When is a Willful Breach 'Willful'? The Link Between Definitions and Damages

Richard Craswell
{"title":"When is a Willful Breach 'Willful'? The Link Between Definitions and Damages","authors":"Richard Craswell","doi":"10.1017/CBO9780511780097.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The existing literature on willful breach has not been able to define what should count as \"willful.\" I argue here that any definition we adopt has implications for just how high damages should be raised in those cases where a breach qualifies as willful. As a result, both of these issues -- the definition of \"willful,\" and the measure of damages for willful breach -- need to be considered simultaneously. Specifically, if a definition of \"willful\" excludes all breachers who behaved efficiently, then in theory we can raise the penalty on the remaining inefficient breachers to any arbitrarily high level (\"throw the book at them\"). But if, instead, a given definition of willful would catch even some efficient breachers in its net, the damages assessed against willful breachers should be more limited. In that case, damages for willful breach might still justifiably be raised, but they should be raised only to the level that is economically efficient.","PeriodicalId":168354,"journal":{"name":"Torts & Products Liability Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"26","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Torts & Products Liability Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511780097.011","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 26

Abstract

The existing literature on willful breach has not been able to define what should count as "willful." I argue here that any definition we adopt has implications for just how high damages should be raised in those cases where a breach qualifies as willful. As a result, both of these issues -- the definition of "willful," and the measure of damages for willful breach -- need to be considered simultaneously. Specifically, if a definition of "willful" excludes all breachers who behaved efficiently, then in theory we can raise the penalty on the remaining inefficient breachers to any arbitrarily high level ("throw the book at them"). But if, instead, a given definition of willful would catch even some efficient breachers in its net, the damages assessed against willful breachers should be more limited. In that case, damages for willful breach might still justifiably be raised, but they should be raised only to the level that is economically efficient.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
什么时候故意违约是“故意的”?定义与损害之间的联系
现有的关于故意违约的文献没有能够定义什么应该算作“故意”。我在此认为,我们所采用的任何定义都暗示着,在违约行为被认定为故意的情况下,应该提出多高的损害赔偿。因此,这两个问题——“故意”的定义和故意违约的损害赔偿措施——需要同时考虑。具体来说,如果“故意”的定义排除了所有行为有效的违规者,那么从理论上讲,我们可以将对剩余的低效违规者的惩罚提高到任意高的水平(“严惩他们”)。但是,如果对“故意”一词的特定定义甚至能将一些有效的违规者纳入其中,那么针对“故意”违规者的损害评估就应该更加有限。在这种情况下,仍然可以合理地提高故意违约的损害赔偿,但只应提高到经济上有效的水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Dynamic Model of Lawsuit Joinder and Settlement Quantitative Proof of Reputational Harm Injuries, Damages and a Puzzle: Can an Effect Ever Precede its Cause Efficiency, Fairness, and the Economic Analysis of Tort Law Fault at the Contract-Tort Interface
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1