Cryptoassets for dispute resolution lawyers

Copyright © 2025 LexisNexis

The content in this subtopic covers digital assets, principally cryptoassets, currently commonly seen in the form of cryptocurrencies (eg Bitcoin), and smart contracts. At the heart of both is a combination of intangible property or property rights issues derived from new digital technologies. In this respect, developments in the ‘digital world’ have given rise to new issues for the lawmakers (both domestically and internationally) to grapple with. The content in this subtopic is concerned with how these technological developments are dealt with under English law and from the perspective of how issues pertaining to them may arise in the work of dispute resolution lawyers. That is, when and how rights (and obligations) in respect of such assets arise, can be identified, transferred, protected and enforced under English law.

We may also consider within this subtopic other digital assets such as NFTs (non-fungible tokens) and digital securities (ie equity or debt securities issued and transferred on ‘distributed ledger technology’ (DLT) systems) where, again, given the new technologies surrounding these assets and their creation and transfer within these new environments, they give rise to similar issues as to

To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in with LexisNexis or register for a free trial.

Existing user? Sign-in TAKE A FREE TRIAL
Powered by Lexis+®
Latest Dispute Resolution News

Minutes of the OPR Committee meeting—9 June 2025

Dispute Resolution analysis: The minutes of the Online Procedure Rule Committee (OPRC) meeting of 9 June 2025 (conducted in a hybrid format at The Rolls Building, Royal Courts of Justice, and via video conference) cover a number of issues including event planning, consultation documents, development of the pre-action model, and drafting of rules relating to property and possession.

No default secrecy for judges’ criticism of bench applicants

Law360, London: The Court of Appeal ruled on 17 July 2025 that sitting judges can continue to give feedback about applicants for judicial office but told the Judicial Appointments Commission it must weigh whether to disclose negative feedback to candidates in each case.

Sir Geoffrey Vos gives evidence to Lords Constitution Committee on rule of law

The Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice, Sir Geoffrey Vos, appeared before the House of Lords Constitution Committee to provide evidence for their rule of law inquiry. Sir Geoffrey Vos detailed plans to modernise civil justice in England and Wales. He outlined three key priorities: expanding digital platforms in County Court, replacing the CE-File system with AI-enabled case management and developing a pre-court digital justice system. Currently only 11% of County Court cases use digital systems. Sir Geoffrey Vos reported that Civil Automatic Referral to Mediation (CARM) has been implemented for claims under £10,000, with a 37-38% success rate since becoming mandatory.

Decoding arbitral disputes—UK injunctions across borders

Law360, London: This article is part of a monthly column that delves into the most critical cross-border investment and commercial European disputes over arbitral award enforcement. In this installment, I analyze the High Court's reasoning in JPMorgan Chase Bank NA v VTB Bank PJSC.

View Dispute Resolution by content type :  
News
Practice notes
Precedents
Q&As

Popular documents

Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?

Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?Having established that a duty of care exists (see Practice Note: Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?), it is then necessary to consider whether or not there has been a breach of that duty. This will depend on a number of factors outlined below and

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claimThis Practice Note outlines the key elements for establishing a claim in negligence. For specific guidance on negligence in the context of company/parent company liability, banks and in professional negligence cases, see:•Practice Note: Tortious

Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners

Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitionersThis Practice Note outlines some of the key considerations when dealing with claims concerning company directors. It addresses the definition of a director, the likely claimant(s) in actions involving directors as well

Causation and remoteness in tort and negligence claims

Causation and remoteness in tort and negligence claimsThis Practice Note considers the requirement for causation as part of establishing a viable claim in tort, including in negligence claims. It considers the aspects of factual causation: including the ‘but for’ test, evidencing it and its limits,
Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?

Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?

Negligence—when is the duty of care breached?Having established that a duty of care exists (see Practice Note: Negligence—when does a duty of care arise?), it is then necessary to consider whether or not there has been a breach of that duty. This will depend on a number of factors outlined below and

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claim

Negligence—key elements to establish a negligence claimThis Practice Note outlines the key elements for establishing a claim in negligence. For specific guidance on negligence in the context of company/parent company liability, banks and in professional negligence cases, see:•Practice Note: Tortious

Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners

Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitioners

Claims against directors—key considerations for dispute resolution practitionersThis Practice Note outlines some of the key considerations when dealing with claims concerning company directors. It addresses the definition of a director, the likely claimant(s) in actions involving directors as well

Causation and remoteness in tort and negligence claims

Causation and remoteness in tort and negligence claims

Causation and remoteness in tort and negligence claimsThis Practice Note considers the requirement for causation as part of establishing a viable claim in tort, including in negligence claims. It considers the aspects of factual causation: including the ‘but for’ test, evidencing it and its limits,