| Abstract: | We study a contracting model with unforeseen contingencies inwhich the court is an active player. Ex ante, the contractingparties cannot include the risky unforeseen contingencies inthe contract they draw up. Ex post, the court observes whetheran unforeseen contingency occurred and decides whether to voidor uphold the contract. If the contract is voided by the court,the parties can renegotiate a new agreement ex post. There aretwo effects of a court that voids contracts. The parties' incentivesto undertake relationship-specific investment are reduced, andthe parties enjoy greater insurance against the unforeseen contingenciesthat the ex ante contract cannot account for. In this context,we fully characterize the optimal decision rule for the court.The behavior of the optimal court is determined by the trade-offbetween the need for incentives and the gains from insurancethat voiding in some circumstances offers to the agents. |
