This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Uncertainty Over Causation and the Determination of Civil Liability

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Steven Shavell

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Situations in which there is uncertainty over the cause of harm are studied (e.g., was the lung cancer due to normal exposure to medical x-radiation, to smoking, to exposure to carcinogens discharged by a chemical plant?); and the effects on incentives to reduce risk of various ways of treating such uncertainty under the liability system are identified using a theoretical model of the occurrence of harm. The main points are these. Use of a threshold probabilit' of causation (e.g., 50%) as a criterion for determining liability may adversely affect behavior: parties might face a diminished burden of liability (if their probability of causation systematically fell below the threshold) and thus do too little to reduce risk; or they might face an extra burden (if their probability were systematically above the threshold), and thus do too much. Second, the best all or nothing criterion for determining liability (a criterion under which a party is fully liable if at all liable) is different in form from a threshold probability criterion. Third, liability in proportion to the probability of causation is superior to all other criteria and results in socially ideal behavior.These points are demonstrated and analyzed in two types of case: where the uncertainty involves a party versus natural or "background" factors; and where it involves which party among several was the author of harm. The importance of the points is shown to depend on the type of case, and as well on the form of liability (strict liability or the negligence rule).The interpretation of the analysis and important qualifications to it are discussed in a concluding section.

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.

File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w1219.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html.

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.

Publisher Info
Paper provided by National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc in its series NBER Working Papers with number 1219.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length:
Date of creation: Oct 1983
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:1219

Note: LE
Contact details of provider:
Postal: National Bureau of Economic Research, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138, U.S.A.
Phone: 617-868-3900
Email:
Web page: http://www.nber.org
More information through EDIRC

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: ().

Related research
Keywords:

Other versions of this item:

Cited by:
(explanations, 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.)
  1. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2001. "Do Exposure Suits Produce a 'Race to File'? An Economic Analysis of a Tort for Risk," Working papers 2002-42, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics, revised Jun 2004. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  2. Thomas J. Miceli & Kathleen Segerson, 2004. "Punishing the Innocent along with the Guilty: The Economics of Individual versus Group Punishment," Working papers 2004-37, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  3. Francesco Parisi & Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci, 2003. "The Economics of Tort Law: A Précis," Working Papers 03-13, Utrecht School of Economics. [Downloadable!]
  4. Eberhard Feess & Gerd Muehlheusser & Ansgar Wohlschlegel, 2009. "Environmental liability under uncertain causation," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 133-148, October. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  5. Qi Zhou, 2009. "Economic analysis of the legal standard for deceit in English tort law," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 28(1), pages 83-102, August. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  6. 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. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  7. Giuseppe Dari-Mattiacci & Gerrit de Geest, 2004. "The Filtering Effect of Sharing Rules," Working Papers 04-17, Utrecht School of Economics. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  8. Urs Schweizer, 2008. "Legal Damages for Losses of Chances," Discussion Papers 235, SFB/TR 15 Governance and the Efficiency of Economic Systems, Free University of Berlin, Humboldt University of Berlin, University of Bonn, University of Mannheim, University of Munich. [Downloadable!]
  9. Dietrich Earnhart, 1998. "Civil Litigation, Access to Government-Held Information, and Coordination of Public and Private Enforcement in the Czech Republic," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 6(2), pages 113-141, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? The RePEc project started in 1997. Its precursor, NetEc, dates back to 1993.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.


This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.