The Property-Contract Balance: Comment

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

See all articles by Murat C. Mungan

Murat C. Mungan

Texas A&M University School of Law

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). 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 C. Mungan (Contact Author)

Texas A&M University School of Law

1515 Commerce St.
Fort Worth, TX Tarrant County 76102
United States

Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?

Paper statistics

Downloads
57
Abstract Views
628
Rank
659,215
PlumX Metrics