The Science Work
History
Site is for sale: mail@thesciencework.com
Category: History

Features of civil regulation of insurance in the sphere of business in pre-revolutionary Russia and in the USSR



i. V. Troitskaya

features of civil regulation of insurance in the sphere of business in pre-revolutionary Russia and in the USSR

In article the analysis of legal regulation of insurance in the sphere of business in pre-revolutionary Russia and in the USSR is carried out. The author marks out features of the regulatory base, sources and essence of legal relations on protection of interests of businessmen and other economic entities during the specified period, traces continuity in legal regulation and compares results of development of insurance matter in Russia and foreign countries at the corresponding stages.

I. Troitskaya

SPECIFICITY OF LEGAL REGULATION IN THE SPHERE OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP INSURANCE IN THE RUSSIAN EMPIRE AND THE USSR

An analysis of legal regulation in the sphere of entrepreneurship insurance in the Russian Empire and the USSR is presented. The specificity of normative base, sources of law and essence of legal relations in entrepreneurship insurance, traces the succession in legal regulations are described, and a comparison with the development results abroad is made.

Insurance played rather important role in the economic system of pre-revolutionary Russia. Development of the Russian insurance business went according to development of economy. The industrial growth designated at the end of the 18th century promoted activization of the insurance market. The needs for insurance satisfied earlier at the expense of the foreign insurance companies operating through intermediaries (mainly English) increased several times and the states drew attention.

Sale of the insurance policy of the foreign insurer was followed by export of money abroad and was, in fact, the foreign trade transaction. In the conditions of state budget deficit and the negative balance of payments of the country the decision on introduction of the state insurance monopoly was made. The manifesto of June 28, 1786 became the first statutory act in the field of insurance in Russia. According to it the National loan bank and the Insurance expedition — the first insurance the organizations in Russia were founded. Insurance activity of the state came down actually to providing the credits, on insurance only stone houses accepted as a deposit at implementation of credit operations were accepted. Other objects of insurance were still insured in the foreign insurance companies, however under such contracts in favor of the Order of public contempt 1.5% of the insured sum were collected. Thus, it is possible to note that introduction of the state insurance monopoly had pronounced fiscal character.

k of entrepreneurship, reinsurance, marine

The circle of the objects which are subject to insurance was limited. The most part of property in which insurance were interested both landowners, and merchants, was not subject to insurance protection within the existing state monopoly. Moreover, the quantity and quality of the offered services did not correspond to the level of development of the commodity-money relations and even made negative impact on their further formation. During this period insurance was not independent activity of the specialized organizations for provision of services directed to protection of property interests of insurers, and, on the contrary, was only intended to serve business deals, reducing thereby risks of the lender.

The second stage of development of insurance matter in pre-revolutionary Russia is connected with emergence of the joint-stock insurance companies. The state monopoly proved the inefficiency. On the market the foreign insurers filling a niche of property insurance began to get. Along with it the banking system of Russia reached the sufficient level of development, there were spare banking capitals which formed a basis for formation of joint-stock insurance. So, in 1827 there was "the 1st the Russian company, insurance from fire", and in 1835 — and "2nd Russian company, insurance from fire", enjoying general state support and having the exclusive right to implementation of insurance operations within twenty years. After time were founded even more than ten large joint-stock insurance

societies, in particular, "Salamander", "Hope", Volga.

After peasant reform of 1861 the economy entered the period of rapid growth. The prevailing earlier subsistence economy began to be forced out by the commodity-money relations, industrial production actively developed. It gave an impetus to further improvement of the developed system of insurance. Creation of the new joint-stock insurance companies continued, by 1913 their quantity reached twenty. Territorial insurance was entered, mutual insurance began to work.

The provision "About Territorial Insurance" of 1864 allocates three types of insurance, carried out by provincial territorial justices: okladny (obligatory), additional and voluntary. The buildings belonging to peasants were subject to Okladny insurance. Insurers could also insure them over okladny norms on the same conditions within additional insurance. On voluntary insurance both the immovable, and personal estate was accepted.

Insurance in the sphere of business still remained extremely undeveloped. Insurance protection of interests of producers of goods and services was carried out only within the property insurance which was means or result of production. So, insurance covered about 45% of buildings and constructions of the plants and factories in the cities and about 30% [11, page 482] buildings in rural areas (including obligatory insurance). Insurance of the cattle (which was actually means also practiced in villages within territorial insurance

productions), production stock and a harvest from a hailstorm.

