Australia: Is your refund policy immune from COVID-19?
The COVID-19 global health emergency has significantly impacted the ability of Australian businesses to supply services to consumers.
Can smart contracts be legally binding contracts?
Publication | November 2016
An R3 and Norton Rose Fulbright white paper
There is much excitement globally about smart contracts and distributed ledger technologies that support them. Properly funded technology vendors and consortia have emerged which are now able to give tangible expression to that sense of excitement in the form of new and innovative smart contract and distributed ledger products and services.
It has become apparent to us, however, that when industry stakeholders (both buyers of the new technologies and vendors) speak of smart contracts, they can mean very different things. As any contracts lawyer will tell you, words matter. Consistency of language is vital if clear lines of communication are to be achieved in a rapidly evolving industry. What do we mean by a smart contract? Is it smart? Is it a contract? Do lawyers and technologists understand each other when they use these terms?
Recognising the imperative for clarity on these issues, R3 and Norton Rose Fulbright offer this White Paper as a step forward in forging a consensus of understanding between industry stakeholders, lawyers and technologists in relation to smart contracts.
The White Paper considers whether a smart contract can constitute a legally binding contract under the law of a number of key jurisdictions. It also examines the practicalities of enforceability and provides some suggestions for dispute resolution within a smart contract context.
Contacts
Recent publications
Middle East: Landmark decision by the DIFC Court
On November 17, 2019, the DIFC Court handed down a landmark decision in YYY Limited v ZZZ Limited [DIFC] 2017 ARB 005 (DIFC Court Judgment).
Australia: Be wary of strangers: WA Court of Appeal decides when disputes involving both parties and non-parties to an arbitration agreement should be stayed
The recent decision of the Western Australian Court of Appeal in Hancock Prospecting Pty Ltd v DFD Rhodes Pty Ltd highlights the complex issues that arise where court proceedings commenced by “strangers” to an arbitration agreement involve disputes covered by the arbitration agreement.
Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest legal news, information and events...