- List of Abbreviations
- Contributors and Editors
- The Art, Craft, and Science of Policing
- Crime and Criminals
- Criminal Process and Prosecution
- The Crime-preventive Impact of Penal Sanctions
- Contracts and Corporations
- Financial Markets
- Consumer Protection
- Bankruptcy and Insolvency
- Regulating the Professions
- Personal Injury Litigation
- Claiming Behavior as Legal Mobilization
- Labor and Employment Laws
- Housing and Property
- Human Rights Instruments
- Social Security and Social Welfare
- Occupational Safety and Health
- Environmental Regulation
- Administrative Justice
- Access to Civil Justice
- Judicial Recruitment, Training and Careers
- Trial Courts and Adjudication
- Appellate Courts
- Dispute Resolution
- Lay Decision-Makers in the Legal Process
- Evidence Law
- Civil Procedure and Courts
- Collective Actions
- Law and Courts'Impact on Development and Democratization
- How Does Inter National Law Work?
- <b>Lawyers and Other Legal Service Providers</b>
- Legal Pluralism
- Public Images and Understandings of Courts
- Legal Education and the Legal Academy
- The (Nearly) Forgotten Early Empirical Legal Research
- Quantitative Approaches to Empirical Legal Research
- Qualitative Approaches to Empirical Legal Research
- The Need for Multi-Method Approaches in Empirical Legal Research
- Legal Theory and Empirical Research
- Empirical Legal Research and Policy-making
- The Place of Empirical Legal Research in the Law School Curriculum
- Empirical Legal Training in the U.S. Academy
Abstract and Keywords
This article deals with issues of litigation based on claims of personal injuries. It briefly describes the way that economists have tended to think about the “litigation process.” It discusses a number of areas of empirical work. It begins with case outcomes and looks at the ways in which the legal system itself can influence matter through the encouragement of information transfer and the rules used for allocating legal costs. It considers the role of lawyers by looking at the effects of different legal fee arrangements on case outcomes. Furthermore, it discusses the liability-based legal system that produces the deterrence benefits often claimed for in conceptual work. The deterrent potentials of liability-based litigations are subject to objective and subjective contexts of the injurer. Finally, the article concludes that alternative means such as the “no fault” scheme that allots compensation irrespective of personal fault of the accused, require greater analysis.
Paul Fenn is Norwich Union Professor of Insurance Studies at Nottingham University Business School.
Neil Rickman is Professor of Economics at the University of Surrey and Director ofthe RAND Europe's Institute for Civil Justice.
Access to the complete content on Oxford Handbooks Online requires a subscription or purchase. Public users are able to search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter without a subscription.
If you have purchased a print title that contains an access token, please see the token for information about how to register your code.