Smart contracts, self-executing programs stored and activated by predefined conditions in a distributed ledger, ensure contractual obligations. They guarantee the fulfillment of commitments in pre-programmed terms, linking digital assets and allowing transfers or guarantees according to the conditions of the contract.
These contracts enable the collateralization of digital assets, blocking their availability on the platform that executes the collateralization. Following predefined events, the smart contract is executed as scheduled, returning control to the holder in case of compliance or transferring it to the successful bidder in case of default, as stipulated.
The execution follows scheduled terms, but from a legal perspective, questions arise:
– Is controlling the digital asset equivalent to the possession necessary for the creation of a pledge (art. 1863 CC)?
– Is the DLT timestamp on the DeFi platform equivalent to the public instrument requirement for effectiveness against third parties (art. 1865 CC)?
– Is execution according to the agreed terms sufficient for the transfer of property to the acquirer?
Execution in accordance with established agreements raises the fundamental question: is it sufficient for the transfer of ownership to the transferee? These legal challenges underline the need for an updated and specific regulatory framework to address the complexity of smart contracts and their application in the legal environment, thus ensuring consistency and certainty in these digital transactions.
