Abstract
Are judges inclined to favor plaintiffs over defendants? We analyze the rela-tionships between win rates and cost-shifting outcomes in the Israeli loser-pays regime. Though qualitative analysis of semistructured interviews with judges as-sures us that litigants are equal in the cost-shifting arena, quantitative analysis portrays evidence to the contrary: judges allocate more and higher costs in favor of prevailing plaintiffs than defendants. Results are replicated in three datasets: a sample of all civil cases, small claims between individuals, and claims with matching counterclaims. We discuss explanations for this implicit pro-plaintiff effect in cost-shifting and implications for a possible broader pro-plaintiff bias.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 156-189 |
Number of pages | 34 |
Journal | Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics |
Volume | 179 |
Issue number | 1 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2023 |
Bibliographical note
Publisher Copyright:© 2023 Mohr Siebeck.
Keywords
- civil litigation
- cost-shifting
- judicial behavior
- judicial bias