tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post3966909457323845864..comments2024-03-28T09:22:36.967+13:00Comments on Offsetting Behaviour: Coming to the nuisanceEric Cramptonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15831696523324469713noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-15351975805682101662017-05-18T18:09:47.483+12:002017-05-18T18:09:47.483+12:00Problem of sufficiently defined property rights as...Problem of sufficiently defined property rights as a result of the RMA. With minimal transaction costs (only 2 parties to the dispute) an efficient Coase outcome could have been achieved if property rights were better defined. I.e. if there was a sane version of the RMA in effect. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17276942833065523787noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2830084253401570472.post-65322200707635604322017-05-18T17:16:53.134+12:002017-05-18T17:16:53.134+12:00I think you need to reread Sturges v Bridgman. Doe...I think you need to reread Sturges v Bridgman. Doesn't seem to me that coming to the nuisance is a very effective common law defence at all,at least in the UKPhilhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15147281546842041442noreply@blogger.com