Showing 1 - 10 of 19
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence about injurers' behavior is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the `preponderance of evidence' standard used in common law, together with ordinary exclusion...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005844236
We argue that the common-law standard of proof, given the rulesof evidence, does not minimize expected error as usually argued inthe legal literature, but may well be e±cient from the standpointof providing maximal incentives for socially desirable behavior.By contrast, civil law's higher but...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005857933
We argue that the common-law standard of proof, given the rules of evidence, does not minimize expected error as usually argued in the legal literature, but may well be efficient from the standpoint of providing maximal incentives for socially desirable behavior. By contrast, civil law's higher...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005764370
This paper analyzes the cost and incentive properties of the standard of proof for a finding of negligence. In common law, the usual standard is for courts to decide on the basis of a so-called balance of probabilities or preponderance of the evidence. We show that, if producing information...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005572493
We provide a comparison of the adversarial and inquisitorial trial procedures. We find that social costs associated with a given level of justice are always smaller under the adversarial rule. Nevertheless, the inquisitorial rule may be better because it allows for state control of all the...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005582105
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence about injurers' behavior is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the `preponderance of evidence' standard used in common law, together with ordinary exclusion...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005168676
This paper analyzes the incentive properties of the standard and burden of proof for a finding of negligence, when evidence about injurers' behavior is imperfect and rests with the parties. We show that the `preponderance of evidence' standard used in common law, together with ordinary exclusion...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005100970
We argue that the common law standard of proof, given the rules of evidence, does not minimize expected error as usually argued in the legal literature, but may well be efficient from the standpoint of providing maximal incentives for socially desirable behavior. By contrast, civil law's higher...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005101073
We argue that the common law standard of proof, given the rules of evidence, does not minimize expected error as usually argued in the legal literature, but may well be efficient from the standpoint of providing maximal incentives for socially desirable behavior. By contrast, civil law's higher...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005696274
We analyze the design of legal principles and procedures for court decision-making in civil litigation. The objective is the provision of appropriate incentives for potential tort-feasors to exert care, when evidence about care is imperfect and may be distorted by the parties. Efficiency is...
Persistent link: https://www.econbiz.de/10005696309