Smart contracts, self-executing programs stored on a distributed ledger and triggered by predefined conditions, secure contractual obligations. They guarantee that commitments are fulfilled under
pre-programmed terms, linking digital assets and enabling transfers or security arrangements in accordance with the conditions of the contract.
These contracts make it possible to use digital assets as collateral by locking them on the platform that handles the collateralisation. When the predefined events occur, the smart contract executes as programmed, returning control to the holder if the obligation is met or transferring it to the designated transferee in the event of default, as stipulated.
Execution follows the programmed terms, but from a legal perspective several questions arise:
– Does control of the digital asset amount to the possession required to create a pledge (Article 1863 of the Spanish Civil Code)?
– Is the DLT timestamp on the DeFi platform equivalent to the requirement of a public instrument for the pledge to be effective against third parties (Article 1865 of the Civil Code)?
– Is execution in accordance with the agreed terms sufficient to transfer ownership to the acquirer?
Execution in accordance with the agreed terms raises a fundamental question: is it enough to transfer ownership to the acquirer? These legal challenges underline the need for an updated and specific regulatory framework that addresses the complexity of smart contracts and their application in the legal sphere, so as to ensure consistency and certainty in these digital transactions.
النشرة
فعاليات وأخبار وتحليلات في القانون الرقمي تصلك على بريدك، ولا نراسلك إلا حين يكون لدينا جديد.
