IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/matsoc/v119y2022icp108-117.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Negligence rules coping with hidden precaution

Author

Listed:
  • Schweizer, Urs

Abstract

This paper investigates the implementation of negligence rules when the negligent act constitutes a hidden action in the sense of principal–agent theory and where the available evidence is generated by a signal. Any liability rule exclusively based on the available evidence comes with an incentive threshold. Agents with cost savings from the negligent act above this threshold commit the negligent act whereas the others do not. In a first step, liability rules are examined that implement a given incentive threshold at minimum error costs. As this is a linear programming problem, the present paper makes heavy use of duality theory. The multiplier of the incentive constraint if understood as shadow price allows for an intuitive explanation of the results. As a second step, a comparative statics analysis with respect to the incentive threshold is provided. Surprisingly enough, the relation between the threshold and minimum error costs need not be monotonic.

Suggested Citation

  • Schweizer, Urs, 2022. "Negligence rules coping with hidden precaution," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 108-117.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:matsoc:v:119:y:2022:i:c:p:108-117
    DOI: 10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2022.07.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165489622000592
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.mathsocsci.2022.07.002?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. Juan José Ganuza & Fernando Gomez & Jose Penalva, 2022. "Quality of Evidence and Legal Decision-Making [Monotone Comparative Statics Under Uncertainty]," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 24(1), pages 327-368.
    2. Demougin, Dominique & Fluet, Claude, 2006. "Preponderance of evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 963-976, May.
    3. Hay, Bruce L & Spier, Kathryn E, 1997. "Burdens of Proof in Civil Litigation: An Economic Perspective," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(2), pages 413-431, June.
    4. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2008. "Rules of proof, courts, and incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 20-40, March.
    5. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2005. "Deterrence versus Judicial Error: A Comparative View of Standards of Proof," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 161(2), pages 193-206, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Fluet, Claude, 2020. "L'économie de la preuve judiciaire," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 96(4), pages 585-620, Décembre.
    2. Alice Guerra & Barbara Luppi & Francesco Parisi, 2022. "Do presumptions of negligence incentivize optimal precautions?," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 54(3), pages 349-368, December.
    3. Chulyoung Kim, 2014. "Adversarial and Inquisitorial Procedures with Information Acquisition," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 767-803.
    4. Kim, Chulyoung, 2015. "Centralized vs. Decentralized Institutions for Expert Testimony," MPRA Paper 69618, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Kim, Chulyoung, 2016. "Adversarial bias, litigation, and the Daubert test: An economic approach," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 67-75.
    6. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2008. "Rules of proof, courts, and incentives," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(1), pages 20-40, March.
    7. Fluet, Claude, 2010. "Liability rules under evidentiary uncertainty," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 1-9, March.
    8. Sophie Bienenstock, 2019. "The Deterrent Effect of French Liability Law: the Example of Abusive Contract Terms," Post-Print hal-03222207, HAL.
    9. Cotton, Christopher, 2012. "Pay-to-play politics: Informational lobbying and contribution limits when money buys access," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(3), pages 369-386.
    10. Winand Emons & Claude Fluet, 2019. "Strategic communication with reporting costs," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 87(3), pages 341-363, October.
    11. Murat C. Mungan & Marie Obidzinski & Yves Oytana, 2020. "Accuracy and Preferences for Legal Error," Working Papers 2020-09, CRESE.
    12. Demougin, Dominique & Fluet, Claude, 2006. "Preponderance of evidence," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 50(4), pages 963-976, May.
    13. Christopher Cotton, 2010. "Pay-to-Play Politics: Informational lobbying and campaign finance reform when contributions buy access," Working Papers 2010-22, University of Miami, Department of Economics.
    14. Jean-Marc Bourgeon & Pierre Picard, 2017. "Nitpicky Insurers and the Law of Contracts," CESifo Working Paper Series 6669, CESifo.
    15. Artigot, Mireia & Ganuza, Juan José & Gomez, Fernando & Penalva, Jose, 2018. "Product liability should reward firm transparency," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 160-169.
    16. Chulyoung Kim, 2018. "Judge’s gate-keeping power and deterrence of negligent acts: an economic analysis of Twombly and Iqbal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 39-66, August.
    17. Sylvain Bourjade & Patrick Rey & Paul Seabright, 2009. "Private Antitrust Enforcement In The Presence Of Pre‐Trial Bargaining," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 372-409, September.
    18. Jean‐Marc Bourgeon & Pierre Picard, 2020. "Insurance law and incomplete contracts," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(4), pages 1253-1286, December.
    19. Antonio Nicita & Matteo Rizzolli, 2014. "In Dubio Pro Reo. Behavioral Explanations of Pro-defendant Bias in Procedures," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 60(3), pages 554-580.
    20. Sophie Bienenstock, 2019. "The Deterrent Effect of French Liability Law: the Example of Abusive Contract Terms," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-03222207, HAL.

    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:eee:matsoc:v:119:y:2022:i:c:p:108-117. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/505565 .

    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.