Katsoulacosand Ulph (2009) showed how all the factors identified as being relevant to choosing between a Per Se and an Effects-Basedlegal standard in terms of their decision error costs could be combined into asimple formula for determining which standard to use. Seifert (2020) gives an alternativecharacterisation of an Effects-Based legal standard and shows that itsdecision error costs are never higher than those of Per Se. We argue that nevertheless our originalformula remains valid for choosing between these two legal standards. </p
In this paper we make three contributions to the literature on optimal Competition Law enforcement p...
This Article offers an economic analysis of the extent to which legal commands should be promulgated...
In this paper we use the welfare-based framework proposed by Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to examine ...
Katsoulacosand Ulph (2009) showed how all the factors identified as being relevant to choosing betwe...
I extend the model of legal standards in Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to allow for optimal statistica...
We present a formal model for the optimal choice of legal standards which takes into account decisio...
This Chapter reviews some recent literature on optimal Legal Standards and in particular on how the ...
We present a new welfare-based framework for optimally choosing legal standards (decision rules). We...
We present a new welfare-based framework for optimally choosing legal standards in a variety of regu...
This paper presents a new formal systematic framework for comparing Per Se, Rule of Reason and other...
We present a welfare-based framework for the optimal choice of legal standards which encompasses dec...
In this paper we make three contributions to the literature on optimal Competition Law enforcement p...
ELIDEK project “Optimal Design of Competition Policy Enforcement”.The choice of legal standards (LSs...
This paper presents the first, to our knowledge, attempt at a systematic formal analysis of Per Se a...
We use the welfare-based framework proposed by Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to examine a number of qu...
In this paper we make three contributions to the literature on optimal Competition Law enforcement p...
This Article offers an economic analysis of the extent to which legal commands should be promulgated...
In this paper we use the welfare-based framework proposed by Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to examine ...
Katsoulacosand Ulph (2009) showed how all the factors identified as being relevant to choosing betwe...
I extend the model of legal standards in Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to allow for optimal statistica...
We present a formal model for the optimal choice of legal standards which takes into account decisio...
This Chapter reviews some recent literature on optimal Legal Standards and in particular on how the ...
We present a new welfare-based framework for optimally choosing legal standards (decision rules). We...
We present a new welfare-based framework for optimally choosing legal standards in a variety of regu...
This paper presents a new formal systematic framework for comparing Per Se, Rule of Reason and other...
We present a welfare-based framework for the optimal choice of legal standards which encompasses dec...
In this paper we make three contributions to the literature on optimal Competition Law enforcement p...
ELIDEK project “Optimal Design of Competition Policy Enforcement”.The choice of legal standards (LSs...
This paper presents the first, to our knowledge, attempt at a systematic formal analysis of Per Se a...
We use the welfare-based framework proposed by Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to examine a number of qu...
In this paper we make three contributions to the literature on optimal Competition Law enforcement p...
This Article offers an economic analysis of the extent to which legal commands should be promulgated...
In this paper we use the welfare-based framework proposed by Katsoulacos and Ulph (2009) to examine ...