Screenshot_2019-09-25_at_15.35.59
Rss

Recht der Werkelijkheid

Meer op het gebied van Algemeen

Over dit tijdschrift  
Aflevering 2, 2012 Alle samenvattingen uitklappen
Redactioneel

Introduction

Auteurs Rob Schwitters en Bert Niemeijer
Auteursinformatie

Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.

Bert Niemeijer
Bert Niemeijer is part-time professor of sociology of law at the VU University of Amsterdam and coordinator of strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern family law, evaluation of law, the social working of rules and courts, trust and confidence in law and courts and the development of legal disputes.

    Visscher gives an overview of the empirical research on the deterrent effects of tort law within the domain of traffic accidents. An impressive amount of law and economics research has been done in the last few decades. This has resulted in special attention for the deterrent effects of the financial incentives which are embedded in various legal systems. Contradictory empirical evidence motivates Visscher to reflect on methodological issues. A major shortcoming of most studies is that the dependent and independent variables are not properly defined and distinguished. Another difficulty is to properly assess the influence of the introduction of the no-fault system on incentives: no-fault not only implies that the prevalence of the tort-system is more-or-less marginalised, but also that it transforms the extent to which the damages of those injured are covered by insurances in various ways. It is not easy to isolate both factors properly. Nevertheless, Visscher finds enough support in the empirical evidence to conclude that, without added financial deterrence incentives, no-fault schemes are likely to lead to increased accident rates, more injuries and more fatalities.


Louis Visscher
Louis Visscher is associate professor in law and economics at the Rotterdam Institute of Law and Economics (RILE) of the Erasmus School of Law. He has studied both economics and law (cum laude) at the Erasmus University Rotterdam, where he also wrote a PhD dissertation on ‘An economic analysis of Dutch tort law’. Louis has published articles and book chapters in the area of the economic analysis of tort law, the law of damages, causation in tort law, insurance, contract law and law enforcement.
Artikel

Medical liability: do doctors care?

Auteurs Ben C.J. van Velthoven en Peter W. van Wijck
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Van Velthoven and Van Wijck review empirical studies on the effects of tort law in the medical sector. The data they present comes mainly from the US, because from the 1970’s US states have enacted a variety of reforms in their tort systems. This variation has provided very useful data to study preventive effects. The empirical evidence analysed shows that medical malpractice risk affects the behaviour of health care providers. It has a negative impact on the supply of services and it encourages extra diagnostic testing;yet if the additional tests and procedures have any value, it is only a marginal one. Furthermore it has been found that changes in the supply of services do not affect health adversely. This suggests that the physicians who are driven out of business have a below average quality of performance. The authors conclude that, at the margin, medical liability law may have some social benefits after all.


Ben C.J. van Velthoven
Ben van Velthoven is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University. His research interests are: liability issues, civil litigation, and criminal law enforcement.

Peter W. van Wijck
Peter van Wijck is associate professor of law and economics at Leiden University and coordinator strategy development at the Dutch Ministry of Security and Justice. His research interests concern tort law, contract law, civil litigation, and crime.
Artikel

Non-pecuniary damages: financial incentive or symbol?

Comparing an economic and a sociological account of tort law

Auteurs Rob Schwitters
SamenvattingAuteursinformatie

    Schwitters focuses on the differences between economic and a sociological perspectives on non-pecuniary damages. By exposing the alternative perspectives on this issue, he illuminates some methodological differences between both disciplines. Although law and economics has had a positive influence on empirical research, he questions the merits of this perspective when analysing non-pecuniary damages. Law and economics regards non-pecuniary damages exclusively as a financial incentive to realise optimal deterrence and maximisation of welfare. Alternatively, in sociology of law there is also attention for the symbolic dimension of law in which rules are seen as normative standards of behaviour. Compensation is a way to bring the wrongdoer to recognise that he has done wrong and has to compensate the victim, and to show the victim that his rights are taken seriously. Through a sociological lens, the adoption of an exclusively economic model of human behaviour has to be questioned. To what extent human behaviour is really influenced by either financial incentives or by normative standards of behaviour is an open empirical question. Finally, he argues that the decision to base our institutions (such as law) on economic underpinnings is a decision which itself cannot be based on an economic procedure of aggregating individual preferences and maximising welfare.


Rob Schwitters
Rob Schwitters is associate professor (sociology of law) and member of the Paul Scholten Centre (University of Amsterdam). He publishes on tort law, responsibility and liability, the welfare state, compliance and methodological issues.

    Elbers et al. studied the impact of being involved in a compensation process on the health of the claimant/plaintiff. Although there is some evidence that being involved has a negative effect on health, there is contradictory evidence concerning the explanatory factors. The authors review various empirical studies, pinpoint the contradictory conclusions and analyse their methodological strengths and weaknesses. Studies concerning the influence of claim settlement processes on the wellbeing of claimants offer insights from which suggestions can be derived for improvement of the position of claimants.


Nieke Elbers
Nieke Elbers is neuropsychologist and post-doc researcher at the Faculty of Law at the VU University Amsterdam. She wrote her PhD thesis about empowerment of injured claimants, investigating claim factors, procedural justice, and e-health.

Arno Akkermans
Arno Akkermans is professor at the Faculty of Law at the VU University Amsterdam. His research interests concern the impact of law and legal procedure on the wellbeing and health of individuals, in the context of civil procedure in general, and of the settlement of personal injury claims in particular.

Pim Cuijpers
Pim Cuijpers is professor of clinical psychology and head of the Department of Clinical Psychology at the Faculty of Psychology and Education at the VU University Amsterdam. He is specialised in conducting randomised controlled trials and meta-analyses on prevention and psychological treatments of common mental disorders, especially depression and anxiety disorders.

David Bruinvels
David Bruinvels is an epidemiologist and occupational physician working at the Netherlands Society of Occupational Medicine (NVAB), the Netherlands Cancer Institute (NKI), and the VU University Amsterdam. His research concerns developing and investigating interventions to improve return to work.
Boekbespreking

Ensuring Corporate Misconduct

Auteurs Tetty Havinga

Tetty Havinga
Boekbespreking

Effects of Civil Liability on Public Order Policy

Auteurs Peter Mascini

Peter Mascini
Boekbespreking

Warnings and product liability

Auteurs Bert Niemeijer

Bert Niemeijer

Tobias Arnoldussen
Tobias Arnoldussen is writing his PhD at the Erasmus School of Law at the University of Rotterdam. He concerns himself with the regulation of air pollution and other environmental problems from a social constructivist and discourse analytic perspective.