Along with joint-stock and territorial insurance also mutual insurance developed. The first society of mutual insurance arose in Riga in 1765, but this form of insurance gained the real development only by the end of the 19th century [13, and 20]. Societies of mutual insurance were engaged generally in insurance upon fire, creating the price policy the competition to joint-stock insurance. They united in the unions for the purpose of ensuring payments in cases of the severe losses exceeding annual collecting insurance premiums. Societies of mutual insurance the first began to serve the interests of large manufacturers, the unions of mining operators, land owners, providing services in insurance within their business activity. In 1903 the Russian mutual insurance union which existed up to 1917 was for this purpose founded.

Sea insurance was the only exclusively enterprise type of insurance in pre-revolutionary Russia. The first regulations on sea insurance contained in the Charter of merchant navigation of 1781 which was proclaimed Catherine II's manifesto on November 23, 1781. (Complete collection of the legislation. T. XXI, No. 15285.)

Those years there were no Russian insurers accepting sea risks on insurance therefore this sphere was completely served by the foreign insurance companies, generally German and English.

The first domestic insurance companies which are engaged in sea insurance appeared in Odessa in on -

to the chala of the 19th century. Sea insurance was regulated generally by the Charter trade which in 1846 was complemented with the special rules for sea insurance prepared on the basis of foreign establishments and also directly foreign laws and sheet conditions, the most widespread of which were so-called Hamburg general rules of sea insurance. They were accepted in Germany in 1867 for regulation of transactions on sea insurance by the insurance companies on the North Sea. Existed till 1919 when were replaced with the new "All-German rules of sea insurance".

In the 70-80th years of the 19th century also large joint stock companies on insurance upon fire began to be engaged in sea insurance. As a subject of sea insurance the vessel with the accessories, cargo, the freight payment and profit on it expected profit on goods, the money given on the security of the vessel and a monetary loan on the security of the ship (bottomry) could serve. Thus, within sea insurance the transfer of enterprise risks to the insurer not only in a broad sense (insurance of objects and objects of business activity), but also in narrow was carried out (directly insurance of the expected profit of the businessman).

With development of insurance business also the reinsurance market began to be formed. Practically all insurers reported and accepted risks in reinsurance. Generally risks were transmitted to the foreign insurance companies. Practiced as well mutual reinsurance between the Russian companies. Contracts of reinsurance

concluded among themselves and zemstvoes. Two large insurance companies acted as professional overcautious persons: "Society of the Russian reinsurance" and the "Help" accepting risks of both the Russian, and foreign insurers.

Thus, by the beginning of the 20th century in Russia there were four main types of the insurers providing services in different types of insurance: territorial societies, private enterprises on the basis of reciprocity (society of mutual insurance), joint-stock companies and foreign insurers.

At the same time the most part of collected insurance premiums fell to the share of joint stock companies (about 65%). Further territorial societies (19%), the mutual insurance companies (about 9%) and foreign insurance companies (about 7%)* followed. Such structure of the insurance market remained up to the October revolution.

By the beginning of the 20th century the insurance companies began to take the important place in the financial and economic system of the country. However insurance coverage level still was significantly lower in comparison with the leading foreign states. So, as of 1915, insurance captured about 30% of cost of all property in Russia whereas in Germany this figure exceeded 80% [7, page 36].

Such situation, in our opinion, partly is explained by insufficiency of legal regulation of the insurance industry in the Russian legislation. So, the major document regulating civil circulation, the Set of civil laws [15, page 29], allocates for definition of the insurance contract only two articles. According to Article 2199 under trade insurance on -

the contract by which one person undertakes to indemnify such loss what can incur property of another from the known accident for a certain payment nimatsya. Mutual insurance was understood as the contract by which all contractors undertake to indemnify such loss what can incur property of one of them from the known accident.

It is definition it is impossible to recognize as successful owing to its incompleteness. It is impossible to designate a circle of subjects which could act as insurers and insurers, there is no instruction on essential terms of the contract, the concepts "insurance risk", "insurance interest" which are necessary for the correct interpretation of the signed contract are not mentioned.

Thus, it is necessary to recognize that the main act did not contain sufficient set of feature allowing to qualify the civil contract as the insurance contract in the sphere of civil law of that time. Undoubtedly, it could not but create difficulties in civil circulation.

These difficulties could be partly eliminated with use of the rules of law concerning the questions of insurance which are contained in other sources. However the problem was aggravated also with the fact that, besides scantiness of legal regulation, the sources of civil law governing the insurance relations were characterized by a big variety. Many both pre-revolutionary, and modern civilians [16, page 281-282 paid attention to this fact; 1, page 240], pointing out uncertainty of a circle of these sources and also their hierarchies. In essence they were "forced" a source -

mi it is right, that is documents which were not among traditional sources, and became those only in connection with "scarcity of legislative rules" [16, page 288].

Among such sources it is possible to call charters of the joint-stock insurance companies and sheet rules. Their validity and value caused a constant controversy in literature and in judicial practice [2, page 19]. However despite the lack of the coordinated position concerning the status of such sources, it is necessary to recognize that actually they met lacks of the legislation and did possible the conclusion and performance of insurance contracts. In practice, owing to a special order of their acceptance, charters of the insurance companies acted as the special laws governing the relations on insurance as in pre-revolutionary Russia they were approved by the highest power of the sovereign of the emperor [18, page 279]. It is also necessary to pay attention that the maintenance of the civic norms regulating specific questions of insurance repeated from one charter in another. It gives the grounds to assume that, having owing to a special order of acceptance formal signs of special laws, these charters actually acted as way of fixing of the customs of a turn operating in the sphere of insurance which originally came from foreign practice, and subsequently and created in Russia.

Application in practice of civil regulation of the norms which are contained in charters of the insurance companies and sheet conditions was connected also with a number of difficulties. Charters of most the insurance companies were made on the basis of the relevant charters

foreign insurers, in particular German and French. In this regard they contained a large amount of the norms which are "foreign" in relation to the Russian civil and trade legislation [10, page 319].

Emergence of collisions was inevitable. They concerned questions of signing of the contracts, their execution, an order of settlement of disputes connected with insurance contracts. In these conditions the question of applicability of any given norms and their interpretation was solved in court. It gave to some civilians the grounds to rank judicial practice as sources of the insurance right [l6, page 288].

Actually, it is necessary to recognize that judgments acted as the regulator of the legal relations arising in connection with insurance, meeting lacks in legislative regulation and in a certain measure adapting for the Russian reality of that time of norm of foreign law, widely used in charters of insurance companies and in sheet conditions.

As it was already mentioned above, at legal regulation of insurance of standard of the foreign legislation worked not only indirectly through charters of the insurance companies and sheet conditions, but also directly. So, Article 561 of the Charter trade contained the instruction on the fact that the relations arising at sea insurance can be regulated by norms of foreign law.

Thus, on the first of the allocated stages of development of insurance matter in Russia the rules of law which are contained in laws (their minority) were involved in the mechanism of legal regulation in the field of insurance and also

norms of foreign law, as implemented in charters of the Russian insurance companies and their sheet conditions (their majority), and acting directly. An essential role in legal regulation of insurance was played also by legally significant behavior of subjects of insurance legal relationship, as well as law-enforcement practice.

From the above it is possible to draw a conclusion that the feature of the initial stage of formation of the insurance market in Russia consisted in domination of foreign norms in one form or another over earlier legal establishments of the Russian civil and trade legislation which rapprochement occurred in the course of implementation of the rights and duties of subjects of insurance legal relationship within their legal behavior and also law enforcement.

Insurance in the enterprise sphere was presented only in the form of the sea insurance corresponding mostly to the level of development of sea insurance in foreign countries and also in type of insurance of the property used as means for implementation of business activity or which is its result. Besides, reinsurance began to be considered not only as the mechanism of ensuring insurance payments, but also as a way of management of enterprise risks of professional insurers.

The beginning of the second stage in formation of insurance matter in Russia should be connected, in our opinion, contrary to popular belief [9, page 53], not with the October revolution of 1917, and with the publication of the Decree of November 28, 1918 go-

yes "About the organization of insurance matter in the Russian Republic". Directly events of October, 1917 did not make changes to activity of insurance institutions. They continued the independent existence till spring of 1918 [16, and 282] when control of their activity was imposed on the Council for insurance affairs founded for this purpose then the system of territorial and mutual insurance was transferred to the jurisdiction of new municipal authorities, but continued to function in almost invariable look. Only by the end of 1918 was transition to absolutely new level of legal regulation of the insurance sphere is proclaimed.

