Should Contractual Clauses that Forbid Renegotiation Always be Enforced?
23 Pages Posted: 26 Nov 2007
There are 3 versions of this paper
Should Contractual Clauses that Forbid Renegotiation Always be Enforced?
Should Contractual Clauses that Forbid Renegotiation Always Be Enforced?
Should Contractual Clauses that Forbid Renegotiation Always Be Enforced?
Abstract
Recent work in the field of mechanism design has led some researchers to propose institutional changes that would permit parties to enter into nonmodifiable contracts, which is not possible under current contract law. This paper demonstrates that it may well be socially desirable not to enforce contractual terms that explicitly prevent renegotiation, even if rational and symmetrically informed parties have deliberately signed such a contract. The impossibility to prevent renegotiation can constrain the principal's abilities to introduce distortions in order to reduce the agent's rent, so that the first-best benchmark solution will more often be attained.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
Simple Contracts, Renegotiation Under Asymmetric Information, and the Hold-Up Problem
-
Cadillac Contracts and Up-Front Payments: Efficient Investment Under Expectation Damages
-
Allocating Control in Agency Problems with Limited Liability and Sequential Hidden Actions
-
Allocating Control in Agency Problems with Limited Liability and Sequential Hidden Actions
-
On the Interplay of Hidden Action and Hidden Information in Simple Bilateral Trading Problems
-
The Hold-Up Problem and Incomplete Contracts: A Survey of Recent Topics in Contract Theory
-
Incomplete Contracts, the Hold-Up Problem and Asymmetric Information
-
Information Gathering, Transaction Costs and the Property Rights Approach
-
Information Gathering, Transaction Costs, and the Property Rights Approach