COSTLY EVIDENCE AND SYSTEMS OF FACT‐FINDING

Jesse Bull ()

Bulletin of Economic Research, 2009, vol. 61, issue 2, 103-125

Abstract: This paper compares the relative merits of adversarial and inquisitorial systems of civil procedure in the presence of evidence suppression. Each party has the incentive to suppress evidence that may damage her case, and to reveal any evidence that strengthens her case. I model the decision of a litigant to suppress evidence. The court conditions its action (transfers between the parties) upon the evidence which is revealed. Enforcement costs, which are the cost of suppression and the cost of requesting evidence, are a loss to the relationship and form the basis for my evaluation of the relative merits of each system. I find that neither system always outperforms the other. The strength of the inquisitorial system is that it allows for randomization over evidence requests, which leads to lower expected enforcement cost. Litigants cannot commit to randomize as they are motivated by the expected award in litigation. The strength of the adversarial system is that it sometimes allows litigants to utilize their information about the level of suppression.

Date: 2009
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8586.2009.00305.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:buecrs:v:61:y:2009:i:2:p:103-125

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=0307-3378

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Bulletin of Economic Research from Wiley Blackwell
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().