5.1.6.
Object
[Rz 94] Another aspect we wish to mention is the object of transaction. As already highlighted,
one of the e
ff
ects of the Blockchain is to crystalize the computer code by making it immutable.
This e
ff
ect is particularly problematic regarding the system of protection of the law with regards
to invalid or illicit contract
136
. For instance, whenever a smart contract has an illicit object, or
does not gather all
essentiali negotii
137
, or is non-compliant with formal requirements, or even a
clausula rebus sic stantibus
occurs. The problem is that a smart legal contract can enforce an illegal
obligation, without the possibility for a judge or anyone to disable it. Thus, the absence of such
rescission mechanisms within the smart contract’s code could be potentially harmful, since the
smart contract would be simply considered legally non-binding.
[Rz 95] Still, some technical solutions exist to prevent this impasse. The first one, and the most ob-
vious, is the destruction of the smart contract via the so-called
selfdestruct
function. This enables
to destroy the contract, which might not be very proportionate with regards to the problems en-
countered. That is why other functions exist, such as the
callcode
,
enums
or else, that can alter the
content of the computer code in a more specific manner. For instance, there is the idea of a func-
tion being used as a back-up address that enables a rescission of the computer code of the smart
contract directly by a legal court very interesting
138
. This would enable the court to act directly
on a smart contract in case of need, and give them the statute of «Oracle», acting as a legitimate
resolution mechanism for technical and juridical issues.
5.2.
Corporation
[Rz 96] The stacking together of smart contracts might, factually, represent a corporation
139
. De-
pending on their specific forms, it may resemble either a collective investment scheme, or a form
of corporation. The law requires mandatorily conditions, such as the authentic form or a regis-
tration to a trade register, or the approval by the FINMA (art. 15I let. a Federal Act on Collective
Investment Schemes [
LPCC
]
140
), to be legally valid.
[Rz 97] Consequently, as most of the smart contracts have no existence o
ff
-chain, and are not re-
gistered by the trade register, the general solution would be to consider those kinds of stacked
smart contracts as constituting an ordinary partnership (530
ff
. SCO)
141
, with all the legal conse-
quences it generates.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |