• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Economics & philosophy >TOO MUCH INVESTED TO QUIT
【24h】

TOO MUCH INVESTED TO QUIT

机译：太多投资退出

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The economic analysis of law has gone through a remarkable change in the past decade and a half. The founding articles of the discipline - such classic pieces as Ronald Coase's "The problem of social cost" (1960), Richard Posner's "A theory of negligence" (1972) and Guido Calabresi and Douglas Malamed's "Property rules, liability rules, and inalienability: One view of the cathedral" (1972) - offered economic analyses of familiar aspects of the common law, seeking to explain, in particular, fundamental features of the law of tort in terms of such economic ideas as transaction costs (Coase), Kaldor-Hicks efficiency (Posner), or minimizing the sum of the accident costs and avoidance costs (Calabresi and Malamed). In each case, they argued that the law of torts should be understood as a set of liability rules selected for their incentive effects, rather than as a set of substantive rights and remedies for their violation. These authors claimed to be able to explain most of the features of tort law and, where features were found that did not fit with their preferred explanations, recommended modification. Although they disagreed on important questions, each of the pieces seems to work a manageable structure into what strikes first-year law students as an otherwise random morass of common-law judgments. Generations of legal academics were introduced to these works, and drawn into their way of looking at things. As a student studying first-year torts with Calabresi at Yale, I had the sense that I was in the presence of greatness.
机译：在过去的十五年中，对法律的经济分析发生了显着变化。该学科的创始文章-经典作品，如罗纳德·科斯（Ronald Coase）的“社会成本问题”（1960），理查德·波斯纳（Richard Posner）的“过失理论”（1972）以及吉多·卡拉布雷西（Douglas Malamed）和道格拉斯·马拉默德（Douglas Malamed）的“财产规则，责任规则和不可剥夺性” ：《大教堂的视图》（1972年）-提供了对普通法常见方面的经济学分析，力图从交易成本（科斯），卡尔多等经济思想的角度来特别解释侵权法的基本特征-提高效率（Posner），或将事故成本和避免成本的总和最小化（Calabresi和Malamed）。在每种情况下，他们都认为侵权法应理解为为激励作用选择的一套赔偿责任规则，而不应理解为针对其侵权行为的一系列实质性权利和补救办法。这些作者声称能够解释侵权法的大多数特征，并且在发现与他们的首选解释不符的特征时，建议进行修改。尽管他们不同意重要的问题，但每个部分似乎都在一个易于管理的结构上打动了一年级的法学学生，使之成为普通法判决中的其他杂物。几代法律学者被介绍给这些作品，并吸引他们看待事物的方式。作为一名在耶鲁大学与卡拉布瑞西一起研究一年级侵权行为的学生，我感到自己处在伟大之中。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Economics & philosophy》 |2004年第1期|p.185-208|共24页
  • 作者

    ARTHUR RIPSTEIN;

  • 作者单位

    Faculty of Law and Department of Philosophy, University of Toronto;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 f;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号