Connect with us


Legal statement provides guidance on status of cyptoassets & smart contracts

As has been widely reported, the Government’s UK Jurisdiction Taskforce has published its legal statement on cryptoassets and smart contracts, which aims to provide market confidence, legal certainty…



Guest contributers: Gowling WLG

As has been widely reported, the Government’s UK Jurisdiction Taskforce has published its legal statement on cryptoassets and smart contracts, which aims to provide market confidence, legal certainty and predictability by giving guidance on the legal status of these asset classes.

The legal statement is especially relevant as we are seeing an increasing number of instructions concerning cryptocurrency and smart contracts. In particular, we are currently advising on litigation arising out of a crypto fraud involving detailed considerations of the options available to recover crypto asset losses from a variety of parties. We are also acting for several clients seeking regulatory advice in this area, and so the legal statement is a significant development which is highly material for our ongoing work.

Here, we look at the key findings of the report and what they mean for dealings and disputes involving cryptoassets and smart contracts.

Background to the legal statement

The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) is one of six taskforces established by the UK Government-backed LawTech Delivery Panel. The LawTech Delivery Panel aims to promote the use of technology in the UK legal sector, while the UKJT‘s specific objective is to demonstrate that English law and the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales provide a state of the art foundation for the development and use of distributed ledger technology, smart contracts and associated technologies.

In May 2019, the UKJT issued a consultation paper on the status of cryptoassets, distributed ledger technology and smart contracts in English law. The consultation paper identified that the development of these technologies has far-reaching implications for domestic and international financial markets, but that a lack of certainty around the legal status of these technologies could be hampering development. The consultation sought views of stakeholders on the principal areas of uncertainty, with a view to providing guidance and certainty in this area, and to bolster the use of English law and the jurisdiction of England and Wales in transactions involving these assets and technologies.

Scope and status of the legal statement

The legal statement addresses a number of fundamental principles around the characterisation and treatment of cryptoassets and smart contracts, including whether a cryptoasset is ‘property’ and/or ‘goods’; the ownership and transfer of cryptoassets; whether security may be granted over a cryptoasset; and whether a smart contract is legally binding and enforceable.

It does not however seek to formulate a precise definition of what cryptoassets or smart contracts are, but rather sets out to identify and describe the features of cryptoassets and smart contracts that are novel as compared to their more traditional equivalents, and to assess whether and how those novelties might affect their legal treatment.

The legal statement also expressly does not address specific legal areas including the regulation of dealings in cryptoassets, taxation, criminal law, data protection, intellectual property, consumer protection or anti-money laundering. These are matters the UKJT considers to be best dealt with by other bodies and are logically subsequent to the more fundamental questions it has sought to address.

As Sir Geoffrey Vos, Chancellor of the High Court and Chair of the UKJT, says in his foreword, “there is no doubt that some of the matters covered by the legal statement will, in the future, be the subject of judicial decision. But my hope is that, in the meantime, the legal statement will provide a foundation for the responsible future utilisation of cryptoassets and smart contracts.” While the statement has no formal legal effect, it will no doubt be treated as highly persuasive both in crypto / smart transactions, and in disputes arising out of them.

Key findings

While acknowledging that the law is highly fact-sensitive and that there are many factors which will affect the status of cryptoassets or smart contracts in a given context, the statement comes to a number of general conclusions.

The overarching conclusion is that English common law is well able to deal with and adapt to technological developments and has a strong track record of responding flexibly to new commercial mechanisms, which makes it the perfect ‘home’ for transactions involving these technologies, and related disputes. As the statement says, “rather than depending on the often cumbersome, time-consuming and inflexible process of legislative intervention, judges are able to apply and adapt by analogy existing principles to new situations as they arise… Time and again over the years the common law has accommodated technological and business innovations including many which… were at the time no less novel and disruptive than those with which we are now concerned.”

In terms of more specific findings, the statement concludes as follows:


  • Cryptoassets have all the indicia of property, e.g. they are definable, identifiable by third parties, and have some degree of permanence or stability.
  • It is in principle possible to identify who owns a cryptoasset (typically the person who lawfully controls the private key).
  • The novel or distinctive features of some cryptoassets (e.g. their intangibility, cryptographic authentication or decentralisation) do not disqualify them from being property.
  • Cryptoassets are therefore to be treated in principle as property.
  • Cryptoassets are purely virtual, and cannot be physically possessed, which limits the types of security which may be granted over them.

