Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Consumer Law Blogs -> CL&P Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Consumer Law
: CL&P BlogStephen P. King Paper on Tort Law Reform's Effect on Consumers
By Jeff Sovern
Stephen P. King of the Faculty of Business and Economics, Monash University has written Does Tort Law Reform Help or Hurt Consumers?. Here's the abstract:
Legal limits on insurance damages claims have been introduced in Australia, the United States and other jurisdictions. In this paper I construct a simple competitive model to analyze the effect of tort law reforms on consumers. The model shows that reforms to limit non-economic losses make consumers unambiguously worse off ex ante. Although insurance premiums fall and these reductions are passed on to consumers in full, this gain is more than offset by the increased risk that consumers are forced to bear. In contrast, reforms for income related (i.e. economic) losses lead to ambiguous outcomes. The potential benefits from limits to economic loss arise due to the inability of insurers to price discriminate on the basis of income or expected loss. Because of this there is an implicit cross-subsidy from low-income to high-income consumers that is embedded in the insurance premium and relevant product price. Tort law reforms partially unwind this cross subsidy.
The results presented in this paper show that tort law reforms may achieve their stated goal, such as lowering monetary prices, but can still make consumers worse off by introducing an uninsurable risk. There is also an important difference between reforms that limit claims for economic and non-economic losses. Insurance for economic loss will generally include an implicit cross-subsidy and, as a consequence, reforms can alter the ex ante utility for different groups of consumers in different ways.
Full post as published by CL&P Blog on January 18, 2010 (boomark / email).
Texas, USA
alleging the Medical Malpractice and Tort Reform Act of 2003 violates several provisions of the Constitution.
Stephen J. Hyland
alleging fraudulent operations in offering expertise in same gender couples' issues.
King Nut Peanut Butter
Recalled for Salmonella
King Medical Malpractice
Five More Suits Settled for $3 Million
Burger King
Settles Brain Injury Suit for $20 Million
DirecTV
alleging a cancellation fee that is improperly or insufficiently disclosed to consumers.

Effect of Tort Reform Legislation
"Using Neuroeconomics Experiments to Study Tort Reform"
The Role and Effect of Compensation Consultants on CEO Pay









