当前位置: X-MOL 学术Eur. J. Law Econ. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Efficient priority rules under default: the case of traditio versus contract principle
European Journal of Law and Economics ( IF 1.266 ) Pub Date : 2020-09-24 , DOI: 10.1007/s10657-020-09668-0
Jens Andreasson , Wolfgang Faber , Shubhashis Gangopadhyay , Claes Martinson , Stefan Sjögren

We investigate the economic consequences of the traditio and the contract principle—differing in how they determine the priority rights for an item sold but not delivered. Our results suggest that the two principles are equivalent in terms of the net utilities enjoyed by involved actors. For example, a lower price paid for a forward transaction under a traditio principle can be compensated by better credit terms, implying there is no competitive advantage for either the seller or buyer under any principle. We demonstrate how market prices, incorrectly used, may misleadingly favour a contract principle, and discuss how fraudulent behaviour better supports a traditio regime. We also contribute to the legal discussion on priority regimes of undelivered items basing our discussion on bankruptcy priority laws instead of distribution of ownership.



中文翻译:

默认情况下的有效优先权规则:传统与合同原则的案例

我们研究传统的经济后果和合同原则-不同之处在于它们如何确定已售出但未交付的物品的优先权。我们的结果表明,在涉及的参与者享有的净效用方面,这两个原则是等效的。例如,在传统原则下为远期交易支付的较低价格可以通过更好的信用条件予以补偿,这意味着在任何原则下买卖双方都没有竞争优势。我们将演示错误使用的市场价格如何可能误导合同原则,并讨论欺诈行为如何更好地支持传统制度。我们还将基于破产优先权法律而非所有权分配的讨论,为有关未交付项目优先权制度的法律讨论做出贡献。

更新日期:2020-09-24
down
wechat
bug