Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

The Property-Contract Balance: Comment

5 Pages Posted: 5 Dec 2015 Last revised: 24 Nov 2016

Murat C. Mungan

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty

Date Written: December 2, 2015

Abstract

Dari-Mattiacci, Guerriero, and Huang (2016) (henceforth DGH), construct a model in which certain goods may be stolen from their owners (O) by intermediaries (or thieves) (I) and be sold to buyers (B). In these and similar circumstances, the law (if the stolen good can be identified) may take the good from the buyer and assign it to its previous owner (henceforth pro-owner rules), or may decide to leave it where it is (henceforth pro-buyer rules). DGH study the implications of their model, and thereby conclude that the normative desirability of pro-buyer versus pro-owner rules hinges primarily on who values the good most.

Below, I provide comments regarding DGH's model and their interpretation of it. While doing so, I make frequent references to the notation and results described in DGH. This makes reading DGH a prerequisite to following my comments.

Suggested Citation

Mungan, Murat C., The Property-Contract Balance: Comment (December 2, 2015). FSU College of Law, Law, Business & Economics Paper No. 15-28; 172 Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 70 (2016); FSU College of Law, Law, Business & Economics Paper No. 15-28; FSU College of Law, Public Law Research Paper No. 783. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2698254

Murat Mungan (Contact Author)

George Mason University - Antonin Scalia Law School, Faculty ( email )

3301 Fairfax Drive
Arlington, VA 22201
United States

Paper statistics

Downloads
38
Abstract Views
243