AUTOMATION OF CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS IN THE DIGITAL ENVIRONMENT: LEGAL RISKS AND LIABILITY ISSUES
Keywords:
digital contract law, automated contractual performance, algorithmic enforcement of obligationsAbstract
This article examines the legal nature of the automation of contractual obligations in the digital environment and analyzes the legal risks and liability issues arising from the application of automated execution mechanisms. The study explores automated contractual performance from the perspective of classical institutions of contract law, including contractual autonomy, consent, fault, liability, and the principle of justice. Particular attention is paid to legal uncertainty caused by algorithmic execution, technical failures, and the limited ability of existing legal frameworks to adequately regulate such relations.
The article also analyzes the problem of allocating liability in cases where contractual obligations are improperly performed due to technical errors, system malfunctions, or incorrect algorithmic interpretation of contractual terms. It is argued that automated execution mechanisms, while increasing efficiency and reducing transaction costs, may weaken legal certainty and undermine fairness if not supported by appropriate legal safeguards. Based on the research findings, the article formulates scientific and practical recommendations aimed at improving normative regulation, clarifying legal responsibility, and ensuring a balanced integration of automated execution mechanisms into modern contract law.
References
1. Szabo, N. (1997). Formalizing and Securing Relationships on Public Networks. First Monday, 2(9).
2. Lessig, L. (2006). Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace. New York: Basic Books.
3. Buterin, V. (2014). A Next-Generation Smart Contract and Decentralized Application Platform. Ethereum White Paper. Retrieved from https://ethereum.org/en/whitepaper/
4. World Economic Forum. (2020). Contracts for the Digital Age: Smart Contracts and Legal Risk. Geneva: WEF Publications.
5. UK Jurisdiction Taskforce. (2019). Legal Statement on Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts. London.
6. The Law Commission of England and Wales. (2021). Smart Legal Contracts: Advice to Government. Law Commission Report No. 401.
7. U.S. Congress. (2000). Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (E-SIGN Act). Public Law 106–229.
8. European Union. (2023). Regulation on Markets in Crypto-assets (MiCA). Official Journal of the European Union.
9. Mehar, M. I., Shier, C. L., Giambattista, A., Gong, E., Fletcher, G., & Laskowski, M. (2019). Understanding a Revolutionary and Flawed Grand Experiment in Blockchain: The DAO Attack. Journal of Cases on Information Technology, 21(1), 19–32.
10. Levi, S. D., & Lipton, A. B. (2018). An Introduction to Smart Contracts and Their Potential and Inherent Limitations. Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance.
11. De Filippi, P., & Wright, A. (2018). Blockchain and the Law: The Rule of Code. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi. (2022). “Elektron raqamli imzo to‘g‘risida”gi Qonun. O‘RQ-793.
13. O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Fuqarolik kodeksi. (amaldagi tahrir).
14. World Bank Group. (2021). Legal Frameworks for Digital Contracts and Automation. Washington, DC.
