一個保險判決的個案,有點複雜,可以詳細的翻譯嗎?送20點!

Question

In the course of his judgment, Bailhache J. said:’ As to the concealment, I was always of the opinion. . . that if Mr. N. had said nothing at all to Mr. E., but had merely put these clauses before him without saying anything about existing insurances or their cancellation or anything of the kind, and gad said to him: “What I want is a policy which will include these clauses; what are your terms for such a policy as that?” I should be quite satisfied in that case there was no obligation upon Mr. N. to tell Mr. E. that there gad been any trouble with the N.Z. Co. about the clause, that they gad cancelled the clause or refused to renew the insurance, or anything of the kind. . . There was no concealment of a material fact at all. ‘The learned judge went on to say that unfortunately the broker, acting in perfect good faith, told the defendant Company’s underwriter that the prolongation of voyage clause formed part of an existing and current policy, which the held was an untrue representation.

如題!!這是一個保險判決的個案!!拜託各位了!!

Answer 1

Bailhache J在判決中表示: 我對隱瞞的見解始終如一,  若N先生一語不發, 只將這些條款放在E先生面前, 隻字不提現存保險或其取消或諸如此類的話, 而僅是對他說:"我要的是有這些條款的保單, 你的條件如何?" 我將贊同N沒有義務告知E, N與N.Z.公司之間就此條款已發生爭議, 公司已取消條款或拒絕續保或類似情形...在這種狀況下,可認定對重要的事實毫無隱瞞. 睿智的法官繼續說道, 不幸的是, 出於完全善意的保險經紀人卻告訴被告保險公司的代理人說:< "航程延長條款"構成現存有效保單之一部分.> 此種行為已造成不實之陳述(也構成了對重要事實之隱瞞).KEY POINT:單純之緘默,不一定構成"隱瞞", 不實的陳述反而構成隱瞞. 本案, 要保人的經紀人在善意(不知情)情況下所為, "與事實不符的陳述",被判定為"隱瞞".

2006-05-16 19:32:42 補充：
1. untrue representation:與事實不符的陳述, 不論故意或過失.2. 我國保險法有"..... 故意"隱匿"或因過失遺漏或為不實之說明....", 上文隱瞞也可用"隱匿".

Answer 2

他的評斷其間, Bailhache J. 認為: ' 至於隱含, 我總認為。．如果N. 先生說□什麼根本對E. 先生, 但僅僅投入了這些條目在他之前沒有說任何東西關於現有的保險或他們的取消或任何種類, 和遊蕩前述對他: "什麼我要是將包括這些條目的政策; 什麼是您的期限為如此政策像那?" 我應該是相當滿意案件那裡是沒有義務在N. 先生告訴E. 先生那裡遊蕩是任一麻煩與N.Z. Co. 關於條目, 那他們遊蕩取消條目或拒絕更新保險, 或任何種類。．沒有一個物質事實的隱含根本。` 博學的法官認為, 不幸地經紀, 行動在完善的良好信譽誠意, 告訴被告公司的保險商遠航條目的延長構成一項現有和當前的政策的部分, 舉行是一個不真實的表示法。