IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/anf/wpaper/16.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens

Author

Listed:
  • Pavithra Manivannan

    (XKDR Forum)

  • Susan Thomas

    (XKDR Forum and Jindal Global Business School)

  • Bhargavi Zaveri

    (National University of Singapore)

Abstract

The literature on the performance evaluation of the judiciary captures the perspectives of judges, researchers and court administrators. However, it is not obvious if a litigant who proposes to access the judiciary for the resolution of a dispute would use the same or similar metrics when evaluating the performance of courts. In this paper, we review the global literature that evaluates the performance of the judiciary and identify which of the metrics in the literature would directly matter to a litigant who proposes to access the courts for redress. Using the litigant's expectations as performance metrics, we develop an evaluative framework for comparing similar courts. Our work creates the foundation for developing an information system that could potentially help litigants make informed choices when approaching courts.

Suggested Citation

  • Pavithra Manivannan & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri, 2022. "Evaluating contract enforcement by courts in India: a litigant's lens," Working Papers 16, xKDR.
    • Handle: RePEc:anf:wpaper:16
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://papers.xkdr.org/papers/2022Manivannanetal_courtmetrics.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2022
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wasseem Mina, 2006. "Does contract enforcement matter for international lending?," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(6), pages 359-364.
    2. Giuliana Palumbo & Giulia Giupponi & Luca Nunziata & Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti, 2013. "Judicial Performance and its Determinants: A Cross-Country Perspective," OECD Economic Policy Papers 5, OECD Publishing.
    3. William M. Landes, 1974. "An Economic Analysis of the Courts," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 164-214, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Ulf von Lilienfeld‐Toal & Dilip Mookherjee & Sujata Visaria, 2012. "The Distributive Impact of Reforms in Credit Enforcement: Evidence From Indian Debt Recovery Tribunals," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 80(2), pages 497-558, March.
    5. Katharina Pistor & Martin Raiser & Stanislaw Gelfer, 2000. "Law and Finance in Transition Economies," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 8(2), pages 325-368, July.
    6. Regy, Prasanth V. & Roy, Shubho, 2017. "Understanding Judicial Delays in Debt Tribunals," Working Papers 17/195, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    7. Bernd Hayo & Stefan Voigt, 2008. "The Relevance of Judicial Procedure for Economic Growth," MAGKS Papers on Economics 200828, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    8. Damle, Devendra & Anand, Tushar, 2020. "Problems with the e-Courts data," Working Papers 20/314, National Institute of Public Finance and Policy.
    9. Prasanth Regy & Shubho Roy, 2017. "Understanding Judicial Delays in Debt Tribunals," Working Papers id:11771, eSocialSciences.
    10. Paul R. Milgrom & Douglass C. North & Barry R. Weingast*, 1990. "The Role Of Institutions In The Revival Of Trade: The Law Merchant, Private Judges, And The Champagne Fairs," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 2(1), pages 1-23, March.
    11. Chakraborty, Pavel, 2016. "Judicial quality and regional firm performance: The case of Indian states," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 902-918.
    12. Messick, Richard E, 1999. "Judicial Reform and Economic Development: A Survey of the Issues," The World Bank Research Observer, World Bank, vol. 14(1), pages 117-136, February.
    13. Buscaglia, Edgardo & Ulen, Thomas, 1997. "A quantitative assessment of the efficiency of the judicial sector in Latin America," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 275-291, June.
    14. Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Marta Martínez-Matute & Miguel García-Posada, 2017. "Credit, crisis and contract enforcement: evidence from the Spanish loan market," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 361-383, October.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pavithra Manivannan & Geetika Palta & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah, 2023. "Evaluating courts from a litigant's perspective: A project report," Working Papers 29, xKDR.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fauvrelle Thiago A. & Tony C Almeida Alessio, 2018. "Determinants of Judicial Efficiency Change: Evidence from Brazil," Review of Law & Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 14(1), pages 1-36, March.
    2. Peter Grajzl & Shikha Silwal, 2020. "The functioning of courts in a developing economy: evidence from Nepal," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 101-129, February.
    3. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Slavov, Atanas & Zajc, Katarina, 2016. "Courts in a transition economy: Case disposition and the quantity–quality tradeoff in Bulgaria," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 18-38.
    4. Pavithra Manivannan & Geetika Palta & Susan Thomas & Bhargavi Zaveri-Shah, 2023. "Evaluating courts from a litigant's perspective: A project report," Working Papers 29, xKDR.
    5. Dimitrova-Grajzl, Valentina & Grajzl, Peter & Sustersic, Janez & Zajc, Katarina, 2012. "Court output, judicial staffing, and the demand for court services: Evidence from Slovenian courts of first instance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 19-29.
    6. Stefan Voigt, 2016. "Determinants of judicial efficiency: a survey," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 183-208, October.
    7. Gillian Hadfield, "undated". "Contract Law is Not Enough: The Many Legal Institutions That Support Contractual Commitments," University of Southern California Legal Working Paper Series usclwps-1003, University of Southern California Law School.
    8. Pratik Dutta & Mehtab Hans & Mayank Mishra & Ila Patnaik & Prasanth Regy & Shubho Roy & Sanhita Sapatnekar & Ajay Shah & Ashok Pal Singh & Somasekhar Sundaresan, 2019. "How to Modernise the Working of Courts and Tribunals in India," Working Papers id:13028, eSocialSciences.
    9. World Bank & International Finance Corporation, 2013. "Doing Business 2014 : Understanding Regulations for Small and Medium-Size Enterprises," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 16204.
    10. Doménech-Pascual, Gabriel & Martínez-Matute, Marta & Mora-Sanguinetti, Juan S., 2021. "Do fee-shifting rules affect plaintiffs’ win rates? A theoretical and empirical analysis," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    11. Falavigna, G. & Ippoliti, R., 2021. "Reform policy to increase the judicial efficiency in Italy: The opportunity offered by EU post-Covid funds," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 43(5), pages 923-943.
    12. Juan S. Mora-Sanguinetti & Marta Martínez-Matute, 2019. "An economic analysis of court fees: evidence from the Spanish civil jurisdiction," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(3), pages 321-359, June.
    13. Janine Aron, 2003. "Building institutions in post-conflict African economies," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(4), pages 471-485.
    14. Saibal Ghosh, 2018. "Corporate investment and political federalism: does judicial efficiency matter?," Indian Economic Review, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 263-285, December.
    15. Melcarne, Alessandro & Ramello, Giovanni B. & Spruk, Rok, 2021. "Is justice delayed justice denied? An empirical approach," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    16. Yuexin Huang & Ruijing Li & Danglun Luo & Rongli Yuan, 2024. "Political uncertainty and litigation efficiency: Evidence from China," Economics and Politics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 1020-1055, July.
    17. Jarosław Bełdowski & Łukasz Dąbroś & Wiktor Wojciechowski, 2020. "Judges and court performance: a case study of district commercial courts in Poland," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 171-201, August.
    18. Rizos, Anastasios & Kapopoulos, Panayotis, 2021. "Judicial Efficiency and Economic Growth: Evidence based on EU data," MPRA Paper 107861, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Panayotis Kapopoulos & Anastasios Rizos, 2024. "Judicial efficiency and economic growth: Evidence based on European Union data," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 71(1), pages 101-131, February.
    20. Yang, Defeng & Sheng, Shibin & Wu, Shuilong & Zhou, Kevin Zheng, 2018. "Suppressing partner opportunism in emerging markets: Contextualizing institutional forces in supply chain management," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 90(C), pages 1-13.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K - Law and Economics
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:anf:wpaper:16. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ami Dagli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.papers.xkdr.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.