La reticencia como causal de nulidad relativa en el contrato de seguro de vida deudores

Abstract

The reticence or concealm of information on the part of the insured, which is generated at the time of the declaration of insurability - an act of the pre-contractual stage of the insurance contract - is constituted at the moment in which the abundant good faith, typical of this type of contract, becomes a real presence in the atmosphere of the insurance relationship. The reticence - if any - can produce a relative nullity in the insurance contract, which is why it is the most palpable sign of the trust that the parties have in each other. When deciding to insure, the declaration of insurability puts the insurer in the scenario of "knowing", which emanates from information, pure and simple, from innocent and clear information; However, given the insurer's expert position, and if there is any suggestion of concealment, the insurer is obliged to examine this in depth, by means of scientific tests, in order to determine the real state of health of the insured, which is what is called the "duty to know", so that if a report appears that indicates a weak state of health, the insurer may either give priority to the policy for a higher value (extra premium), or abstain from insuring. If the insurance is over-primed, the state of health presented will have been validated and no reticence may be claimed at the time of the claim, since an indicator of an unstable state of health, resulting from the duty to know, obliges the insurer to enter another phase, of greater auscultation, which is that of "being able to know", which requires the insurer to be fully sure of the most intimate details that may be presented. At this point, the only thing that will remain for the insurer to claim will be the bad faith of the insured, and not the reticence, which would be at this point inappropriate.