Vai apdrošināšanas līgums uztverams par komercdarījumu: pastāvošās pretrunas un atbilstošais risinājums

The article addresses the issue of whether insurance contracts can be considered as a commercial transaction within Latvian national law. Since the entry into force of Part D of the Commercial Act, which introduced the regulation of commercial transaction, covering both bilateral and unilateral commercial transaction based on the subjective concept of commercial law, i.e., a transaction is considered a commercial transaction if at least one of the parties to that transaction is a merchant. As a result, an insurance contract should always be considered a commercial contract (at least unilateral) since the insurer is a merchant. The author criticises such a view, considering that the regulation in commercial transactions applies to equal contract parties, which contradicts the conclusion of the insurance contract. The latter is always considered as unilateral, which is drafted by the insurer itself in its favour without the possibility in practice to influence the terms of the contract by the policyholder. Such an opinion is particularly supported by the fact that the reference to consumer protection law is relatively ineffective, as the most essential terms, such as insurable object and insured risks, including exceptions, fall outside the scope of unfair contract terms. At the same time, the current regulation of insurance law, which lacks modern approaches, is also not drafted considering insurance contract as commercial transaction. Therefore, the author of the article proposes that an insurance contract cannot be considered a commercial transaction under Latvian national law.