After nationalization of banks the property of the joint-stock insurance companies also was turned into state ownership. The decree "About the organization of insurance matter in the Russian Republic" entered the state monopoly in the field of insurance. At the same time insurance activity of the state, in fact, was stopped practically right after the publication of the decree mentioned above. The economic instability caused by civil war and consequences of change of economic regime, and the high rate of inflation made impossible normal functioning of an insurance system. The state was not able to provide insurance payments. As a result of it personal insurance was cancelled completely [5, and 542], and property insurance was replaced with institute of the state help rendered to affected farms in the natural form [4, and 538]. The last to some extent can be considered return to initial stages of origin of insurance —

awareness of need for protection of property interests, but lack of sufficient conditions for formation of a full-fledged insurance system. At early stages of development of insurance, in particular, it was possible to distinguish backwardness of the commodity-money relations from such conditions. After several thousand years the Soviet state came up against the similar situation interfering ensuring insurance protection.

Nevertheless, resources of the state testing besides, economic difficulties, were not sufficient for further maintenance of institute of free aid in nature. Return to the system of accumulation of money by means of insurance was an exit from such situation. Thus, the natural way of transformation of the natural help to insurance protection lasting historically several hundreds of years took in RSFSR only two years, partly because it was passed repeatedly.

Restoration of institute of insurance in Russia was marked by the publication of the Decree of SNK RSFSR "About the national property insurance" of October 6, 1921 (SU RSFSR, 1921, 69, Article 554). This decree provided, first of all, voluntary insurance of farms from natural disasters. Implementation of insurance was assigned to Head department of the Gosstrakh in the system of the National commissariat of finance. Soon, however, national insurance received some independence in connection with transformation of the Gosstrakh to the system of insurance bodies on places and their transfer to cost accounting [6, and 536].

Fundamental norms on insurance contained in Civil to -

the dex of RSFSR accepted in 1922. Within this document a large amount of the precepts of law which were contained in charters of insurance companies and their sheet conditions and also revealed by pre-revolutionary judicial practice found reflection. N.S. Kovalevskaya and M.A. Kowalewski fairly point to the last, noting continuity between the commercial insurance legislation of pre-revolutionary Russia and the Soviet insurance legislation [8, page 9]. The civil code of 1922 was focused on introduction of the New Economic Policy and therefore proceeded from existence of multistructure economy and the commodity-money relations. However lifetime of the New economic policy was much shorter than time of effect of the Civil Code. So, the norms progressive in essence concerning insurance were invalid. Actually they were replaced with the norms which are contained in the rules and instructions for separate types of insurance approved by the Ministry of Finance of the USSR.

Quite corresponding realities of that time can recognize such method of legal regulation of the sphere of insurance. The planned character which was actively taking root into economy forced, paradoxically it can seem, look for more effective methods of development of some economic areas, in particular insurance. Insurance had to be self-sustaining, therefore, to function with the greatest possible effectiveness. For this purpose the plan for collecting insurance payments according to which the sums of receipts from insurers exceeded the sums of payments for insured events ** was developed for the Gosstrakh. Of course, at absence

full-fledged market mechanisms such profitability had more financial and registration, than commercial value. However despite this, need of achievement of profitability of insurance activity allows to speak about preservation during the Soviet period of intrinsic understanding of insurance as economic and legal category, but not its transformation into acceptance by the state of obligatory measures for ensuring compensation actions.

The insurance nature, its economic essence, demanded from the state of creation of some conditions of managing inherent in rather market economy. Despite the statement of the famous Soviet theorist insurance V.K. Raykhera that "insurance in the capitalist countries is business enterprise, insurance in the USSR — a socialist action is right" [14, page 176], the insurance system objectively could not function without commerce elements.

So, to the purposes of efficiency of insurance activity served a number of the methods authorized by the state. Among those, certainly, not the last role was occupied also by legal regulation of insurance. The state realized that for achievement of objectives in the field of insurance this sphere has to be regulated by the norms corresponding to the nature of the insurance relations and also that is important, established practices. In this regard N.S. Kovalevskaya and M.A. Kowalewski's judgment that the conditions operating in the USSR and rules of insurance can be considered the legal customs revealed by the Ministry of Finance of the USSR approving these rules interestingly looks [8, page 10].

Thus, the public authority not just randomly introduced any rules of insurance, and "found and enshrined in the act those provisions which consider, in particular, both the previous experience, and ideas of justice not only this body, but also potential insurers" [8, and 10]. It is difficult not to agree with this opinion, such approach could provide the being required implementation of the plan for collecting payments in the sphere of voluntary insurance.

