1.04k likes | 1.21k Views
CONTRACTS October 3, 2006. Contracts. BILATERAL AGENCY CONTRACTS. BILATERAL AGENCY CONTRACTS. Bilateral Agency. Property Rights Primarily “imposed rules” with some scope for contracting within the imposed framework
E N D
CONTRACTS October 3, 2006
Contracts BILATERAL AGENCY CONTRACTS
BILATERAL AGENCYCONTRACTS Bilateral Agency . Property Rights Primarily “imposed rules” with some scope for contracting within the imposed framework Horizontal –joint or group rights Vertical – many landlord and tenant cases - subordinate possession Contracts Primarily “voluntary rules” with some scope for contracting hierarchies Horizontal – equal partners Vertical – creating subordinate agents – most common form of contract
PRINCIPAL – AGENCY CONTRACTS “SUPER” Principal Its “problem” is to maximize social surplus Principal promise payment AGENT
PRINCIPAL – AGENCY CONTRACTS • This “Principal-Agency ” exchange model is the principal model featured in Cooter's treatment of contract law
PRINCIPAL – AGENCY CONTRACTS Formation Of Contracts Principal Makes An Offer To An Agent Agent Accepts The Offer Performance Of The Contract
CAPACITY FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Competent Parties: • Both parties must have the capacity to understand the terms of the contract they are entering into, and the consequences of the promises they make.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • For example, animals, minor children, and mentally disabled individuals do not have the capacity to form every contract • Any contracts with them will be considered void or voidable.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Corporations are considered persons under the law, and thus competent to engage in contracts.
SUBJECT-MATTER FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Proper Subject Matter: • The contract must have a lawful purpose. • A contract to commit murder in exchange for money will not be enforced by the courts.
FORMALITIES FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Need for a written contract? • A spoken contract is often called an "oral contract", not a "verbal contract". • A verbal contract is simply a contract that uses words. Most oral contracts and written contracts are verbal contracts.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Need for a written contract? • An informal exchange of promises may be binding and legally as valid as a oral or a written contract.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Statutory Regulation of Contracts • The Statute of Frauds requires that contracts pertaining to land be in writing. • The Statute of Frauds attempts to prevent false allegations of the existence of contracts that were never made.
OFFER FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • Acceptance • Exchange
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • Principal writes the document, but the document does not become a contract until the agent signs it
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • In presenting the written document to the agent as the first step for its review the parties are following a form of the Prisoner’s dilemna that is sequential and not simultaneous
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • The classical “bargaining theory of contract law assigns the legal word “offer” to the document • Note – What judges say and due involves language. What one observes them do and why is the domain of economic analysis
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • Another way of characterizing “the first step”, taken by the principal is to describe the principal as the “first mover” • (Cooter and Ulen, Law and Economics, 4th edn, Addison-Wesley, Longman, 2004, at p. 196)
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • Principal writes the document, with a view to selecting several potential agents
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • In an “economic” sense, this step follows the Stackelberg process of a Principal that maximizes the profit or utility of the “agent” as part of its profit or utility maximizing step
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • Cooter assumes that the Principal-Agency game is played as a Stackleberg game • Before making the “first move”, the Principal considers the “second move” that would be made by the Agent
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • A boss designing a contract for a worker (which, usually but not always, must satisfy a “participation constraint” that the worker be willing to accept it instead of quitting the job)
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • The Agent’s “incentive compatibility constraint” is binding A((1-a)CA(a)– 1) = 0 A > 0
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • The offer generates an agency cost • This agency cost depends upon the amount of effort provided by the agent • This cost enters the “contract problem” through the incentive constraint.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • This agency cost is usually described as a disutility of effort or a benefit from shirking or foregone pleasurable activities. • This agency cost is the marginal cost of effort and may vary with effort.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer • If the Agent “would co-operate”, the “first move” occurs by the Principal • If the Agent “would not cooperate”, then no “first move” • No Offer • No Contract • (Cooter, Figure 6.1, 4th p. 197)
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Offer (Advertising) • How, where, when and what? • Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Company [1893] 1 QB 256; Court of Appeal, 1892 Dec. 6,7, LINDLEY, BOWEN and A. L. SMITH, L.JJ.
ACCEPTANCE FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • If there is only one Agent, he or she has the choice of accepting or rejecting the offer
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • If the Agent or group of Agents reject the offer, the contract game is over
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • The classical “bargaining theory of contract law assigns the legal word “acceptance” to the document if the Agent or one of the Agents accepts the offer
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • Another way of characterizing “the second step”, taken by the agent is to describe the agent as the “second mover”
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • The “participation constraint” of the Agent is binding mA (TA+ (1-a)C(a)- a) = 0 • mA > 0
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Acceptance • Acceptance of the offer generates a “second” agency cost. • The second agency cost is the opportunity cost of the agent participating in the contract. • It is also referred to as a reservation utility (0) and enters into the “contract problem” through the participation constraint.
Performance FORMATION OF CONTRACTS
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS Performance Formation Of Contracts Agent Sends A Signal to the Principal Principal Makes An Offer To An Agent Agent Accepts The Offer Performance Of The Contract
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS Performance . PRINCIPAL Payment For Performance Promise To Perform AGENT(Chosen)
FORMATION OF CONTRACTSPerformance • Parties enter into a “principal-agency” contract: 0 = input of Principal a = input of Agent y = C(0,a) = output of the contract
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Performance • The parties perform the contract in accordance with an agreed upon exchange • The “principal” makes an exchange of a “payment” to an “agent” • The “agent” performs or executes a “promise” for the “principal”
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Performance • If the principal is operating in a perfectly competitive market outside of its relationship with the agent, its longrun profit function = 0
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS U(F) There is a “third” constraint” in the Principal – Agency Problem The “Budget Constraint” of the Principal E F=Output
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Performance • This agency has the following profit function: p(0,a) = aC(0,a) - a or p(a) = aC(a) - a
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS LEGAL ANALYSIS PROMISED ECONOMIC ANALYSIS Principal PAYMENT Agent PARTICIPATION CONSTRAINT Agent PROMISED PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE COMPATIBILITY CONSTRAINT
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS U(F) A “perfectly competitive” risk neutral Principal contracts a “complete” contract with the “risk averse” agent Contract Equilibrium Point The parties are paid in “output” shares E F=Output
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Performance • One of the primary conclusions of the Principal-Agency contract model is that, because • (1) the agent receives only a partial share of the profits generated from the agent’s effort, • (2) the agent’s effort is not perfectly observed by the principal, and • (3) the agent bears the entire cost of that effort, the optimal incentive contract between the principal and agent cannot achieve a Pareto optimal outcome.
FORMATION OF CONTRACTS • Performance • Even with risk neutrality on the part of both parties, moral hazard and inefficiency remain as long as there is a cost of effort born only by the agent and the agent receives only a share of the benefits generated by that effort