IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/hal-04140746.html

On the Role of Inequalities in Legal Systems: A Tocquevilian View

Author

Listed:
  • Bertrand Crettez

    (EconomiX - EconomiX - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • Bruno Deffains

    (EconomiX - EconomiX - UPN - Université Paris Nanterre - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

Abstract

The present paper proposes to interpret the differences in legal systems between common-law and civil- law nations as arising from the importance given to adjudication in comparison with statute laws. It focuses on the relative costs of legal change by adjudication (case law development) when compared with legislation (statutory law development). The main argument is that the public concern with equality is a major determinant of the relative cost of adjudication in a legal system. We develop a model of the legal process that illustrates Tocqueville's fundamental intuition with regard to the uniformity of legal rules, and as a consequence, the relative importance of adjudication and legislation.

Suggested Citation

  • Bertrand Crettez & Bruno Deffains, 2008. "On the Role of Inequalities in Legal Systems: A Tocquevilian View," Working Papers hal-04140746, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:hal-04140746
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04140746
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04140746/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2008. "Judicial Fact Discretion," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 1-35, January.
    2. Bruno Deffains & Dominique Demougin, 2008. "The Inquisitorial and the Adversarial Procedure in a Criminal Court Setting," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(1), pages 31-43, March.
    3. Thorsten Beck & Asli Demirguc-Kunt & Ross Levine, 2003. "Bank Supervision and Corporate Finance," NBER Working Papers 9620, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Aspasia Tsaoussi & Eleni Zervogianni, 2010. "Judges as satisficers: a law and economics perspective on judicial liability," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(3), pages 333-357, June.
    2. Joshua Schwartzstein & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "An Activity-Generating Theory of Regulation," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(1), pages 1-38.
    3. William J. Stuntz, 2008. "Inequality and Adversarial Criminal Procedure. Comment," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 164(1), pages 47-51, March.
    4. Yves Oytana & Nathalie Chappe, 2018. "Expert opinion in a tort litigation game," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 67-107, August.
    5. Zou, Jingxian & Shen, Guangjun & Gong, Yaxian, 2019. "The effect of value-added tax on leverage: Evidence from China’s value-added tax reform," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 135-146.
    6. Kim, Chulyoung, 2015. "Centralized vs. Decentralized Institutions for Expert Testimony," MPRA Paper 69618, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Guido de Blasio & Daniela Vuri, 2013. "Joint Custody in the Italian Courts," CEIS Research Paper 284, Tor Vergata University, CEIS, revised 03 Jul 2013.
    8. C. Hopp & A. Dreher, 2013. "Do differences in institutional and legal environments explain cross-country variations in IPO underpricing?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(4), pages 435-454, February.
    9. Elijah Brewer III & George Kaufman & Larry Wall, 2008. "Bank Capital Ratios Across Countries: Why Do They Vary?," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 34(2), pages 177-201, December.
    10. Howell, William & Shepsle, Kenneth & Wolton, Stephane, 2020. "Executive Absolutism: A Model," MPRA Paper 98221, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    11. Nicola Gennaioli & Stefano Rossi, 2010. "Judicial Discretion in Corporate Bankruptcy," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(11), pages 4078-4114, November.
    12. Ann Dryden Witte & Magaly Queralt, 2004. "What Happens When Child Care Inspections and Complaints Are Made Available on the Internet?," NBER Working Papers 10227, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Philip Bond, 2004. "Optimal plaintiff incentives when courts are imperfect," 2004 Meeting Papers 723, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    14. Sendhil Mullainathan & Andrei Shleifer, 2005. "The Market for News," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(4), pages 1031-1053, September.
    15. Thorsten Beck, 2003. "Stock markets, banks, and economic development:theory and evidence," EIB Papers 2/2003, European Investment Bank, Economics Department.
    16. Phuong Nu Minh Le & Xiaoqin Wang, 2013. "Similarities and differences of credit access by Vietnamese and Chinese firms," International Journal of Business and Social Research, LAR Center Press, vol. 3(5), pages 185-201, May.
    17. Donato Masciandaro, 2006. "E Pluribus Unum? Authorities' Design in Financial Supervision: Trends and Determinants," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 73-102, January.
    18. repec:hal:journl:dumas-00802139 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Demirguc-Kunt, Asli & Laeven, Luc & Levine, Ross, 2004. "Regulations, Market Structure, Institutions, and the Cost of Financial Intermediation," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(3), pages 593-622, June.
    20. Deffains, Bruno & Gabuthy, Yannick & Lambert, Eve-Angéline, 2010. "Labour disputes, investment decisions and the judiciary," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 424-433, April.
    21. Flavio Menezes, 2013. "The Failure of Judges and the Rise of Regulators by Andrei Shleifer ( MIT Press , Cambridge, Massachusetts , 2012 ), pp. 343 ," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 89(287), pages 577-580, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:hal:wpaper:hal-04140746. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.