IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/swn/wpaper/2025-01.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Appeal Decision and Settlement Bargaining

Author

Listed:
  • Ansgar Wohlschlegel

    (Swansea University)

Abstract

This paper analyses settlement bargaining under incomplete information when an appeal is possible. Litigants may engage in pretrial and, before reaching the appeals court, posttrial settlement bargaining. In the latter, both litigants utilise the information revealed at earlier stages, introducing the following effects: First, a defendant rejecting the pretrial settlement reveals having a strong case. Hence, a higher pretrial settlement rate weakens the plaintiff's average case, thereby reducing her posttrial equilibrium payoff (strategic effect). Second, the trial judgment is a noisy public signal of the appeals judgment. Hence, winning at trial makes a litigant stronger in posttrial settlement bargaining (information effect). Unlike in the standard single-stage model of settlement bargaining, I find that lower legal costs may not always reduce settlement incentives and that the allocation of legal costs between litigants may matter. Additionally, a stronger correlation between judgments on both court levels weakens the strategic effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Ansgar Wohlschlegel, 2025. "The Appeal Decision and Settlement Bargaining," Working Papers 2025-01, Swansea University, School of Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:swn:wpaper:2025-01
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rahwebdav.swan.ac.uk/repec/pdf/WP2025-01.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2025
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tim Friehe & Ansgar Wohlschlegel, 2019. "Rent Seeking and Bias in Appeals Systems," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(1), pages 117-157.
    2. Butler, Monika & Hauser, Heinz, 2000. "The WTO Dispute Settlement System: First Assessment from an Economic Perspective," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 16(2), pages 503-533, October.
    3. Theodore Eisenberg, 2004. "Appeal Rates and Outcomes in Tried and Nontried Cases: Further Exploration of Anti‐Plaintiff Appellate Outcomes," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 1(3), pages 659-688, November.
    4. Duol Kim & Heechul Min, 2017. "Appeal rate and caseload: evidence from civil litigation in Korea," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 339-360, October.
    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. Javelosa, Josyline C. & Schmitz, Andrew, 2006. "Costs and Benefits of a WTO Dispute: Philippine Bananas and the Australian Market," Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, Estey Centre for Law and Economics in International Trade, vol. 7(01), pages 1-26.
    2. Jeanne Métivier & A. Bouët, 2017. "Is the WTO dispute settlement procedure fair to developing countries?," Post-Print hal-02273686, HAL.
    3. Lee, Jiwon & Wittgenstein, Teresa, 2017. "Weak vs. Strong Ties: Explaining Early Settlement in WTO Disputes," ILE Working Paper Series 7, University of Hamburg, Institute of Law and Economics.
    4. At Christian & Friehe Tim & Gabuthy Yannick, 2019. "On Lawyer Compensation When Appeals Are Possible," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 19(2), pages 1-11, April.
    5. Johan Lindeque & Steven McGuire, 2007. "The United States and trade disputes in the World Trade Organization: Hegemony constrained or confirmed?," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 725-744, September.
    6. Wilfred J. Ethier, "undated". "Punishment and Dispute Settlement in Trade Agreements," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-14, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    7. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    8. Chau, Nancy H. & Färe, Rolf, 2011. "Shadow pricing market access: A trade benefit function approach," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(4), pages 1631-1663, July.
    9. Ziaul Abedin & Mohammad Ali Tareq, 2008. "Trends of Trade Disputes During the WTO Regime," AIUB Bus Econ Working Paper Series AIUB-BUS-ECON-2008-04, American International University-Bangladesh (AIUB), Office of Research and Publications (ORP), revised Jan 2008.
    10. Pao-Li Chang, 2004. "The Politics of WTO Enforcement Mechanism," Working Papers 04-2004, Singapore Management University, School of Economics.
    11. Kym Anderson, 2016. "Contributions Of The Gatt/Wto To Global Economic Welfare: Empirical Evidence," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(1), pages 56-92, February.
    12. Thomas A. Zimmermann, 2005. "WTO Dispute Settlement at Ten: Evolution, Experiences, and Evaluation," Aussenwirtschaft, University of St. Gallen, School of Economics and Political Science, Swiss Institute for International Economics and Applied Economics Research, vol. 60(01), pages 27-61, March.
    13. repec:lan:wpaper:859 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Thomas H. Cohen, 2008. "General Civil Jury Trial Litigation in State and Federal Courts: A Statistical Portrait," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 5(3), pages 593-617, September.
    15. Eisenkopf, Gerald & Friehe, Tim & Wohlschlegel, Ansgar, 2019. "On the role of emotions in experimental litigation contests," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 90-94.
    16. Francois, Joseph & Horn, Henrik & Kaunitz, Niklas, 2008. "Trading Profiles and Developing Country Participation in the WTO Dispute Settlement System," Working Paper Series 730, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    17. Elliott Ash & Daniel L. Chen & Arianna Ornaghi, 2024. "Gender Attitudes in the Judiciary: Evidence from US Circuit Courts," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 16(1), pages 314-350, January.
    18. Merlone, Ugo & Lupano, Matteo, 2022. "Third party funding: The minimum claim value," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 296(2), pages 738-747.
    19. Pao-Li Chang, 2002. "The Evolution and Utilization of the GATT/WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism," Working Papers 475, Research Seminar in International Economics, University of Michigan.
    20. Fritz Breuss, 2004. "WTO Dispute Settlement: An Economic Analysis of Four EU–US Mini Trade Wars—A Survey," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 275-315, December.
    21. repec:lan:wpaper:860 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Heinz Hauser & Alexander Roitinger, 2002. "A Renegotiation Perspective on Transatlantic Trade Disputes," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2002 2002-09, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Appeals; Litigation; Settlement; Bargaining;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process
    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:swn:wpaper:2025-01. 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: Syed Shabi-Ul-Hassan (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edswauk.html .

    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.