Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Ex ante versus ex post expectation damages

Contents:

Author Info

  • Liu, Zhiyong
  • Avraham, Ronen
Registered author(s):

    Abstract

    What information should courts utilize when assessing contract damages? Should they award damages that were rationally foreseeable at the ex ante stage (ex ante expected damages)? Or should they award damages at the ex post level, incorporating new information revealed after contracting (ex post actual damages)? In practice courts have varied between the two approaches, awarding damages equal to the lower, or the higher, of the two measures of damages. This article shows that ex ante expectation damages are more efficient than ex post actual damages through a simple model of costly litigation for contract breach, where there are either costs of verifying the breach victim's ex post damages, or general litigation costs such as attorneys’ fees. Courts should award foreseeable flat damages, rather than seeking ex post accuracy and awarding actual damages, because actual damages lead to distortions in breach incentives once we take parties’ litigation decisions as endogenous. With costly litigation, ex post expectation damages may cause over-performance or under-performance depending on whether the American or the English rule applies and on the size of the litigation cost. We find that regardless of the direction of the distortion, actual damages induce inefficiency. Ex ante damages are more efficient because of the insensitivity of parties’ litigation decisions to their ex post private information under fixed damages. Our results are robust when accounting for renegotiation.

    Download Info

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0144818812000440
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Bibliographic Info

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal International Review of Law and Economics.

    Volume (Year): 32 (2012)
    Issue (Month): 4 ()
    Pages: 339-355

    as in new window
    Handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:32:y:2012:i:4:p:339-355

    Contact details of provider:
    Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/irle

    Related research

    Keywords: Breach of contract; Asymmetric information; Expectation interest; Renegotiation;

    Find related papers by JEL classification:

    References

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
    as in new window
    1. Ronen Avraham & Zhiyong Liu, 2012. "Private Information and the Option to Not Sue: A Reevaluation of Contract Remedies," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 77-102.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
    3. Murat Usman, 2002. "Verifiability and Contract Enforcement: A Model with Judicial Moral Hazard," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 67-94, April.
    4. Bebchuk, Lucian Ayre & Shavell, Steven, 1991. "Information and the Scope of Liability for Breach of Contract: The Rule of Hadley vs. Baxendale," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 284-312, Fall.
    5. Hughes, James W & Snyder, Edward A, 1995. "Litigation and Settlement under the English and American Rules: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(1), pages 225-50, April.
    6. Bernardo, Antonio E & Talley, Eric & Welch, Ivo, 2000. "A Theory of Legal Presumptions," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 1-49, April.
    7. Samuel A. Rea, Jr., 1984. "Efficiency Implications of Penalties and Liquidated Damages," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 147-168, January.
    8. Keith N. Hylton, 2002. "Welfare Implications of Costly Litigation under Strict Liability," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(1), pages 18-43, January.
    9. Steven Shavell, 1980. "Damage Measures for Breach of Contract," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 11(2), pages 466-490, Autumn.
    10. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 1996. "Accuracy in the Assessment of Damages," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 191-210, April.
    11. Chung, Tai-Yeong, 1992. "On the Social Optimality of Liquidated Damage Clauses: An Economic Analysis," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(2), pages 280-305, April.
    12. 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 151-64, January.
    13. Albert Choi & George Triantis, 2008. "Completing Contracts in the Shadow of Costly Verification," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(2), pages 503-534, 06.
    14. Hylton, Keith N, 1990. "Costly Litigation and Legal Error under Negligence," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 433-52, Fall.
    15. Kaplow, Louis, 1994. "The Value of Accuracy in Adjudication: An Economic Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 23(1), pages 307-401, January.
    16. Schwartz, Alan & Watson, Joel, 2001. "The Law and Economics of Costly Contracting," University of California at San Diego, Economics Working Paper Series qt2wh8m7bv, Department of Economics, UC San Diego.
    17. Shavell, Steven, 1984. "The Design of Contracts and Remedies for Breach," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 99(1), pages 121-48, February.
    18. Alan Schwartz, 2004. "The Law and Economics of Costly Contracting," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 2-31, April.
    19. Aaron S. Edlin & Alan Schwartz, 2003. "Optimal Penalties in Contracts," Law and Economics 0303002, EconWPA.
    20. Edlin, Aaron S., 2003. "Optimal Penalties in Contracts," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt2w81s277, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    21. Adler, Barry E., 1999. "The Questionable Ascent of Hadley v. Baxendale," Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics, Working Paper Series qt3wh5v8j9, Berkeley Olin Program in Law & Economics.
    22. George Triantis, 2008. "Evidentiary Arbitrage: The Fabrication of Evidence and the Verifiability of Contract Performance," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 24(1), pages 72-94, May.
    23. Png, I. P. L., 1987. "Litigation, liability, and incentives for care," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 61-85, October.
    24. Stole, Lars A, 1992. "The Economics of Liquidated Damage Clauses in Contractual Environments with Private Information," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 582-606, October.
    25. Ronen Avraham & Zhiyong Liu, 2006. "Incomplete Contracts with Asymmetric Information: Exclusive Versus Optional Remedies," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 8(3), pages 523-561.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Lists

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:irlaec:v:32:y:2012:i:4:p:339-355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei).

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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