Legal disputes to ensue
The National Health and Insurance Administration of the Ministry of Health and Welfare made a series of announcements, including “The instruction for medical expenses caused by the Formosa Fun Coast park cornstarch fire accident in New Taipei City” and “Matters about medical expenses within three months after the Formosa Fun Coast park cornstarch fire accident in New Taipei City,” to explain how funding for medical expenses related to injuries sustained at the Formosa Fun Coast blast would be distributed.
According to the announcements, the ministry will exercise the right of subrogation against Taian Insurance (泰安產物保險公司), insurer of the Formosa Fun Coast water park (八仙海岸), and those who are held responsible for the event at which the fire occurred. However, the report clarifying who is responsible for the accident has not been clear.
According to Article 95 of the National Health Insurance Act (全民健康保險法): “In case the third party is liable for the beneficiary due to tortuous accident covered by this insurance, the insurer of this insurances may, after paying the medical benefits to the beneficiary, exercise the right of subrogation against the tort-feasors specifically addressed by the following subparagraphs: In public safety accidents: The insurer of compulsory third party liability.”
The ministry may exercise the right of subrogation against the park’s insurer, Taian Insurance. But after its acceptance of the New Taipei City government categorical funding, should this right of subrogation claims be transferred to New Taipei City?
Moreover, what is the scope of its claim against the insurer? The cost of its payments, or the insured amount of liability insurance?
Another question is that the accused party in Article 95 of the act is: “The insurer of compulsory third party liability,” rather than the “third party.” Therefore, the ministry is unable to request those held responsible for the event be held accountable to the National Health Insurance Act.
Is there any way for the ministry to exercise its right of subrogation according to Article 53 of the insurance law? There are legal disputes, obviously.
Tsai Hung Shen
New Taipei City
The Chinese government on March 29 sent shock waves through the Tibetan Buddhist community by announcing the untimely death of one of its most revered spiritual figures, Hungkar Dorje Rinpoche. His sudden passing in Vietnam raised widespread suspicion and concern among his followers, who demanded an investigation. International human rights organization Human Rights Watch joined their call and urged a thorough investigation into his death, highlighting the potential involvement of the Chinese government. At just 56 years old, Rinpoche was influential not only as a spiritual leader, but also for his steadfast efforts to preserve and promote Tibetan identity and cultural
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS