The rise of cryptocurrency has revolutionised value exchange and contractual execution in international trade. This article assesses whether existing legal and arbitral frameworks adequately ensure certainty, fairness, and enforceability in international cryptocurrency contracts. Employing doctrinal and comparative legal analysis, it examines the legal and regulatory framework of crypto-assets and smart contracts across jurisdictions in both the Global North (including the UK and the EU) and the Global Majority (such as India and Iran). Within some evaluations of regulatory approaches, such as UNIDROIT and MiCA, the research finds that while some jurisdictions in the Global North have made progress in establishing regulatory frameworks that recognise crypto-assets as property and promote the enforceability of smart contracts, they still face significant challenges. These obstacles are even more pronounced in Global Majority countries, where regulatory strategies tend to be prohibitive or fragmented. Decentralised innovations like Decentralised Finance (DeFi) and Decentralised Autonomous Organisations (DAOs) further complicate governance and cross-border recognition. The article also investigates the impact of international arbitration, particularly under the New York Convention and UNCITRAL Model Law. The findings reveal that, while these instruments support cross-border enforcement, they face challenges inherent to cryptocurrency, including issues with arbitration agreements, pseudonymity, public policy objections, and the volatility of damages. Blockchain’s decentralised structure further complicates the determination of an arbitral seat. Although crypto arbitration platforms are emerging as an innovative potential, their lack of connection to national legal systems renders them largely unenforceable. Integrating digital currencies into domestic legal frameworks may mitigate these concerns; however, effectiveness hinges on global acceptance, which remains fragmented across jurisdictions. In conclusion, the findings submitted that, despite notable progress, considerable gaps remain in both legal and arbitral frameworks concerning cryptocurrency. The key recommendations are to harmonise international legal and arbitral frameworks, establish more explicit rules for blockchain evidence, enhance privacy protections, and adopt hybrid arbitration methods that combine decentralised approaches with established practices. These measures aim to strengthen regulatory cooperation and ensure stability in cross-border cryptocurrency transactions.
Mehrnoosh Khajvand (Wed,) studied this question.