Efficiency of the implementation of a imputacion criteria based risk events product damage the attendance of dangerous activity

Authors

  • David Modesto Guette Hernández Universidad Libre

Keywords:

Economic analysis of law, Efficiency, Allocation factor, Hazardous activities

Abstract

In Colombia there is a dispute against the doctrinal and jurisprudential criterion or factor allocation in the event of occurrence of damages resulting from the exercise of dangerous and hazardous activities concurrent, being that one party takes the blame, and other risk. The economic analysis of law as a model of argument to justify from economic criteria directly related to the efficiency of rules, an interpretation based on the risk allocation criterion. The Coase theorem, on the allocation of rights and the theory of predictability related calabressi serve as underpinnings to justify time interpretation criterion assumes the risk of attributing factor or events that cause product damage concurrent performing other hazardous activities. It’s more efficient to impose the obligation of prevention of risk who exercises dangerous activity, or dangerous activity events concurrent, who can prevent it at a lower cost, in order to internalize costs, to establish a rule to distribute the reciprocally damage. This interpretation also marks the rhythm with philosophical principles that are enshrined in the 1991, policy letter, as long as, it favors individual freedom, understood as the realization of minimum guarantees for all citizens, which may only be given priority to the extent that one be settled between economic argument and the individual, in favor of the latter.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

CALABRESI, Guido. The Costs of Accidents A Legal and Economic Analysis. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1970; Id., Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Torts, Yale Law Journal.

CALABRESI, Guido. Optimal Deterrence and Accidents. To Fleming James, Jr. Il miglior fabbro, 84 Yale L.J., 656, 657, 666; ID., Some Thoughts on Risk Distribution and the Law of Tort, 70 Yale L.J. 497, 1961; ID., “Transaction Costs, Resource Allocation and Liability Rules- A Comment”, 11 J.L. & Econ.

COOTER, Robert & THOMAS, Ulen. Derecho y economía. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica, 2002.

FALLA, Alejandro. Accidentes, responsabilidad civil y propósitos sociales. http://www. bullardabogados.pe/publications/wpcontent/ uploads/2011/12/1994af_accidentes.pdf

GAMBOA NIÑO, Luis Fernando. Economía: ¿racionalidad sustantiva o procesal? Documento virtual. En: http://www.fuac.edu.co/ revista/IV/IV/cuatro.pdf

GAVIRIA GIL, Juan Antonio & PLATA LÓ- PEZ, Luis Carlos. El conflicto en la asignación de derechos desde la perspectiva del análisis económico del derecho: El teorema de Coase y la jurisprudencia de la Corte Constitucional colombiana. Revista de Derecho, edición especial, julio de 2012. ISSN: 0121-8697 (impreso) ISSN: 2145-9355 on line.

GUIBOURG, Ricardo. Derecho, sistema y realidad. Buenos Aires: Astrea, 1986.

GUTIÉRREZ OSA, Jair Alexander. Análisis económico del derecho. Revisión al caso colombiano. Contexto. Revista de derecho y economía, Nº 24, 2004.

HABERMAS, Jürgen. Facticidad y validez. Madrid: Editorial Trotta, 1998.

HINESTROSA, Fernando. Responsabilidad por productos defectuosos. En: Derecho Económico. Tomo IV. Bogotá: Universidad Externado de Colombia, 2003, p. 328.

PAPAYANIS, Diego. El enfoque económico del derecho de daño. Una crítica a las tesis normativas y positivas del Análisis Económico del Derecho. En: www.palermo.edu/derecho/ eventos/pdf/enfoque_eko.pdf - Argentina

PALACIOS LLERAS, Andrés. El análisis económico del Derecho en Colombia: a propósito de Mauricio Rubio y su obra. Contexto Revista de derecho y economía, Nº 28, 2008. Sentencias Corte Suprema de Justicia Sala de Casación Civil. 15 de julio de 1938. M.P. Juan Francisco Mujica; Sentencia diecinueve (19) de diciembre de dos mil seis (2006). Referencia: Expediente No. 2002-00109-01; Sentencia diecinueve (19) de mayo de dos mil once (2011). Referencia: Expediente No. 05001-3103-010-2006-00273-01; Sentencia nueve (09) de julio de dos mil diez (2010). Referencia: Expediente No. 11001-3103-035- 1999-02191-01; Sentencia veintitrés (23) de octubre de dos mil uno (2001). Referencia: Expediente No. 6315. Sentencia del veinticuatro (24) de agosto de dos mil nueve (2009). Referencia: Expediente No. 11001-3103-038- 2001-01054-01.

Downloads

Published

2013-06-01

Issue

Section

Artículos de investigación científica y tecnológica

Most read articles by the same author(s)