Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

When is the Preponderance of the Evidence Standard Optimal?

Contents:

Author Info

  • Henrik Lando

    (Copenhagen Business School)

Abstract

This paper defines the preponderance of the evidence standard and establishes it as a benchmark, optimal under certain idealized conditions. The main conditions are: only efficiency matters (not fairness); people are risk–neutral; sanctions are socially cost–free; and a suit may be brought even if no violation of the law has occurred. Concerning the definition of preponderance of the evidence, a distinction is made between standards based on probability of guilt and standards based on the evidence. It is stressed that the latter does not include ex ante information concerning the offender’s type, and should hence not be associated with a probability of guilt in a Bayesian sense. The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance (2002) 27, 602–608. doi:10.1111/1468-0440.00195

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.palgrave-journals.com/gpp/journal/v27/n4/pdf/2500195a.pdf
File Function: Link to full text PDF
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/gpp/journal/v27/n4/full/2500195a.html
File Function: Link to full text HTML
Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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 Palgrave Macmillan in its journal The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance.

Volume (Year): 27 (2002)
Issue (Month): 4 (October)
Pages: 602-608

as in new window
Handle: RePEc:pal:gpprii:v:27:y:2002:i:4:p:602-608

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/

Order Information:
Postal: Palgrave Macmillan Journals, Subscription Department, Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS, UK
Email:
Web: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/pal/subscribe/index.html

Related research

Keywords:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

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

Cited by:
  1. Dominique Demougin & Claude Fluet, 2007. "Rules of Proof, Courts, and Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 2014, CESifo Group Munich.
  2. Louis Kaplow, 2012. "On the Optimal Burden of Proof," NBER Working Papers 17765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

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:pal:gpprii:v:27:y:2002:i:4:p:602-608. 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: (Elizabeth Gale).

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.