Comparative Causation -- A Re-examination
AbstractNegligence-based liability has been justified on the grounds of its efficiency properties. However, this approach towards liability assignment has been criticized in several recent writings. In a series of articles, causation-based apportionment of liability has been recommended, as an alternative basis for liability assignment. In an interesting paper, Parisi and Fon (2004) have studied various properties of the causation-based liability. In this paper, I review some of their propositions. The main aim of the paper, however, is to investigate the implications of the ‘alternative’ specification of liability. The paper shows that a combination of negligence-based and causation-based liability makes the diligence strategies dominant choice for the agents.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics in its series Working papers with number 139.
Length: 23 pages
Date of creation: Aug 2005
Date of revision:
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.:
- Kahan, Marcel, 1989. "Causation and Incentives to Take Care under the Negligence Rule," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 427-47, June.
- Chung, T.Y., 1992.
"Efficiency of Comparative Negligence: A Game Theoretic Analysis,"
UWO Department of Economics Working Papers
9215, University of Western Ontario, Department of Economics.
- Chung, Tai-Yeong, 1993. "Efficiency of Comparative Negligence: A Game Theoretic Analysis," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 22(2), pages 395-404, June.
- Steven Shavell, 2003.
"Economic Analysis of Accident Law,"
NBER Working Papers
9694, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Francesco Parisi, 2004. "Comparative Causation," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 6(2), pages 345-368.
- Aaron S. Edlin., 1993.
"Efficient Standards of Due Care: Should Courts Find More Parties Negligent Under Comparative Negligence?,"
Economics Working Papers
93-218, University of California at Berkeley.
- Edlin, Aaron S., 1994. "Efficient standards of due care: Should courts find more parties negligent under comparative negligence?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 14(1), pages 21-34, March.
- Oren Bar-Gill & Omri Ben-Shahar, 2003. "The Uneasy Case for Comparative Negligence," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 433-469, August.
- Arlen, Jennifer H., 1990. "Re-examining liability rules when injurers as well as victims suffer losses," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 233-239, December.
- Yu-Ping Liao & Michelle J. White, 2002. "No-Fault for Motor Vehicles: An Economic Analysis," American Law and Economics Review, Oxford University Press, vol. 4(2), pages 258-294.
- Paul Burrows, 1999. "A Deferential Role for Efficiency Theory in Analysing Causation-Based Tort Law," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 29-49, July.
- Miceli, Thomas J., 1997. "Economics of the Law: Torts, Contracts, Property, Litigation," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195103908, September.
- Feldman, Allan M. & Frost, John M., 1998. "A simple model of efficient tort liability rules," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 201-215, June.
- David Kaye & Mikel Aickin, 1984. "A Comment on Causal Apportionment," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 13(1), pages 191-208, January.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Vinayan. K.P).
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.