This article examines the evidentiary value of blockchain technology in civil litigation through a comparative legal analysis. While blockchain’s technical features offer significant potential for creating reliable evidence, the study demonstrates that technical security alone does not establish legal certainty. The research analyses how different legal systems approach blockchain evidence, including China’s direct integration into internet courts, the United States’ cautious application within existing electronic evidence frameworks subject to hearsay rules, the European Union’s technology-neutral approach through eIDAS regulations, and the varied national practices in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Türkiye. The findings reveal that blockchain records face inherent functional limitations, particularly in proving physical-world events, as they can only guarantee data integrity within the digital environment. The study identifies three scenarios where blockchain evidence proves most effective: proving transactions executed directly on blockchain networks, serving as an electronic detection instrument for transactions occurring outside the network, and recording real-world events directly onto blockchain systems. However, challenges persist across jurisdictions, including the absence of harmonised standards, difficulties in establishing attribution, concerns about the “garbage in, garbage out” principle, and the need for expert testimony in evaluating blockchain evidence. The article concludes that the effective integration of blockchain into evidence law requires clear normative frameworks that balance technical reliability with procedural safeguards. It recommends establishing specific admissibility criteria for blockchain records, developing standardised verification mechanisms, providing judicial training on the technology, and coordinating with international standards such as UNCITRAL and EU regulations to ensure uniformity across jurisdictions.
Kaya et al. (Tue,) studied this question.