Traditional Institutions for Modern Blockchain Dispute Resolution
Contrary to general belief, the legal industry stands to gain much from technological innovation, notably from blockchain and the self-executing smart contracts for which it serves as a foundation. These types of contracts create a whole set of dispute resolution challenges as they are very particular in their nature. Smart contracts differ in presentation from traditional contracts. What makes smart contracts legally binding? How does a court of law interpret smart contracts? Is it possible to resolve legal disputes arising from these smart contracts?
This article begins by defining the terms blockchain and smart contract before addressing the challenges that these instruments pose to jurists. These include the anonymity of the parties to the transaction, making crypto transactions less traceable and less accessible. The existence of self-executing smart contracts thus eliminates the need for intermediaries, and indicates an absence of traditional contractual elements. There are also issues on using these instruments as proof, and the incompatibility of blockchain with certain personal data rights.
We will finally provide a set of possible solutions to mitigate these challenges and maybe lead to further development of this technology within legal frameworks. Proposed solutions include a contextual fix that involves solving individual problems as they come along in a case-by-case scenario, or a one solution fits all AI governing body that is programmed to mitigate disputes arising from this advanced technology. There also exists the need for legal reforms to better accommodate this technological development.
