Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Constructive Ambiguity: Ip Licenses As A Case Study, Michal Shur-Ofry, Ofer Tur-Sinai
Constructive Ambiguity: Ip Licenses As A Case Study, Michal Shur-Ofry, Ofer Tur-Sinai
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Ambiguity in contracts is often perceived as undesirable. A certain level of ambiguity, however, can have significant virtues: reducing transaction costs associated with foreseeing and negotiating remote contingencies; facilitating the closing of efficient transactions that would not otherwise close; increasing the adaptability and “anti-fragility” of contracts in the face of unforeseen developments; and preserving trust between the parties. Some contracts are more likely to benefit from a certain degree of ambiguity. Relying on multi-disciplinary literature, this Article systematically analyzes ambiguity’s merits and identifies three principal features of transactions that are positively correlated to the virtues of ambiguity: (1) long duration, …
Admit Or Deny: A Call For Reform Of The Sec's "Neither-Admit-Nor-Deny" Policy, Priyah Kaul
Admit Or Deny: A Call For Reform Of The Sec's "Neither-Admit-Nor-Deny" Policy, Priyah Kaul
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
For four decades, the SEC’s often-invoked policy of settling cases without requiring admissions of wrongdoing, referred to as the “neither-admit-nor-deny” policy, went unchallenged by the courts, the legislature, and the public. Then in 2011, a harshly critical opinion from Judge Jed Rakoff in SEC v. Citigroup incited demands for reform of this policy. In response to Judge Rakoff’s opinion, the SEC announced a modified approach to settlements. Under the modified approach, the Commission may require an admission of wrongdoing if a defendant’s misconduct was egregious or if the public markets would benefit from an admission. Many supporters of the neither-admit-nor-deny …