Advertisement

Enforcing Legal Norms Through Private Means

Conference paper
Part of the Ius Comparatum - Global Studies in Comparative Law book series (GSCL, volume 30)

Abstract

We ordinarily think of legal norms as not only established through public means, but also enforced through public means—typically by legislatures and courts, or by bodies authorized by law to produce and enforce such norms. That view of legal norms is, however, an incomplete one. Private actors of various stripes also produce norms that, directly or indirectly, exert binding effect. Modes of private law enforcement span a wide range, running from the most private, personal, and informal at one extreme, to the quite formal, on the other. Development of private modes of law enforcement relieves public authorities of carrying the full law enforcement burden. Yet, private law enforcers often work in tandem with public authorities, especially as we move along this spectrum I have identified. Either way, private law enforcement promotes the public good. However, private law enforcement is not an unmitigated good. Each mode of private law enforcement brings along with it a certain number of risks that must be acknowledged and addressed. Ironically, perhaps, these risks sometimes can only be properly addressed with a minimum of intervention of public authorities. In other words, public and private law enforcement are deeply mutually interdependent.

References

  1. Curran PD (2003) Standard-setting organizations: patents, price fixing, and per se legality. Univ Chicago Law Rev 70:983–1009CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Feldman DC (1984) The development and enforcement of group norms. Acad Manag Rev 9:47–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Gardner J (2015) The many faces of the reasonable person. Law Q Rev 131:563–584Google Scholar
  4. Glover JM (2012) The structural role of private enforcement mechanisms in public law. William Mary Law Rev 53:1137–1217Google Scholar
  5. Greenbaum E (2015) Forgetting FRAND: the WIPO model submission agreements. Les Nouvelles 50:81Google Scholar
  6. Hay J, Shleifer A (1998) Private enforcement of public laws: a theory of legal reform. In: AEA Papers and ProceedingsGoogle Scholar
  7. Kaplow L (1992) Rules versus standards: an economic analysis. Duke Law J 42:557–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Kesan JP, Hayes CM (2014) FRAND’s forever: standards, patent transfers and licensing commitments. Ind Law J 89:231–314Google Scholar
  9. Morse AH (2010) Rules, standards and fractured courts. Okla City Univ Law Rev 35:559–605Google Scholar
  10. Pham H (2008) The private enforcement of immigration laws. Georgetown Law Rev 96:777–826Google Scholar
  11. Posner RA, Rasmussen EB (1999) Creating and enforcing norms, with special reference to sanctions. Int Rev Law Econ 19:369–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rysman M, Simcoe T (2008) Patents and the performance of voluntary standard setting organizations. Manag Sci 54:1920–1934CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer international Pubishing Switzerland AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Columbia Law SchoolNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations