本文目的在描繪現行我國保險實務上常用之契約基礎條款輪廓，以及探討此等制度運作所可能產生之弊端暨解決方法。本研究指出我國契約基礎條款於實務上可概分為「純粹契約基礎條款」及
「非純粹契約基礎條款」兩者，且因我國民商法並未採取口頭證據原則，故所滋生之問題恐較英國嚴重。而於立法廢止確認特約條款前，可以行政層面及司法層面兩種手段有效緩和契約基礎條款所生弊端：於行政監理方面，行政機關亦可以事前核准之方式積極介入，否則不予核准銷售；另就司法層面而言，法院於解釋前揭兩種契約基礎條款時，應留意解釋重點之不同，俾以保護消費者。

The purpose of this article aims not only at portraying current basis of the contract clauses practitioners of insurance industry in Taiwan use frequently and relevant dilemmas, but also at submitting a solution to these issues. In practice, basis of the contract clauses in insurance policies of Taiwan can be roughly divided into two groups:pure basis of the contract clauses and non-pure basis of the contract clauses, a classification this article fashions. The latter triggers ambiguous and uncertain interpretation of courts. Moreover, a lack of parol evidence rule in Civil Code of Taiwan even aggravates the dilemma. Prior to abolishment of affirmative special provision of Insurance Law of Taiwan, this article proposes administrative and judicial ways to mitigate aforementioned predicaments: the former is via screening mechanism set forth in Guideline of the Procedure Prior to Selling Insurance Products. Regulators should have to require insurers to delete basis of thecontract clauses, whether pure or not, in insurance policies. The latter isthrough principles of interpretation by courts. Courts should adopt different principles of interpretation when dealing with disparate type of basis of the contract clauses. Whether contracts belong to adhesive contracts or not also has a significant impact on manner in which courts construct basis of the contract clauses. This article reckons that bothadministrative and judicial measures will facilitate the goal of consumer protection.