Question

请帮忙翻译成中文 O(∩_∩)O谢谢

There is also lively debate in legal circles as to whether the rights of subrogation are the subject of an express or implied agreement, or whether they arise automatically by operation of law. The reasoning of the courts has not always been clear in relation to this,[5] but the answer is probably all three in many cases. It is clear that subrogation rights can arise even where there is no contract between subrogor and subrogee,[6] so it is clearly not necessary for there to be an express or implied term. However, it clearly is an implied term of any policy of insurance or guarantee that the insurer or guarantor will be subrogated in the event of any payment by the insurer to the insured party. However, in practice, most policies of insurance will contain an express clause regulating subrogation rights as well.[7]

Answer 1

也有生动的辩论在法律界，是否是债权人的权利的主体时，明示或暗示的协议，或者他们是否自动出现，通过法律的运作。推理法院并不总是清楚在这方面， [ 5 ]但答案也许是所有三个在许多情况下。很明显，代位权可能出现即使没有合同subrogor和subrogee ， [ 6 ]因此，这显然是没有必要的存在是一个明示或暗示的任期。然而，它显然是一个隐含条款的任何保险单或保证保险人或担保人将代位在发生任何付款规定，向被保险投保方。然而，在实践中，最保险的政策将包含明确的条款规定，以及代位权