skip to main content
10.1145/3326365.3326414acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicegovConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

The genesis of the revolution in Contract Law: Smart Legal Contracts

Published:03 April 2019Publication History

ABSTRACT

Smart Contracts, which derive from Blockchain technology, are one of the most peremptory applications of this. However, as it is a very recent technology, investors' uncertainty and fear makes their development slowly and cautiously. There are, therefore, a number of questions and legal problems that arise. The paper identifies what revolution Blockchain adds to the contractual processes, exploring its potential and analysing the main legal difficulties it is facing. It seeks the analysis of the pros and cons of this new technology, specially the questions about enforcement, nature and form, consent and (in) flexibility. The purpose of this investigation is to recognize the nature of this technology and its impact on the Contract Law. And because of this, the impact and challenges that it brings to the Governance of a nation as well as on private companies and individuals. Therefore this study is based mostly in the review of already existing embryonic laws about Blockchain technology or similar, authors that wrote about Smart Contracts and also some recent news to show the social and economic impact in the world. In short, the subject that this paper presents is the beginning of a true technological, social and economic revolution that must be anticipated and prepared by the law and those who work with it.

References

  1. Antonio Cordeiro. 1980. Direito das Obrigações, Lisbon.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Antonio Cordeiro. 2005. Tratado de direito civil, Coimbra, 459Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Francisco Andrade. 2017. Contratação electrónica, Lisboa, article written following the participation in an on-going training of the Centro de Estudos Judiciários ("Temas de Direito Civil e Direito Processual Civil").Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Carlos Fuenzalida. 1999. En torno a los contratos electrónicos, "Revista General de Legislación y Jurisprudência", Enero-Febrero, 84.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Reggie O'Shields. 2017. SMART CONTRACTS: LEGAL AGREEMENTS FOR THE BLOCKCHAIN, Noth Carolina, 179, DOI: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/ncbi/vol21/iss1/11/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. Nick Szabo. 1994. Smart Contract, DOI: http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literatur e/LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.best.vwh.net/smart.contracts.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nick Szabo.1996. Smart Contracts: Building Blocks for Digital Markets, DOI:http://www.fon.hum.uva.nl/rob/Courses/InformationInSpeech/CDROM/Literature /LOTwinterschool2006/szabo.best.vwh.net/smart_contracts_2.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. Steve Omohundro. 2014. Cryptocurrencies, Smart Contracts, and Artificial Intelligence.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Jerry Hsiao. 2017. Smart Contract on the Blockchain-Paradigm Shift for Contract Law, Macau, 688, DOI: https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol67/iss2/2/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Maher Alharby and Aad van Moorsel. 2017. BLOCKCHAIN-BASED SMART CONTRACTS: A SYSTEMATIC MAPPING STUDY, Ithaca, DOI: https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.06372Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Samuel Bourque & Sara Fung Ling Tsui. 2014. A LAWYER'S INTRODUCTION TO SMART CONTRACTS 4.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Alexander Savelyev. 2016. CONTRACT LAW 2.0: «SMART» CONTRACTS AS THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF CLASSIC CONTRACT LAW, Moscow.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Reggie O'Shields. 2017. SMART CONTRACTS: LEGAL AGREEMENTS FOR THE BLOCKCHAIN, Noth Carolina, 189, DOI: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/ncbi/vol21/iss1/11/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Don Tapscott and Alex Tapscott. 2017. Realizing the Potential of Blockcha in A Multistakeholder Approach to the Stewardship of Blockchain and Cryptocurrencies, DOI: http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Realizing_Potential_Blockchain.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Margaret Jane Radin. 2017. The Deformation of Contract in the Information Society, Working Papers from the University of Michigan Law School, Michigan, DOI: http://repository.law.umich.edu/law_econ_current/124Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Mark Giancaspro. 2017. Is a 'smart contract' really a smart idea? Insights from a legal perspective, Adelaide, DOI:https://kundoc.com/pdf-is-a-smart-contract-really-a-smart-idea-insights-from-a-legal-perspective-.htmlGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Alexander Savelyev. 2016. CONTRACT LAW 2.0: «SMART» CONTRACTS AS THE BEGINNING OF THE END OF CLASSIC CONTRACT LAW, National Research University Higher School of Economics, MoscowGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. J. Neuburger. 2017. Arizona Passes Groundbreaking Blockchain and Smart Contract Law - State Blockchain Laws on the Rise, DOI: http://newmedialaw.proskauer.com/2017/04/20/arizona-passes-groundbreaking-blockchain-and-smart-contract-law-state-blockchain-laws-on-the-rise/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Eliza Mik. 2017. Smart Contracts: Terminology, Technical Limitations and Real World Complexity, Singapore.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. Tom Lyons. 2018, Blockchain Innovation in Europe https://www.eublockchainforum.eu/sites/default/files/reports/20180727_report_innovation_in_europe_light.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Pete Rizzo. 2016. How Barclays Used R3's Tech to Build a Smart Contracts Prototype, CoinDesk, DOI: https://www.coindesk.com/barclays-smart-contracts-templates-demo-r3-corda/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Anatol Antonovici. 2017. JPMorgan/Goldman-Backed Blockchain Pilot Delivers 100% Success Rat, Cryptovest, DOI:https://cryptovest.com/news/jpmorgangoldman-backed-blockchain-pilot-delivers-100-success-rate/Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Judith Lee. 2015. Blockchain Technology and Legal Implications of 'Crypto 2.0', BNA report, DOI: https://www.gibsondunn.com/wp-content/uploads/documents/publications/Lee-Long-Blockchain-Technology-BNA-Banking-03.31.2015.pdfGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. Morgan Stanley. 2016. Blockchain in Banking: Disruptive Threat or Tool?, Digital Asset, DOI:http://hub.digitalasset.com/industry-reports/morgan-stanley-global-insight-blockchain-in-banking-disruptive-threat-or-toolGoogle ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Phillip Stafford and Hannah Murphy. 2016. Has the Blockchain Hype Finally Peaked?, Financial Times, DIO:https://www.ft.com/content/5e48f9ec-b651-11e6-ba85-95d1533d9a62Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The genesis of the revolution in Contract Law: Smart Legal Contracts

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Other conferences
      ICEGOV '19: Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Theory and Practice of Electronic Governance
      April 2019
      538 pages
      ISBN:9781450366441
      DOI:10.1145/3326365

      Copyright © 2019 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 3 April 2019

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • short-paper
      • Research
      • Refereed limited

      Acceptance Rates

      ICEGOV '19 Paper Acceptance Rate81of171submissions,47%Overall Acceptance Rate350of865submissions,40%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader