Two seemingly unrelated recent developments in the world of blockchain are now posing the same odd question: Can there be law without people?
Blockchain technology has enabled a world of “smart contracts”—programs stored on the blockchain that automatically run and carry out predetermined tasks when predetermined conditions are met. These smart contracts are often integrated with so-called decentralized autonomous organization (DAOs), loose groups of tokenholders who effectuate decision making through software protocols.
Can DAOs, natural persons or other legal entities be held legally responsible when outcomes that are caused or enabled by those “smart contracts” are ones that society seeks to prevent and hold unlawful? Or is no one legally responsible, so that whatever these “smart contracts” might do is simply beyond the power of the institution of the law to remedy or prevent?
Robert A. Schwinger explores recent developments in this edition of his New York Law Journal Blockchain law column.
Download the full New York Law Journal article, "Can there be law without people?"
Publication
On 24 October 2024, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) confirmed that the European Commission’s (the EC) 2009 decision, which imposed a (then record) €1.06 billion fine on Intel, was flawed as far as it found that loyalty rebates granted by Intel had anti-competitive effects.
Publication
The Dutch tax classification system for non-Dutch entities will undergo significant changes as of 1 January 2025.
Publication
In King Crude Carriers SA & Ors v Ridgebury November LLC & Ors [2024] EWCA Civ 719 the Court of Appeal held that the claimant sellers (the Sellers) were entitled to claim the deposits promised under sale contracts as a debt despite the defendant buyers’ (the Buyers) breach of contract, which had resulted in the non-fulfilment of a condition precedent to the payment of the deposits.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events . . .
© Norton Rose Fulbright LLP 2023