Heuristics and the Problem of Pure Economics Loss
Choose format
RIS BIB ENDNOTEHeuristics and the Problem of Pure Economics Loss
Publication date: 19.12.2018
Principia, 2018, Volume 65, pp. 35-47
https://doi.org/10.4467/20843887PI.18.001.9884Authors
Heuristics and the Problem of Pure Economics Loss
The goal of this text is to pose hypotheses related to use of heuristics in the process of deciding cases related to pure economic loss and making laws governing liability for it. Pure economic losses are a type of injury where the victim only suffers economically, i.e. there is no bodily harm or injury to property, and there is a lack of a contractual nexus between the victim and the tortfeasor. Pure economic losses are, in principle, not recoverable in common law systems and, in principle, recoverable in civil law systems. Pure economic losses are a heterogenic category consisting of a variety of case types, here divided into (1) ricochet loss, (2) transferred loss, (3) loss induced by faulty information. Cases of pure economic loss are usually more complex, compared to physical injuries and consequential economic losses, as they may involve a loss of profits. This paper explores the use of heuristics in the process of deciding pure economic loss cases and in the process of forming general norms related to them.
Bagińska, Ewa. 2013. Odpowiedzialność deliktowa w razie niepewności związku przyczynowego: studium prawnoporównawcze. To- ruń: Towarzystwo Naukowe Organizacji i Kierownictwa “Dom Organizatora.”
Bernstein, Anita. 2006. “Keep It Simple: An Explanation of the Rule of No Recovery for Pure Economic Loss.” Arizona Law Review 48: 773–812.
Bishop, William. 1982. “Economic Loss in Tort.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 2: 1–29.
Boom, Willem H. van, Helmut Koziol, and Christian A. Witting, eds. 2004. Pure Economic Loss. Wien: Springer.
Burchell, Jonathan M. 1980. “The Birth of a Legal Principle – Negligent Misstatement Causing Pure Economic Loss.” South Afri- can Law Journal 97: 1–14.
Bussani, Mauro, Vernon Valentine Palmer, and Francesco Parisi. 2003. “Liability for Pure Financial Loss in Europe: An Economic Restatement.” The American Journal of Comparative Law 51 (1): 113–162. https://doi.org/10.2307/3649142.
Dari-Mattiacci, Giuseppe. 2003. “The Economics of Pure Economic Loss and the Internalization of Multiple Externalities.” German Working Papers in Law and Economics 2003 (1): 167–190.
Giaro, Tomasz. 2009. “Dal Soft Law Moderno Al Soft Law Antico.” In Soft Law e Hard Law Nella Società Postmoderna, edited by Alessandro Somma, 83–100. Torino: Giappichelli.
Golecki, Mariusz J., and Jarosław Bełdowski, 2018. “Creating So- cial Norms Through Media, Cascades and Cognitive Anchors: Judicial Activism and the Quality of Energy Law from the Perspective of Behavioral Law and Economics.” In Energy Law and Economics. Economic Analysis of Law in European Legal Scholarship, edited by Klaus Mathis, and Bruce R. Huber, 193–210. Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74636-4_10.
Grotius, Hugo. 2001. On the Law of War and Peace. Translated by A.C. Campbell. Kitchener: Batoche Books.
Guthrie, Chris, Jeffrey J. Rachlinski, and Andrew J. Wistrich. 2000. “Inside the Judicial Mind.” Cornell L. Rev. 86: 777–830.
Kahneman, Daniel, and Dale T. Miller. 1986. “Norm Theory: Com- paring Reality to Its Alternatives.” Psychological Review 93 (2): 136–153. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.136.
Kouladis, Nicholas. 2006. Principles of Law Relating to Internation- al Trade. New York: Springer.
Martín-Casals, Miquel, and Jordi Ribot. 2004. “Compensation for Pure Economic Loss Under Spanish Law.” In Pure Economic Loss, edited by Willem H. van Boom, Helmut Koziol, and Chris- tian A. Witting, 62–76. Wien: Springer.
Mousourakis, George. 2012. “The Law of Obligations.” In George Mousourakis. Fundamentals of Roman Private Law, 183–277. Berlin: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-29311-5_4.
Palmer, Vernon Valentine. 2011. “The Great Spill in the Gulf... and a Sea of Pure Economic Loss: Reflections on the Boundaries of Civil Liability.” Penn State Law Review 116: 105–116.
Pryor, Ellen S. 2006. “The Economic Loss Rule and Liability Insur- ance.” Arizona Law Review 48: 905–924.
Rhee, Robert J. 2010. “A Production Theory of Pure Economic Loss.” Northwestern University Law Review 104: 1–48.
Roese, Neal J. 1997. “Counterfactual Thinking.” Psychologi- cal Bulletin 121 (1): 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.121.1.133.
Sebok, Anthony J. 2011. “The Failed Promise of a General Theory of Pure Economic Loss: An Accident of History” DePaul Law Review 61: 615–642.
Simon, H. A. 1956. “Rational Choice and the Structure of the Envi- ronment.” Psychological Review 63 (2): 129–138.
Sugarman, Stephen D. 1985. “Doing Away with Tort Law.” Califor- nia Law Review 73: 555–664.
Szczerbowski, Jakub J. 2013. Szkoda czysto majątkowa w kontekście unifikacji prawa prywatnego w Europie. Olsztyn: Wydział Prawa i Administracji Uniwersytetu Warmińsko-Mazurskiego. http://bit.ly/szczerbowski-szkoda.
Weinrib, Ernest J. 1988. “The Monsanto Lectures: Understanding Tort Law.” Valparaiso University Law Review 23: 485–526.
Information: Principia, 2018, Volume 65, pp. 35-47
Article type: Original article
Titles:
Heuristics and the Problem of Pure Economics Loss
Faculty of Law SWPS, University of Social Sciences and Humanities in Warsaw,
SWPS
Published at: 19.12.2018
Article status: Open
Licence: CC BY-NC-ND
Percentage share of authors:
Article corrections:
-Publication languages:
English