The legislator had settled the dispute idiosyncratic - About the nature of the right of the insurer in return - for fire insurance because it authorized a true believer in the legal solutions replace the insured (the creditor) in the demand charge (debtor) worth of compensation and in pursuance of its commitment arising from the insurance contract . Provided that the effective damage related or soon to the insured who are with him in one living or be someone asks for the insured, they did not authorized by law the right to refer to them and asking them worth the compensation In its the insured [Article (771) civilian ([1]).
([1]) Article (771) cities that "solves insured legally including paid compensation for the fire in cases be to the insured before the cause doing the harm gathered his responsibility insured, unless the latest damage soon or to the insured who are living with him in one or a person to be insured is responsible for his actions. " =
= Article (926) civilian Jordanian that "may believer to replace the insured including paid guarantee for damage in cases be to the insured before the caused damage that resulted him responsibility insured unless the latest damage is deliberate assets and branches of the insured or of his wives and-laws or who may be his one living or a person to be insured is responsible for his actions."
التسميات
effects of insurance