The Structure of Incremental Liability Rules
-
Satish K. Jain
This paper investigates the structure of incremental liability rules. Necessary and sufficient conditions are derived for an incremental liability rule to be efficient. A liability rule, in the ordinary sense of the term, to be called a standard liability rule, is a rule which specifies the proportions in which the loss, in case of accident, is to be apportioned between the victim and the injurer as a function of their proportions of non-negligence. An incremental liability rule is a rule which specifies (i) which of the two parties, the victim or the injurer, is to be the non-residual liability holder; and (ii) the proportion of the incremental loss, which can be ascribed to the negligence of the non-residual party, to be borne by the non-residual liability holder. The necessary and sufficient conditions for an incremental liability rule to be efficient, derived in the paper, can be stated as follows: Let the party which is the residual liability holder when both parties are non-negligent be designated as r and the other party as nr. An incremental liability rule is efficient for every admissible application iff its structure is such that: (i) If party r is negligent and party nr is non-negligent, then party r must remain the residual liability holder. (ii) If party nr is negligent and party r is non-negligent, then party nr must either become the residual liability holder or liability of nr must be equal to the entire incremental loss which can be ascribed to the negligence of nr.
©2011 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Macroeconomic Instability and Corporate Failure: The Role of the Legal System
- Prevention of Crime and the Optimal Standard of Proof in Criminal Law
- Does a Rise in Maximal Fines Increase or Decrease the Optimal Level of Deterrence?
- Benchmarks and Economic Analysis
- Pass a Law, Any Law, Fast! State Legislative Responses to the Kelo Backlash
- The Problem of Shared Social Cost
- A Cost of Tax Planning
- Never Two Without Three: Commons, Anticommons and Semicommons
- Unavoidable Accident
- Protecting Private Property with Constitutional Judicial Review: A Social Welfare Approach
- Measuring Criminal Spillovers: Evidence from Three Strikes
- Corruption on the Court: The Causes and Social Consequences of Point-Shaving in NCAA Basketball
- Valuation of Quality of Life Losses Associated with Nonfatal Injury: Insights from Jury Verdict Data
- Belief in a Just World, Blaming the Victim, and Hate Crime Statutes
- Do Citizens Know Whether Their State Has Decriminalized Marijuana? Assessing the Perceptual Component of Deterrence Theory
- The Structure of Incremental Liability Rules
- Firms' Motivations for Environmental Overcompliance
- Contingent Fees, Signaling and Settlement Authority
- Rethinking the Economic Model of Deterrence: How Insights from Empirical Social Science Could Affect Policies Towards Crime and Punishment
- Crime, Business Conduct and Investment Decisions: Enterprise Survey Evidence from 34 Countries in Europe and Asia
- Additive and Non-Additive Risk Factors in Multiple Causation
- The Devil Made Me Do It: The Corporate Purchase of Insurance
- Factors Affecting the Length of Time a Jury Deliberates: Case Characteristics and Jury Composition
- Hybrid Licensing of Product Innovations
- The Effect of Endogenous Right-to-Work Laws on Business and Economic Conditions in the United States: A Multivariate Approach
- The Choice in the Lawmaking Process: Legal Transplants vs. Indigenous Law
- Building Encroachments
- Reporter's Privilege and Incentives to Leak
- Decision Analysis on Whether to Accept a Remittitur
- Deterrence in Rank-Order Tournaments
- Self-Defeating Subsidiarity
- Do Broader Eminent Domain Powers Increase Government Size?
Articles in the same Issue
- Article
- Macroeconomic Instability and Corporate Failure: The Role of the Legal System
- Prevention of Crime and the Optimal Standard of Proof in Criminal Law
- Does a Rise in Maximal Fines Increase or Decrease the Optimal Level of Deterrence?
- Benchmarks and Economic Analysis
- Pass a Law, Any Law, Fast! State Legislative Responses to the Kelo Backlash
- The Problem of Shared Social Cost
- A Cost of Tax Planning
- Never Two Without Three: Commons, Anticommons and Semicommons
- Unavoidable Accident
- Protecting Private Property with Constitutional Judicial Review: A Social Welfare Approach
- Measuring Criminal Spillovers: Evidence from Three Strikes
- Corruption on the Court: The Causes and Social Consequences of Point-Shaving in NCAA Basketball
- Valuation of Quality of Life Losses Associated with Nonfatal Injury: Insights from Jury Verdict Data
- Belief in a Just World, Blaming the Victim, and Hate Crime Statutes
- Do Citizens Know Whether Their State Has Decriminalized Marijuana? Assessing the Perceptual Component of Deterrence Theory
- The Structure of Incremental Liability Rules
- Firms' Motivations for Environmental Overcompliance
- Contingent Fees, Signaling and Settlement Authority
- Rethinking the Economic Model of Deterrence: How Insights from Empirical Social Science Could Affect Policies Towards Crime and Punishment
- Crime, Business Conduct and Investment Decisions: Enterprise Survey Evidence from 34 Countries in Europe and Asia
- Additive and Non-Additive Risk Factors in Multiple Causation
- The Devil Made Me Do It: The Corporate Purchase of Insurance
- Factors Affecting the Length of Time a Jury Deliberates: Case Characteristics and Jury Composition
- Hybrid Licensing of Product Innovations
- The Effect of Endogenous Right-to-Work Laws on Business and Economic Conditions in the United States: A Multivariate Approach
- The Choice in the Lawmaking Process: Legal Transplants vs. Indigenous Law
- Building Encroachments
- Reporter's Privilege and Incentives to Leak
- Decision Analysis on Whether to Accept a Remittitur
- Deterrence in Rank-Order Tournaments
- Self-Defeating Subsidiarity
- Do Broader Eminent Domain Powers Increase Government Size?