Smart Contracts

  • A smart contract is capable of satisfying the requirements of a contract in English law (i.e. that there is agreement between two or more parties, those parties intend to create legal relations between them, and each has given consideration (something of benefit to the other)). Whether these requirements are met in a given case is (just as it is with traditional written or oral contracts) fact-sensitive.
  • A smart contract can be identified, interpreted and enforced using well established legal principles, just as with more traditional forms of contract. The parties’ agreement may be defined by computer code, or the code may merely (seek to) implement an agreement formed elsewhere.
  • English law is capable of addressing a situation where anonymous or pseudonymous parties contract, whether by smart contract or otherwise.
  • Smart contracts and the use of private keys can in principle meet statutory requirements for contracts to be “in writing” or “signed”, where these apply to specific types of agreement.

Impact of the statement

There has been much-agonised commentary on whether cryptoassets are, can be or should be regulated and subject to the law, or if their nature and unique features mean they sit outside traditional legal rules in the same way that, because of their decentralisation, they sit outside of traditional financial systems. This legal statement firmly (and unsurprisingly) concludes that cryptoassets are not outside the law, and demonstrates that the law is and has already shown itself able to adapt to technological advances.

It is apt that the statement’s celebration of the common law’s inherent flexibility and adaptability in fact follows on the heels of recent judicial decisions that align with its findings – judges are already making these decisions and will no doubt be bolstered by the statement in doing so. In the months prior to the legal statement, we have for example seen the English courts granting worldwide freezing injunctions to preserve misappropriated cryptocurrency, and ordering the operators of a digital currency exchange to disclose information on a digital wallet used in suspected fraud.

The conclusion that cryptoassets are to be treated as property has important ramifications in a number of areas, e.g. in the rights of liquidators in corporate insolvency, the vesting of property in personal bankruptcy, and in cases of fraud, theft or breach of trust.

Gowling WLG has pioneering experience in this area, particularly in advising on disputes involving the tracing and recovery of cryptoassets. Please contact the authors for more information on how we can help.



SEC chief Gensler now eyeing crypto staking and ‘poker chip’ stablecoins



In recent weeks, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] has brought several crypto companies into the regulatory spotlight. Coinbase was warned about its high-interest crypto-product Lend, with the SEC threatening to sue if it launched.

Unsiwap also felt the heat as it was reportedly investigated. Meanwhile, the SEC vs Ripple lawsuit saw the court denying Ripple’s request for documents revealing SEC’s trading policies on digital assets.

Even as these events unfolded, SEC Chair Gary Gensler spoke to Washington Post journalist David Ignatius about cryptocurrency and the SEC’s powers.

Cop on the beat

Gensler first stressed that crypto tokens were a “highly speculative asset class” and defended his dedication to investor and consumer protection. He admitted that the SEC had a broad definition of securities and that it gave the agency a “great deal of authority.”

Encouraging crypto trading platforms to come in for SEC registration, Gensler said,

“Now, not many have, and so I do really fear that we’ll keep bringing these enforcement cases, but there’s going to be a problem. There’s going to be a problem on lending platforms or trading platforms. And frankly, when that happens, I think a lot of people are going to get hurt.”

Gensler also voiced concerns about staking and added,

“We’ll also be the cop on the beat and bringing those enforcement actions, as well.”

Coming to stablecoins, Gensler used his familiar crypto-Wild West comparison and likened stablecoins to poker chips at the casino. He also explained that though the SEC had “robust authorities,” there were some gaps. He hinted the agency might work with the U.S. Congress to regulate stablecoins.

Notes on Evergrande

With liabilities worth around $300 billion, the crisis of Evergrande, China’s second largest property developer, has shocked the world market – and the crypto sector. Soon the Hong Kong-based, dollar-pegged stablecoin Tether [USDT] came under scrutiny. The company had to confirm that it did not hold commercial papers, debts, or securities issued by Evergrande.

Ignatius also asked Gensler whether Evergrande could affect the American market. Gensler just confirmed that Evergrande was not registered and did not trade on American capital markets.

However, he added,

“…it is possible, from time to time, that we too in America will react to other economies’ and nations’ shocks. And particularly China’s economy is so large relative to Europe’s or our own.”

In essence, the interview came with a familiar promise for crypto innovators and traders. Referring to warning signs and flashing lights signaling a spill in aisle three, Gensler said he would rather “get ahead of it.”

Where to Invest?

Subscribe to our newsletter

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.


Continue Reading


Robinhood to Launch Crypto Wallet in 2022




The information on or accessed through this website is obtained from independent sources we believe to be accurate and reliable, but Decentral Media, Inc. makes no representation or warranty as to the timeliness, completeness, or accuracy of any information on or accessed through this website. Decentral Media, Inc. is not an investment advisor. We do not give personalized investment advice or other financial advice. The information on this website is subject to change without notice. Some or all of the information on this website may become outdated, or it may be or become incomplete or inaccurate. We may, but are not obligated to, update any outdated, incomplete, or inaccurate information.

