One of the selling points of cryptoassets has been the ability to subject them to so‐called ‘smart contracts’ embedded upon blockchains; yet, despite numerous common law decisions accepting cryptoassets as property, until Janesh s/o Rajkumar v Unknown Person (‘CHEFPIERRE’) no courts have had the occasion to consider how such property (in this case, an NFT) interact with these ‘smart contracts’. The case considers ‘smart contracts’ in the context of decentralised finance (DeFi), thus also raising questions concerning the legal effectiveness and prudence of using cryptoassets as objects of security. Although the non‐participation of the defendant meant that the court was deprived of full arguments, the judgment remains worthy of consideration, both for what the court does consider – specifically, criticisms of the Ainsworth test of property – and what it does not.
Read full abstract- All Solutions
Editage
One platform for all researcher needs
Paperpal
AI-powered academic writing assistant
R Discovery
Your #1 AI companion for literature search
Mind the Graph
AI tool for graphics, illustrations, and artwork
Unlock unlimited use of all AI tools with the Editage Plus membership.
Explore Editage Plus - Support
Overview
17 Articles
Published in last 50 years
Articles published on Full Arguments
Authors
Select Authors
Journals
Select Journals
Duration
Select Duration
18 Search results
Sort by Recency