Futures
Access hundreds of perpetual contracts
CFD
Gold
One platform for global traditional assets
Options
Hot
Trade European-style vanilla options
Unified Account
Maximize your capital efficiency
Demo Trading
Introduction to Futures Trading
Learn the basics of futures trading
Futures Events
Join events to earn rewards
Demo Trading
Use virtual funds to practice risk-free trading
Launch
CandyDrop
Collect candies to earn airdrops
Launchpool
Quick staking, earn potential new tokens
HODLer Airdrop
Hold GT and get massive airdrops for free
Pre-IPOs
Unlock full access to global stock IPOs
Alpha Points
Trade on-chain assets and earn airdrops
Futures Points
Earn futures points and claim airdrop rewards
Promotions
AI
Gate AI
Your all-in-one conversational AI partner
Gate AI Bot
Use Gate AI directly in your social App
GateClaw
Gate Blue Lobster, ready to go
Gate for AI Agent
AI infrastructure, Gate MCP, Skills, and CLI
Gate Skills Hub
10K+ Skills
From office tasks to trading, the all-in-one skill hub makes AI even more useful.
GateRouter
Smartly choose from 40+ AI models, with 0% extra fees
Man spends millions on insurance, can only cash out at 105? Rejected when requesting to cancel, court rules in favor
A recent case of insurance policy cancellation dispute was heard by the Miyun Court in Beijing.
Over the past few years, Mr. Li purchased four wealth management insurance policies through a salesperson from a Beijing-based insurance company. All of these policies were of the "maturity withdrawal, flexible use" type, which built a strong trust. On June 30, 2024, the salesperson presented Mr. Li with a large policy.
Under the urging of the insurance salesperson, Mr. Li signed a contract titled "Certain Longevity Insurance Product Plan" and paid the first premium of 2 million yuan on the same day. However, continuous funeral arrangements and laboring caused his health to deteriorate, and he was hospitalized. After recovering and being discharged, he carefully reviewed the thick insurance contract, and one clause shocked him.
The contract clearly states that the 10 million yuan principal can only be withdrawn when Mr. Li reaches 105 years old, and after five years, he can only receive a small dividend each year.
After multiple unsuccessful negotiations, Mr. Li sued the Beijing-based insurance company in court.
Based on the evidence in the case, the court held that the insurance company's salesperson, despite knowing that Mr. Li's insurance needs were short-term wealth management with principal withdrawal after five years, deliberately concealed the core clause, leading Mr. Li to an erroneous understanding and signing the contract. This meets the criteria for fraud.
At the same time, the court found that Mr. Li's lawsuit was filed within the one-year statutory period for rescission under the Civil Code. Considering all the evidence, the Miyun Court ultimately ruled that the insurance company's conduct constituted fraud, supported the plaintiff's claims, and canceled the insurance contract. The court also ordered the insurance company to refund Mr. Li 2,000,010 yuan in insurance premiums.
Source | Rule of Law in Action
Source: People's Attention