Strict liability versus negligence when the injurer's activity involves positive externalities
- 155 Downloads
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.
KeywordsExternality Negligence Product liability Strict liability
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Calabresi, G. (1970). The Costs of Accidents, New Haven. Yale University Press.Google Scholar
- Polinsky, M. (1980). “Strict Liability vs. Negligence in a Market Setting.” American Economic Review. 70, 363–367.Google Scholar
- Sanchirico, C. (2001). “Deconstructing the New Efficiency Rationale.” Cornell Law Review. 86, 1003–1089.Google Scholar
- Veljanovski, C. G. (1979). ‘Economic’ Myths about Common Law Realities–Economic Efficiency and the Law of Torts, Working paper no. 5, Centre Socio-Legal Stud., Oxford UniversityGoogle Scholar
- Weingast, B. R., McBride, M. E., & Conant J. L. (1979). Product Safety and Consumer Information: The Impact of Liability Assignment and Standards Regulation, Working paper no. 45, Center Stud. Amer. Bus., Washington University (St. Louis) .Google Scholar