The paper compares the Nash bargaining solution of a simple settlement game (with perfect and complete information and imperfect decision making judges) to the equilibrium results of a trial game without settlement stage. The comparison allows for an evaluation of the efficiency of settlement with regard to primary and secondary cost. Das Paper stellt die Nash-Verhandlungslösung eines Vergleichsspiels (mit perfekter, vollständiger Information und imperfekten Gerichten) neben die Gleichgewichtslösungen eines Klagespiels ohne Vergleichsstufe. Die Ergebnisse erlauben Aussagen zu primären und tertiären Kosten (mithin zur Effizienz) von Prozessvergleichen.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. 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.
Publisher Info
Paper provided by Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management in its series FEMM Working Papers with number
08021.
Find related papers by JEL classification: K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process C78 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory - - - Bargaining Theory; Matching Theory
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
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.: