Published on:
26 May 2025
3
min read
Image credit: World Arbitration Update.
Had a fair bit of intellectual stimulation, and some fun even, at the World Arbitration Update panel in Singapore last Thursday on International Arbitration & Emergent Technologies.
And as luck would have it, the panel took take place on 22 May 2025, which happens to be Bitcoin Pizza Day! Fitting, given the topic and the lively discussion of cryptocurrency and blockchain-related disputes.
For the unacquainted, on 22 May 2010, a Florida man bought 2 pizzas for 10,000 bitcoins. This was, apparently, the first documented purchase using bitcoin.² Today, those bitcoins are worth USD 1.1 billion.³
Several key takeaways for those interested in the intersection between technology and disputes, which I'll break up into a few posts.
--
Rodolphe Ruffié-Farrugia posed an incisive question about whether the rise in smart contracts heralds the demise of lawyers. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that smart contracts will in fact lead to more work for lawyers.⁴
1️⃣ What is a smart contract even? And for what matter, what is a contract?
I suggest that:
- a contract is a bundle of rights and obligations,⁵ under which party B is obliged to cause event X to happen. If party B fails to do so, they might get sued by their counterparty⁶; and
- a smart contract is a mechanism implemented via lines of code. In simple terms, a smart contract ensures that IF event Y happens, THEN event X will happen, without human intervention.
So they are different methods to achieve the same goal: which is for event X to happen.
2️⃣ Just as how contracts are drafted by lawyers, smart contracts will need to be programmed by coders. But nobody is infallible, and coders, like ordinary human beings (and even *gasp* lawyers), may well get it wrong.
So suppose party A and party B execute a smart contract, under which party A is supposed to receive sum X from party B upon event Y happening. Event Y does happen. But as it turns out, due to an error in the code, party A receives sum 2X instead.
Who's party A going to call? I bet a disputes lawyer would be pretty high up their list.
And if party B / the coder / the smart contracts platform / etc receive a lawyers' letter of demand from party A's lawyers, I'd be pretty surprised if they don't seek legal advice.
So I suggest that when things go wrong - as they often do - lawyers will have a part to play.
3️⃣ I can absolutely see a scenario where parties execute a smart contract, but also concurrently enter into a contract to account for the smart contract behaving in unexpected ways.⁷ If so, won't parties A and B need a lawyer to draw up the contract after all?⁸
So, bring on the smart contracts, I say.
Disclaimer:
The content of this article is intended for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
¹ https://www.linkedin.com/posts/khelvin-xu_home-activity-7330804629477216257-2F1F/
² https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2025/05/22/bitcoin-pizza-day-celebrates-cryptos-historic-moment/
³ That's some expensive pizza.
⁴ Specifically, disputes lawyers, and in the short-to-mid term at least.
⁵ I'm sure there's a better explanation, but this is probably sufficiently correct and complete for the point I'm making below.
⁶ Theoretically. For now, let's not muddy the waters by going into the practical difficulties.
⁷ After all, even before entering executing a smart contract, parties would already have in mind, broadly, what are the consequences that are supposed to be automatically triggered when certain events occur. From here, it's no big leap for parties to reduce, into writing, these expectations.
⁸ I mean, they could DIY it, but that would increase the probability of a dispute down the road, which would necessitate engaging, you guessed it, disputes lawyers.
