Microjustice Sharing Rules
Disputes typically have one or more issues that are about dividing value, damages or tasks. How much alimony should a former spouse reasonably pay after twenty years of marriage? How can compensation in case of eviction concretely be determined? What is a reasonable percentage of the original claim to settle for in case of bankruptcy of the debtor? Fair shares can be very difficult to agree upon, especially if there are no clear guidelines.
For some issues clear formulas, percentages or other guidelines may have been developed that give disputants a clear indication of what would be a reasonable division. In many jurisdictions, for instance, a clear formula for determining severance pay is available that is usually a function of gross monthly income and number of years worked. But for many issues, the concrete and direct information about what a reasonable share is remains deeply hidden in the legal system. Dispute resolution professionals might have - maybe implicit - knowledge of this, as well as some scholars. But sharing rules often remain undisclosed to disputants. This contributes to their uncertainty about how they can reasonably settle, what they can expect or how their legal adviser or a judge is performing.
The Microjustice Sharing Rules project focuses on finding ways to systematically collect, develop and sustainably deliver sharing rules. Its primary goals are to develop and test methodologies for making sharing rules transparent, test the effects of transparency of sharing rules on disputants' ability to settle (in terms of incurred costs and satisfaction), and identify a viable business model for delivering.