Resolving Contractual Disputes: Arbitration vs Mediation
In this paper we analyze contracts written on potentially non-verifiable states. We first show that the contract always enters a dispute phase. We analyze two possible legal rules which can be used to resolve the disputes. Under both rules the paper derives the optimal contract. An interesting feature of the optimal contract is that for low verifiability likelihood the agent is always rewarded unless there is failure. The other result is that under both legal rules used first-best effort and more than first-best-effort level can be implemented, depending on how small the likelihood of verifiability is.
|Date of creation:||Mar 2005|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: 0117 33 10799
Fax: 0117 33 10705
Web page: http://www.bris.ac.uk/cmpo/
More information through EDIRC
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.:
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2004.
"Agreeing Now to Agree Later: Contracts that Rule Out but do not Rule In,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
2032, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2004. "Agreeing Now to Agree Later: Contracts that Rule Out but do not Rule In," NBER Working Papers 10397, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2004. "AGREEING NOW TO AGREE LATER: Contracts that Rule Out but do not Rule In," STICERD - Theoretical Economics Paper Series /2004/472, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, LSE.
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2004. "Agreeing now to agree later: contracts that rule out but do not rule in," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 19316, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 2004. "Agreeing Now to Agree Later: Contracts that Rule Out but do not Rule In," ESE Discussion Papers 109, Edinburgh School of Economics, University of Edinburgh.
- de Meza, David & Lockwood, Ben, 2004. "Too Much Investment : A Problem Of Coordination Failure," The Warwick Economics Research Paper Series (TWERPS) 703, University of Warwick, Department of Economics.
- Canice Prendergast & Robert H. Topel, 1993.
"Favoritism in Organizations,"
NBER Working Papers
4427, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Oliver Hart & John Moore, 1985.
"Incomplete Contracts and Renegotiation,"
367, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Department of Economics.
- MacLeod, W Bentley & Malcomson, James M, 1989.
"Implicit Contracts, Incentive Compatibility, and Involuntary Unemployment,"
Econometric Society, vol. 57(2), pages 447-80, March.
- W. Bentley MacLeod & James M. Malcomson, 1986. "Implicit Contracts, Incentive Compatibility, and Involuntary Unemployment," Working Papers 585, Queen's University, Department of Economics.
- Sappington, David, 1983. "Limited liability contracts between principal and agent," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-21, February.
- Holmstrom, Bengt & Milgrom, Paul, 1991. "Multitask Principal-Agent Analyses: Incentive Contracts, Asset Ownership, and Job Design," Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(0), pages 24-52, Special I.
- Stigler, George J, 1970.
"The Optimum Enforcement of Laws,"
Journal of Political Economy,
University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(3), pages 526-36, May-June.
- Edlin, Aaron S & Reichelstein, Stefan, 1996.
"Holdups, Standard Breach Remedies, and Optimal Investment,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 478-501, June.
- Aaron S. Edlin & Stefan Reichelstein, 1995. "Holdups, Standard Breach Remedies, and Optimal Investment," NBER Working Papers 5007, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Jonathan Levin, 2000.
"Relational Incentive Contracts,"
01002, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Canice Prendergast, 1999. "The Provision of Incentives in Firms," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 7-63, March.
- Joseph A. Ritter & Lowell J. Taylor, 1999. "Low-powered incentives," Working Papers 1999-005, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
- Steven Shavell & A. Mitchell Polinsky, 2000.
"The Economic Theory of Public Enforcement of Law,"
Journal of Economic Literature,
American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 45-76, March.
- Bentley MacLeod, 2001.
"Optimal Contracting with Subjective Evaluation,"
Theory workshop papers
357966000000000036, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Currie, Janet & McConnell, Sheena, 1991. "Collective Bargaining in the Public Sector: The Effect of Legal Structure on Dispute Costs and Wages," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(4), pages 693-718, September.
- Maskin, Eric & Tirole, Jean, 1999. "Unforeseen Contingencies and Incomplete Contracts," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(1), pages 83-114, January.
- B. Douglas Bernheim & Michael D. Whinston, 1997.
"Incomplete Contracts and Strategic Ambiguity,"
Harvard Institute of Economic Research Working Papers
1787, Harvard - Institute of Economic Research.
- W. Bentley Macleod, 2000. "Complexity and Contract," Revue d'Économie Industrielle, Programme National Persée, vol. 92(1), pages 149-178.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bri:cmpowp:05/117. 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: ()
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.