On Specific Performance in Civil Law and Enforcement Costs
Abstract: We argue that enforcement costs, ignored in the literature on ‘efficient breach’, are important for the choice of contract breach remedy. Empirically we find that specific performance is almost never claimed in Civil Law countries. It involves forcing a party in breach to perform actions while damages involves extracting only a monetary payment. The former is more difficult and more coercive. We study enforcement rules of Denmark, France and Germany. Enforcement of specific performance is absent in Denmark and weak in France. In Germany it seems stricter, which points to the importance of costs of enforcement to the claimant.
|Date of creation:||01 May 2001|
|Date of revision:|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +45 3815 3815
Web page: http://www.cbs.dk/departments/finance/
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.:
- Aaron S. Edlin & Stefan Reichelstein, 1995.
"Holdups, Standard Breach Remedies, and Optimal Investment,"
NBER Working Papers
5007, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- 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.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hhs:cbsfin:2000_010. 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: (Lars Nondal)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.