You should never make an investment decision on an ICO, IEO, or other investment based on the information on this website, and you should never interpret or otherwise rely on any of the information on this website as investment advice. We strongly recommend that you consult a licensed investment advisor or other qualified financial professional if you are seeking investment advice on an ICO, IEO, or other investment. We do not accept compensation in any form for analyzing or reporting on any ICO, IEO, cryptocurrency, currency, tokenized sales, securities, or commodities.

See full terms and conditions.

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.


Continue Reading


Own NFT Land in ERTHA Metaverse that Could Generate Revenue



[PRESS RELEASE – Please Read Disclaimer]

The last year or so has seen the massive growth of the non-fungible token space, which became arguably the most talked-about field in the cryptocurrency space. With celebrities from all industries trying to take advantage of the ongoing craze, NFTs have now become the place to be for protocols providing groundbreaking featured and services.

Some have taken their development stages further, attempting to garner a more significant market share. This is the case with ERTHA, whose metaverse has tapped one of the most legendary online games from the past two decades – Heroes of Might and Magic.

Its economic and social life, inspired by the aforementioned game, is built on the binance smart chain and aims to enable users to explore and investigate the space by choosing specializations and increasing the strength of the NFTs.

The project’s globe consists of 350,000 HEX land plots, all of which are represented as non-fungible tokens. Users owning a HEX land plot will have the chance to receive cash-back for every transaction completed with Ethereum (ETH) as a landowner. The game is specifically designed to replicate a real-life environment, simulating the actions that people would perform in order to earn a living and continue with their lives.

As mentioned above, ERTHA is designed to inspire economic and social growth, investigate the new online world, and push users to increase their engagement levels in the NFT space.

The project’s development process has been wildly comprehensive as it took Alpha more than 17,000 Code commits and over 30,000 hours of writing program code to provide the end-product.

The map of ERTHA is divided by NFT hexagons. This allows players to be free to choose where to live, study, work, and earn ETH tokens. Many companies and players also prefer paying taxes in the form of the second-largest cryptocurrency.

The project further promised that some internal developments, such as territorial disputes and international conflicts, can positively impact the prices of the NFTs.

ERTHA metaverse political influence and management of different territories are controlled with decentralized instruments, meaning smart contracts, through the financial epicenters in the game. Political influence introduces a number of advantages for NFT holders.

ERTHA also promised full decentralization for its land properties and non-fungible token attributes.


Binance Futures 50 USDT FREE Voucher: Use this link to register & get 10% off fees and 50 USDT when trading 500 USDT (limited offer).

PrimeXBT Special Offer: Use this link to register & enter POTATO50 code to get 50% free bonus on any deposit up to 1 BTC.

PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.

Click here to access.


Continue Reading
Blockchain4 days ago

Over 40 days after Ethereum’s EIP-1559, here’s where it stands

Blockchain5 days ago

Cardano Sees an Influx in Smart Contracts ! But There’s a Twist

Uncategorized4 days ago

What is The Old Gym in NBA 2K22 Next Gen?

Uncategorized4 days ago

NBA 2K22 Limitless Spot-Up and Chef Badges Explained

Blockchain4 days ago

After Targeting BlockFi, State Regulators Now Set Their Eyes On Celsius

Blockchain4 days ago

Matic Price to hit $1.75 in the next leg up! Launch on Bitfinex to be the Catalyst?

Uncategorized4 days ago

NFTs Are the Building Blocks of the Metaverse — Here’s How It’s Being Built

Uncategorized4 days ago

Best Dribble Pull-Up in NBA 2K22: Which to Use

Uncategorized4 days ago

Shiba Inu (SHIB) Rises to Range High

Blockchain4 days ago

Ripple’s Legal Team Says They Have No Plans To Settle With SEC Over Lawsuit On XRP Sales

News4 days ago

XRP Lawsuit: Here’s Why Experts Think Ripple Could Win the Case Against SEC

Blockchain4 days ago

EY Taps Polygon Network to Improve Enterprise Clients’ Experience 

Blockchain3 days ago

Flux Pools autoriza o pagamento de ativos paralelos em mais de 300K Flux!

Uncategorized5 days ago

The Head of Diem wants you to trust Facebook, but is he fighting a losing battle?

Blockchain3 days ago

All you need to know about MATIC before investing

Blockchain4 days ago

EOS: Why there’s a question mark attached to its long-term trajectory

Blockchain4 days ago

Shiba Inu’s days in the sun may be over; here’s why

Blockchain3 days ago

Smart Contracts Running on Bitcoin? Internet Computer Founder Explains How It’s Possible

Uncategorized2 days ago

PetPals, One Of The First Play-To-Earn NFT Web-Based Games Is Out Now

Uncategorized5 days ago

Insider NFT Trading at OpenSea: Regulation Imminent?