The Soviet state consistently adhered to this principle. So, in the Civil Code of the RSFSR of 1964 the number of articles regulating insurance was significantly reduced: instead of numerous actually not existing rules of the code of 1922 the new Civil code contained only three articles concerning regulation of the civil relations in the sphere of insurance.

Within consideration of features of legal regulation of the insurance sphere in the Soviet Union it is necessary to pay attention to the proclaimed state monopoly of insurance activity. However the analysis of the legislation existing then allows us to draw a conclusion that monopolism of the state in the insurance industry was not so unambiguous. So, the very first decree of the Soviet power regulating the insurance sphere contained the reference to withdrawal from the state insurance monopoly for the cooperative organizations which were carrying out mutual insurance of property and goods [3, and 904]. This exception was confirmed also in the Provision on national insurance in the USSR of 1925 ***. Cooperative insurance orga-

nization were liquidated only in 1930 [12, and 414]. During the existence the cooperative insurance companies actually continued activity of the private organizations of mutual insurance functioning in pre-revolutionary Russia, being engaged in insurance of property which is object of production, first of all agricultural and also results of this production — goods.

the fact that throughout all Soviet period of withdrawal from the state monopoly to a degree it is possible to connect with the enterprise insurance interesting us Is characteristic

>. Undoubtedly, it is impossible to tell about recognition in the USSR possibilities of implementation of commercial insurance as it automatically would cause need of recognition of admissibility of business activity. However actually commercial insurance continued to exist and even to develop, naturally, in limited forms and volumes. The economic system as the difficult mechanism continued to function under the internal laws, inventing all new forms of existence of tools, necessary for it, and leading finally to fixing one way or another of the relevant standards in practice of legal regulation.

To the middle of the 30th years of the 20th century the concept of "standard production and economic risk" occurred in regulations even (see, for example, Paragraph 7 of the Resolution of the Central Election Commission and SNK of the USSR of June 12, 1929. "About property responsibility of workers and employees for the damage caused by them to employers". SZ USSR of 1929 N 42,

Article 367) which was in essence similar to modern understanding of enterprise risk and limited responsibility of workers to employers, shifting the losses caused in connection with usual activity of the enterprise to economic entity (and body of national insurance). It actually meant recognition of implementation of economic activity on the risk. However after that the category "risk" was announced by a bourgeois concept, alien to a new economic system. The theory went on the way of improvement of methods of planning and management of economy by means of command mechanisms, trying to exclude completely uncertainty, therefore, and all risk from the economic relations.

Despite this, it is necessary to recognize that kind of there were these attempts, it is impossible to come to entirely predictable system of managing, and it will hardly be sometime possible. Uncertainty of the factors of the external environment influencing economic activity cannot be brought to naught even at the Soviet planned methods in economy. So, natural disasters cause destructions of production capacities and other instruments of managing, but within the Soviet insurance system only real damages, that is damage caused directly to property were paid. All other losses connected, in particular, with the forced idle time of the enterprises became covered by economic entities independently. It is represented that the efficiency of activity was estimated not in terms of financial and economic indicators, such as, for example, at -

a bylnost or profitability as it becomes presently, and according to implementation of the economic plan in scales of the whole country. In this regard it is difficult to speak about loss of profit by the organizations in modern financial understanding of this word. However certain adverse effects came for them because of failure to follow the plan for idle time. Exclusively monetary indemnification was in that case inexpedient therefore in this sphere the development of directly commercial insurance came to a standstill.

Absolutely in a different way there was a situation in traditionally commercial branch of insurance — in sea insurance. Here our thesis about direct dependence of practice of legal regulation of the insurance relations on their economic essence is confirmed. From time immemorial sea insurance served the purposes of risk mitigation of property and financial losses of shipowners and other interested persons. Feature of sea insurance always was that risks, connected not only with the vessel (comprehensive insurance) or cargo (cargo), but also risks of non-receipt of the freight which is due for granting the vessel or transportation of cargo and also the expected profit or the commission were subject to insurance. The exception of any types of insurance protection of sea insurance would make such insurance deprived of economic sense for interested persons.

Many historically developed norms of common maritime law found the reflection and in the first Soviet Maritime Code of 1929, and subsequently practically without changes were transferred to the Code

trade navigation of the USSR of 1968. Moreover, the majority of standards of these codes owing to the direct instruction were dispositive, allowing those parties to use the standard conditions in world practice including not entered the text of acts in regulation of the relations.

