Abstract
This article examines the effects of compensation system in the dispute resolution of securities false statement. Firstly, this paper develops an evolutionary game model to analyze the evolutionary stable strategy (ESS) of the dispute resolution. Then, we analyze the factor which influence the choice of the parties from an economics perspective. Expected compensation and expected systemic risk are more influential to the decision of the parties by derivation. Moreover, we test the theoretical deduction with statistics description of the private securities litigation in China. In conclusion, the irrational expectation of the litigation income, which influences the strategy selection of the parties and results in more lawsuits.
References
Bu, Y., and X. Huo. 2015. “The Revival of ADR in China: The Path to Rule of Law or the Turn Against Law?,” in New Developments in Civil and Commercial Mediation, IusComparatum – Global Studies in Comparative Law, edited by C. Esplugues, and L. Marquis,, 191–223. New York: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-18135-6_5Suche in Google Scholar
Calabresi, G., and K. S. Schwartz. 2011. “The Costs of Class Actions: Allocation and Collective Redress in the US Experience.” European Journal of Law and Economics 32: 169–183.10.1007/s10657-011-9233-zSuche in Google Scholar
Cenini, M., B. Luppi, and F. Parisi. 2011. “Incentive Effects of Class Actions and Punitive Damages Under Alternative Procedural Regimes.” European Journal of Law and Economics 32: 229–240.10.1007/s10657-011-9241-zSuche in Google Scholar
Deng, Y., F. M. Xu, O. Li, W. Y. Shi, and C. H. Liu. 2016. “《社会偏好中的框架效应》[The framing effect on social preferences].” 《心理科学进展》[Advances in Psychological Science] 24 (4): 622–632.10.3724/SP.J.1042.2016.00622Suche in Google Scholar
Ding, L. 2016. “《制度激励、博弈均衡与社会正义》[Institutional Incentives, game equilibrium and social justice],” 《中国社会科学》[Social Science in China] (4): 135–158.Suche in Google Scholar
Kobayashi, B. H. 2015. “The Law and Economics of Litigation.” George Mason University Law and Economics Research Paper Series.10.2139/ssrn.2613145Suche in Google Scholar
Li, H. J., F. M. Xu, P. Xiang, S. X. Kong, and Z. Z. Meng. 2013. “《基于预期理论的参照依赖》[Reference Dependence Based on Prospect Theory], ”《心理科学进展》[Advances in Psychological Science], 21 (2): 317–325.10.3724/SP.J.1042.2013.00317Suche in Google Scholar
Li, J., W. Du, F. Yang, and G. Hua. 2014. “Evolutionary Game Analysis of Remanufacturing Closed-Loop Supply Chain with Asymmetric Information.” Sustainability 6 (9): 6312–6324.10.3390/su6096312Suche in Google Scholar
Luppi, B., F. Parisi. 2012. “Litigation and Legal Evolution: Does Procedure Matter?” Public Choice 152 (1): 181–201.10.1007/s11127-011-9860-5Suche in Google Scholar
Mota, C. E. 2008. “Litigation, Arbitration and Mediation Contributing to Conflict Settlement.” Conflict Prevention in Project Management, 99–124. New York: Springer.Suche in Google Scholar
Schillig, M. 2009. “The Contribution of Law and Economics as a Method of Legal Reasoning in European Private Law.” European Review of Private Law 2009 (5): 853–893.10.54648/ERPL2009054Suche in Google Scholar
Stipanowich, T. J. 2004. “ADR and the ‘Vanishing Trial’: The Growth and Impact of ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’.” Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 1 (3): 843–912.10.1111/j.1740-1461.2004.00025.xSuche in Google Scholar
Taylor, J. A. 2013. “Review of Expenses and Funding in Litigation in Scotland.” Consultation Paper.Suche in Google Scholar
Ulen, T. S. 2011. “An Introduction to the Law and Economics of Class Action Litigation.” European Journal of Law and Economics 32: 185–203.10.1007/s10657-011-9252-9Suche in Google Scholar
Visscher, L. 2012. “A Law and Economics View on Harmonization of Procedural Law.” In Litigation in a Globalising World, edited by X. E. Kramer and C. H. van Rhee, 65–91. Hague: T.M.C. Asser Press.10.1007/978-90-6704-817-0_4Suche in Google Scholar
Wärneryd, K. 2012. “Nine Points of the Law: Evidentiary Rules and the Costs of Litigation.” Public Choice 153: 279–285.10.1007/s11127-011-9793-zSuche in Google Scholar
Xu, W. 2017. “[An Empirical Analysis of the Private Securities Litigation in China].”《中国政法大学学报》[Journal of China University of Politics and Law] (2): 74–83.Suche in Google Scholar
©2018 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Reassessing Accountability and Sophistication of Insured in Insurance Misrepresentation: Lessons and Implications for Taiwan
- The Effect of Compensation System on the Dispute Resolution of Securities False Statement in China: A Law and Economics Analysis
- Redesigning Indonesia Copyright Act to Accommodate Autonomous Intelligent System: Status Quo and Room for Improvement
- Board Independence of Listed Companies in the US and China
- Patent Pool and Deprivatization of Patents
Artikel in diesem Heft
- Reassessing Accountability and Sophistication of Insured in Insurance Misrepresentation: Lessons and Implications for Taiwan
- The Effect of Compensation System on the Dispute Resolution of Securities False Statement in China: A Law and Economics Analysis
- Redesigning Indonesia Copyright Act to Accommodate Autonomous Intelligent System: Status Quo and Room for Improvement
- Board Independence of Listed Companies in the US and China
- Patent Pool and Deprivatization of Patents