IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bpj/rlecon/v2y2006i2n1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Property Rules and Liability Rules, Once Again

Author

Listed:
  • Hylton Keith N

    (Boston University)

Abstract

In recent years, new articles presenting rigorous analyses of bargaining incentives have overturned some of the fundamental claims made by Calabresi and Melamed in their seminal article on property rules and liability rules published in 1972. In particular, the proposition that property rules are socially preferable to liability rules when transaction costs are low appears to be either no longer valid or severely weakened under the new analyses. This paper reexamines the property rule versus liability rule question in light of the contributions of the recent bargaining theory literature. In contrast to this literature, I find that the fundamental propositions of Calabresi-Melamed remain valid, and I extend the framework to provide a more detailed positive economic theory of common law rules. The key contribution of this paper is pointing out the importance of subjective valuations in the analysis of property and liability rules. This allows for a synthesis of Calabresi-Melamed and the bargaining theory literature within an expanded framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Hylton Keith N, 2006. "Property Rules and Liability Rules, Once Again," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 2(2), pages 137-191, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:2:y:2006:i:2:n:1
    DOI: 10.2202/1555-5879.1073
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.2202/1555-5879.1073
    Download Restriction: For access to full text, subscription to the journal or payment for the individual article is required.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2202/1555-5879.1073?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ian Ayres & Paul Goldbart, "undated". "Optimal Delegation and Decoupling in the Design of Liability Rules," Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy Working Paper Series yale_lepp-1026, Yale Law School John M. Olin Center for Studies in Law, Economics, and Public Policy.
    2. Hylton, Keith N., 1990. "The influence of litigation costs on deterrence under strict liability and under negligence," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 161-171, September.
    3. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. A. Mitchell Polinsky, 1980. "Resolving Nuisance Disputes: The Simple Economics of Injunctive and Damage Remedies," NBER Working Papers 0463, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Avraham, Ronen, 2004. "Modular liability rules," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 269-297, September.
    6. Polinsky, A Mitchell & Rubinfeld, Daniel L, 1988. "The Welfare Implications of Costly Litigation for the Level of Liability," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 17(1), pages 151-164, January.
    7. McChesney, Fred S., 1993. "Boxed in: Economists and benefits from crime," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 225-231, June.
    8. Blaug,Mark, 1997. "Economic Theory in Retrospect," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521577014.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chouinard Hayley H & Steinhoff Christina, 2008. "Split-Estate Negotiations: The Case of Coal-Bed Methane," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 233-258, July.
    2. Eguchi Kyota, 2008. "Damages or Reinstatement: Incentives and Remedies for Unjust Dismissal," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 443-474, December.
    3. David Encaoua & Yassine Lefouili, 2009. "Licensing ‘Weak’ Patents," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 492-525, September.
    4. Rockett, Katharine, 2010. "Property Rights and Invention," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 315-380, Elsevier.
    5. Gao, Wenlian & Chou, Julia, 2015. "Innovation efficiency, global diversification, and firm value," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 278-298.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Albert Choi & Chris William Sanchirico, 2004. "Should Plaintiffs Win What Defendants Lose? Litigation Stakes, Litigation Effort, and the Benefits of Decoupling," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 33(2), pages 323-354, June.
    2. Hylton, Keith N. & Zhang, Mengxi, 2017. "Optimal remedies for patent infringement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 44-57.
    3. Steven Shavell, 2005. "Liability for Accidents," NBER Working Papers 11781, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Peter Van Wijck & Ben Van Velthoven, 2000. "An Economic Analysis of the American and the Continental Rule for Allocating Legal Costs," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 115-125, March.
    5. Polinsky, A. Mitchell & Shavell, Steven, 2014. "Costly litigation and optimal damages," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 86-89.
    6. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2001. "Should Victims of Exposure to a Toxic Substance Have an Independent Claim for Medical Monitoring?," Working papers 2002-41, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jan 2002.
    7. Feess, Eberhard & Sarel, Roee, 2022. "Optimal fine reductions for self-reporting: The impact of loss aversion," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Hylton Keith N, 2005. "The Theory of Penalties and the Economics of Criminal Law," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 175-201, September.
    9. Campos, Sergio J. & Cotton, Christopher S. & Li, Cheng, 2015. "Deterrence effects under Twombly: On the costs of increasing pleading standards in litigation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 61-71.
    10. Anderson, David A, 1999. "The Aggregate Burden of Crime," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(2), pages 611-642, October.
    11. Miceli, Thomas J. & Segerson, Kathleen, 2003. "A note on optimal care by wealth-constrained injurers," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 273-284, September.
    12. Ronen Avraham & Zhiyong Liu, 2006. "Incomplete Contracts with Asymmetric Information: Exclusive Versus Optional Remedies," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 8(3), pages 523-561.
    13. Kathryn Zeiler, "undated". "Medical Malpractice and Contract Disclosure: An Equilibrium Model of the Effects of Legal Rules on Behavior in Health Care Markets," American Law & Economics Association Annual Meetings 1071, American Law & Economics Association.
    14. Ayal Adi & Rotem Yaad, 2014. "Incorporation Rules," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-30, March.
    15. Dari-Mattiacci Giuseppe, 2006. "On the Optimal Scope of Negligence," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(3), pages 331-364, January.
    16. Shavell, Steven, 1999. "The level of litigation: private versus social optimality of suit and of settlement," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 99-115, March.
    17. Clements, Matthew T., 2003. "Precautionary incentives for privately informed victims," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 237-251, September.
    18. Innes, Robert, 2004. "Enforcement costs, optimal sanctions, and the choice between ex-post liability and ex-ante regulation," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(1), pages 29-48, March.
    19. Miceli, Thomas J. & Stone, Michael P., 2014. "“Piggyback” lawsuits and deterrence: Can frivolous litigation improve welfare?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 49-57.
    20. Beckner, Clinton III & Katz, Avery, 1995. "The incentive effects of litigation fee shifting when legal standards are uncertain," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 205-224, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bpj:rlecon:v:2:y:2006:i:2:n:1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.degruyter.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.