Forum Selection in International Business Contracts: Home Bias Portfolio Puzzle and Managerial Moral Hazard
We provide an economic analysis of forum selection in international business contracts. International business contracts or multi-state transactions within federally structured countries might be subject to more than one sovereign adjudication system. In case of conflict between the transacting parties, the appropriate tribunal must be identified. We examine the question of business firms' optimal choice of the forums to adjudicate future business disputes. We extend the investment model approach to litigation by applying a "portfolio theory" type analysis. We show that firms that prefer higher expected income and lower income volatility are better off diversifying the forums under which they litigate business disputes. This stands in contrast to real-world business practice that consistently shows a clear preference to selecting the "home" court and legal system to settle international business disputes. In a fraction of the cases, both parties gain by selecting a certain forum, because of specialization for example, and it becomes optimal to ignore diversification. In most cases, however, the relevant factors that affect forum selection are zero sum and priced ex ante, court bias, for example. Once priced, there is no incentive to disregard diversification. We hypothesize that, in addition to specialization, factors such as managerial moral hazard explain the real-world behavior of firms: managers are less likely to be blamed, ex post, for choosing the "home court." We suggest that, as international barriers decline and international trade grows, firms will diversify the forums in which they adjudicate international business disputes.
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.
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.
Volume (Year): 22 (2004)
Issue (Month): 3 (May)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/finance/journal/11156/PS2|
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:22:y:2004:i:3:p:219-232. 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: (Sonal Shukla)or (Rebekah McClure)
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.