Owing to the international nature of shipping, as the parties in the relations on sea insurance foreign subjects quite often acted. It demanded special approach to legal regulation of insurance legal relationship in this sphere. So, especially for implementation of sea insurance on the basis of Management of foreign operations of the Gosstrakh in 1947 Ingosstrakh was created [17, page 24-25]. Moreover, in 1973 the status of joint-stock company among which shareholders there were not only a Ministry of Finance of the USSR, but also VAO "Intourist", Centrosoyuz was provided to it. From this point formally state monopoly for insurance activity was stopped as not all stocks of Ingosstrakh remained in the property of the state. The structure which was engaged in insurance of the risks connected with foreign economic activity became close to the similar organizations operating abroad and ceased to use the immunity provided to the state in the relations regulated by the international private law.

Nevertheless, in domestic market the state monopoly continued to exist. Maritime Codes provided a possibility of insurance of "the expected profit" (Article 213 of KTM USSR of 1968), using modern terms "risk nepoluche-

a niya of the expected income" (Subparagraph 3 of Paragraph 2 of Article 929 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation). However inclusion of a condition about a covering by the insurer of risks of non-receipt of profit remained on a discretion of the parties and was carried out generally by the international shipping. In domestic market of shipping company, acting on behalf of the state as shipowners, used this type of insurance infrequently that after all does not allow to draw a conclusion about total absence of elements of enterprise insurance in the state with the proclaimed denial of business activity per se.

Reinsurance in the USSR was also not completely forgotten. The provision "About National Insurance in the USSR" authorized the Gosstrakh to sign contracts of reinsurance of the risks on all types of insurance except obligatory okladny. Proceeding from the fact of obligatory excess of collecting insurance premiums over insurance payments of national insurance by bodies discussed above, it is possible to draw a conclusion that reinsurance and in Soviet period was considered as the instrument of insurance of the expected profit. It is no wonder that according to heads of the public insurance authorities "receiving profit as end in itself, is not a problem of the Gosstrakh. The surplus received as a result of any given favorable year in cash desk of the Gosstrakh, not a dividend which is subject to delivery to shareholders" (tsit. on: [16, page 302]). And it is valid, the income remaining at the disposal of the Gosstrakh after implementation of all insurance payments went for organization of events on prevention of the fires, an epizooty and other natural disasters. All this, that not

less, does not prevent to consider implementation of national insurance as a way of receiving additional revenues of the state, let and directed to socially useful needs.

Thus, reinsurance in the USSR can be referred to insurance of risk of non-receipt of income from insurance activity. Formally this activity is not that Soviet legal system, enterprise in connection with denial, but is actually very similar to it in orientation and the purposes.

Were subject to reinsurance as well risks of cooperative insurance companies during their existence (Article 4 of the Provision on national insurance in the USSR of September 18, 1925). The surplus arising at implementation of activity by cooperative insurance companies was not withdrawn in the state treasury and remained at the disposal of these organizations serving the interests of the cooperatives which were engaged in production or agricultural activity. Thus, it is possible to note that actually here we deal too with a certain profit which risk of non-receipt was insured in the Main board of the Gosstrakh within reinsurance.

So, during the Soviet period it is possible to distinguish a certain degree of dispositivity of the norms which are legislatively established by the state from features of legal regulation of insurance. The civil code, being the main civil act, contained only the general articles concerning insurance. Such approach gave to participants of insurance legal relationship an opportunity to reveal

precepts of law which are the most suitable for regulation of these relations. The rules of insurance approved by public authorities by separate types were result of similar activity. Such rules differed in easier procedure of acceptance, allowing to make in due time necessary changes to the governing insurance relations of norm, doing all insurance system of more flexible and adequate economic reality of the country.

The dependence of the norms which are subject to application on the subject of adjustable insurance legal relationship was the second feature of legal regulation of the insurance sphere during the Soviet period. The essential difference between the norms governing the relations of the insurance bodies and insurers which are the Soviet citizens or legal entities and foreign insurers was observed. It was explained by the considerable difference between the economic systems of the USSR and the majority of foreign countries making impossible application similar Soviet norms in the international insurance market. For implementation of activities for insurance of the external economic risks and also for the conclusion of transactions on insurance with participation of a foreign element the independent organization — Ingosstrakh was created.

It image?

Fredriksen Tor-Erik
Other scientific works: