Tacit collusion and liability rules

This paper demonstrates that the likelihood of tacit collusion in a given oligopolistic industry may depend on the kind of liability rule applied to the industry. We study typical settings for the analysis of product liability and environmental liability. For the latter, it is established that tacit collusion is more likely under strict liability than under negligence. However, the two liability rules are equivalent with regard to their effects on tacit collusion in the model pertaining to product liability. This context-dependent impact on tacit collusion can be traced back to a difference in the shape of firms’ cost functions.     

Environmental liability and harmonization in the presence of transboundary effects and hidden assets

Within the context of transboundary disputes, this paper seeks to determine which liability concept, negligence or strict liability, performs better when assets are secure against foreign claims for transboundary damages. Our results indicate that, if assets are hidden from foreign claims, strict liability will not implement the socially optimal outcome, but neither will negligence. However, even though the socially optimal outcome is not always achieved, strict liability weakly dominates negligence. These results suggest that the harmonization of statues that deal with transboundary pollution should be based on strict liability not negligence. JEL classification K32 · Q5 Smith and Eckert both thank SSHRC of Canada for financial assistance. We thank two referees for valuable comments that greatly improved the paper and Matt Smith for his research assistance. All remaining errors are our responsibility.     

Lender Liability for Environmental Harm: An Argument Against Negligence Based Rules

A firm strictly liable for any harm done will choose an inefficiently low care level if there is a possibility that it goes bankrupt. One possibility to improve care is extending liability to secured lenders, as applied under CERCLA and as currently being discussed in the EU. I compare strict liability, partial liability and vague negligence for lenders in a model with moral hazard and environmental auditing. While auditing is socially valuable only if it increases the firm's care level, the creditor also calculates the reduction in the information rent. Thus, for each possible care level, monitoring is always too high. This effect is aggravated by a vague negligence rule, where the probability that a lender is found liable decreases in the level of auditing. It is demonstrated that partial liability is superior, because the incentive for excessive monitoring is diminished.     

Product Liability in the European Union: Compensation and Deterrence Issues

In Europe a common standard of strict liability has been introduced with the European directive 85/374. The implementation of this Directive has not led to an expansion of product liability cases. Moreover neither the product nor the insurance market has been dislocated as in the United States. Both the fact that most liability cases continue to be discussed under national legislation—even when it is based on liability with fault—and the different price of insurance in Eurpean Countries show that the directive did not reach its harmonisation goals. We discuss the optional provisions that limit strict liability under the directive, but claim that the scarce impact of liability laws—in spite of increasing concerns for product safety—may be due to compensation provided by the Welfare State and to the cost of access to justice in Europe. Compensation by the Welfare State is inadequate with respect to the internalisation of the cost of accidents especially when public institutions do not file claims against liable producers. Product safety regulation should have performed the deterrence function. However we also point out that the threat of reputation losses is a powerful incentive for firms to carefully control product safety, when consumers increasingly care about product quality and accidents are heavily advertised by media.JEL Classification: K13, K41     

论英美刑法中的严格责任及其借鉴

严格责任是英美刑法中一种特殊的刑事归责方式,是一种无罪过责任,即罪过不是犯罪构成的必要条件。而我国 学者对严格责任的认识各不相同,有的学者认为严格责任就是绝对责任;有的学者认为严格责任不同于绝对责 任,但英美刑法中既有严格责任,也有绝对责任。通过对二者的实质性探讨,从公共政策、诉讼效率及诉讼成本的 视角来考察,严格责任有其存在的必要性,英美刑法中的一些做法就值得我们借鉴吸收,我国刑法应该在一定范 围内确立严格责任犯罪。     

过失责任与严格责任的整合解释——一个信息费用的视角

过失本质上是一个具有经济学内涵的定义。过失责任与严格责任均致力于实现事故预防费用、事故损失与制度运作的行政成本之和的最小化。信息费用决定着它们达成目标的能力和运作成本。过失标准客观化的原因在于节省信息费用。过失责任受制于确定过失的信息费用,严格责任受制于评估预测事故损失的信息费用。经济学的逻辑而非道德理论为这两种归责制度及其变迁提供了一个融贯简约而又富有说服力的解释。     

The Empire Fracks Back: The Case for Hydraulic Fracturing Strict Liability in New York

The possibility that New York will allow high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the near future raises the issue of liability for environmental and other extraction-related harms. Given the potential risk, New York courts should consider treating natural gas exploration under a strict liability regime. Natural gas producers facing strict liability for drilling mishaps would be forced to internalize the environmental and other social costs inherent in the drilling process, thus incentivizing producers to exercise a maximum of care.     

Inducing corporate compliance: A compound corporate liability regime

Corporate liability regimes have two major social goals: (i) inducing corporations to internalize all social ramifications of their activity; and (ii) inducing corporations to prevent, deter, and report their employee misconduct. The scholarly polemic has shown that none of the liability regimes recognized thus far in the literature efficiently satisfies both social goals. Following a Law and Economics approach, this paper develops an innovative regime that may comprise an optimal corporate liability framework in most settings. The Compound Corporate Liability Regime developed in this paper is a two-layer strict liability regime. Under this regime, corporations that self-report their employee misconduct incur a sanction that is reduced by the variable enforcement costs saved due to their self-reporting. Such a liability framework aligns social and corporations’ interests, and thereby satisfies both social goals of corporate liability regimes.     

Contractual Limitations on the Auditor's Liability: An Uneasy Combination of Law and Accounting

Operative as from 6 April 2008, sections 532–538 of the Companies Act 2006 create a new liability limitation regime in contractual relationships between audit firms and companies in relation to the statutory audit function which overturns an almost eighty years old fundamental principle of company law. This new regime is the product of continuing pressure by the audit profession for liability reform and concern by Government regarding the market structure for audit services. This commentary critically evaluates the regime from law and accounting perspectives. It concludes by reflecting on its longer term implications for audit quality, perceptions of the audit profession and the evolution of a future research agenda.     

Strict liability versus negligence when the injurer's activity involves positive externalities

In this paper, I assert that, if the potential injurer’s activity involves externalities unrelated to accidents, the strict liability rule minimizing only the social cost associated with accidents does not induce the social optimum. I also demonstrate that if the externalities are positive, the negligence rule can perform better than the strict liability rule by selecting the due care appropriately, whereas it cannot if the externalities are negative. This argument can be applied to the product liability law. JEL Classification K13     

Causality and causation in tort law

This paper considers alternative approaches to dealing with causal uncertainty in strict liability tort regimes. Beginning from the philosophical literature on causing, a distinction is made between the scientific idea of causality and the legal idea of causation. This distinction is generalized to a context of causal uncertainty and associated probabilities are constructed. It is shown that a rule of proportional liability whereby the tortfeasor pays damages in proportion to the probability in causation of them having caused the damage would be socially efficient. This contrasts with the implied use of the probability in causality by the courts and in the law and economics literature on causal uncertainty.     

Towards Efficiency in Attributing Criminal Liability to Corporations: Canadian and Brazilian Regimes Compared

This article compares Canadian treatment of corporate criminal liability with that in Brazil, examining whether there are ways in which one system can learn from the other. It is argued that the Canadian model could provide a starting point for revision of Brazilian legal principles in this area that, would encourage the public to recognize that crimes committed by corporations should be taken seriously. However, because criminal liability requires a high burden of proof and is therefore difficult to secure, the Brazilian regime of strict liability may ultimately be useful in encouraging compliance by corporations, assuming sanctions are severe enough and detection of violations by law enforcers is enhanced. The solution may therefore consist in the use of both these regimes, as is currently the case with anticorruption law in the UK.     

严格责任论:以英美刑法为中心

刑法学界有观点认为,严格责任是结果责任、客观归罪的典型,应予彻底否定。刑事严格责任起源于英美法国家,我国《刑法》中并无这一概念。要对刑事严格责任进行评判,应当充分了解其存在的背景、内涵及其价值基础,否则,作出的结论往往是不尽妥当的。英美刑法中,严格责任的适用受到了种种条件的限制,不同于绝对责任,更非结果责任或者客观归罪,有其存在的价值基础。     

我国地方环境立法的良好范例——《深圳经济特区环境保护条例》（修正案）评析

《深圳经济特区环境保护条例》在理念上和制度上具有较多的创新之处,确立了一系列有利于环境保护的制度,如扩大环境监管权限制度、明确政府环境责任、强化对违法行为的制裁等等,这些都对我国环境法律的制定和修改具有重要意义.本文探讨了《深圳经济特区环境保护条例》取得成功的原因和启示,并对该务例的具体实施问题进行了分析.     

Environmental liability reform and privatization in Central and Eastern Europe

The legacy of severe environmental degradation inherited by the new Central and Eastern European (CEE) economies requires liability reform to aid the cleanup of existing pollution sources and create incentives for future environmental risk reduction. The paper analyzes a host of liability approaches to meet these goals, given economic and institutional characteristics specific to the CEE nations, and explores the impact of environmental liability rules on privatization and foreign investment. A principal conclusion of the analysis is that, for a host of efficiency-based reasons, liability should not be retroactively applied to the new owners of privatized firms. Also, the paper advocates the use of national liability funds to finance the cost of existing liabilities, while highlighting dangers associated with their use. In addition to the desirability of alternative privatization mechanisms, the paper also analyzes altemative liability rules to govern prospective environmental hazards.     

信息产品责任研究

信息产品存在缺陷导致损害,其提供者是否应当承担类似于有体物产品责任的严格责任?这是一个值得研究的问题。尽管信息产品具备大规模生产、大批量流通等导致严格责任的属性,但对言论自由的威胁、对无限责任的担忧使得信息产品的严格责任目前只能在十分有限的范围内成立。事实性、应用型信息的作者应就产品存在的缺陷对受害人的损害承担过错责任,出版者、发行者应就产品存在的缺陷对受害人的损害承担严格责任。     

Scope of liability: the vanishing distinction between negligence and strict liability

The duty-of-care requirement cannot be used anymore as the touchstone to differentiate negligence from strict liability because it can be found in many forms of the latter. Duty of care is smuggled into strict liability hidden under the scope of liability requirement (traditionally called “proximate causation”). As far as the scope of liability requirement is common to negligence and to many forms of strict liability, there is a fairly large common ground to both liability rules, and consequently the marginal Hand formula is applied to both rules. Indeed, under a negligence rule, the marginal Hand formula is applied twice: first to assess whether or not the defendant did breach his or her duty of care, and, second, to delimit whether or not the defendant’s behavior was a proximate cause of the harm suffered by the victim. However, under a strict liability rule, the Hand formula is applied only once when the proximate causation question is raised. Traditional law and economics analysis has almost always taken the normative question raised by the causation requirement as given, which is a potential major problem due to the importance of scope of liability or proximate causation in legal practice. Defining the scope of liability, that is to say, the boundaries of the pool of potential defendants, is the basic legal policy decision for each and every liability rule. In the normative model presented in this paper, the government first chooses efficient scope of liability, and given the scope of liability, the government then decides the liability rule and damages that guarantee efficient precaution. In the article, most known scope of liability rationales developed by both common law and civil law systems are discussed in order to show the substantial common ground between negligence and strict liability.     

行政许可后续监管体系中双罚制引入问题研究

组织监管异质性是将双罚制引入组织型行政许可监管责任体系之基本前提。组织违法结构双层特性决定了单罚制所具有的"敲山震虎"式监管缺憾;组织规模特性加剧了行政许可持有人监管事实信息优势地位,降低了其违法成本与难度,而"熟人"监管背景特性则放大了组织型行政许可持有人"管制俘虏"能力。双罚制具有两个层面的制度价值:一是作为监管惩戒机制,其增强了行政许可持有人违法阻却力量,加大了行政许可持有人违法成本;二是作为守法责任传递机制,双罚制在驱动行为个体自律的同时,也在倒逼组织自律,激发组织守法内生动力的生成。双罚制的科学合理建构需以解决适用范围、责任分配、行为责任个体确定三个方面的标准问题为支撑。     

论食品安全事故中的赔偿责任人

发生食品安全事故,往往会涉及多个责任人,其责任是不同的。食品生产者承担严格责任并不意味着其他连带责任者也一样承担严格责任。销售者、广告者承担的是过错责任。《食品安全法》关于销售者的责任规定,有宽纵之嫌;而广告者的责任似乎又过于严厉。为求平衡,销售者、广告者的责任均以过错推定责任为宜。消费者向原材料提供者的索赔,也面临法律障碍。《食品安全法》关于销售者十倍赔偿的责任规定,是“纸老虎”,消费者要胜诉十分困难。农民个人作为农产品生产者,其责任监管十分欠缺,是急需研究和完善的一个领域。     

比较法视野中的销售者责任

与我国主流学者主张销售者承担产品严格责任不同,世界上绝大多数国家学者认为,承担产品责任对销售者而言是不公平的。美国虽从总体上对销售者承担产品责任持肯定态度,但现实中施加了许多限制,而由于警示缺陷只须承担过错责任,销售者责任已在很大程度上偏离了传统严格责任的内涵。我国不加限制地要求销售者承担产品责任之正当性值得怀疑,需要重新反思。