IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jleorg/v26yi3p592-608.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal Standards of Negligence When One Party Is Uninformed of the Standards

Author

Listed:
  • Henrik Lando

Abstract

This article analyzes optimal negligence standards when only one of two (future) parties will be informed of the standards. When the informed party is the injurer and acts first, the simple negligence rule is optimal, and under certain conditions, the first best standard of due care is optimal. The informed party will have an incentive to comply with the standard due to the discontinuity of the negligence rule, whereas the uninformed party may infer this and hence also take appropriate precautions. In general, the optimal policy for the court depends on who acts first and on who the injurer is. Thus, optimal rules are contributory negligence when the informed party is the victim and acts first, no liability when the uninformed party is the injurer and acts first, and strict liability without contributory negligence when the uninformed party is the victim and acts first. The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Yale University. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Henrik Lando, 2010. "Optimal Standards of Negligence When One Party Is Uninformed of the Standards," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(3), pages 592-608.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:26:y::i:3:p:592-608
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jleo/ewp014
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:jleorg:v:26:y::i:3:p:592-608. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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 RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/jleo .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.