header-logo header-logo

UK’s crypto future looks bright

28 June 2023
Issue: 8031 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Cyber
printer mail-detail
The law of England and Wales is well placed—with some minor reform and development—to secure the UK’s position as a global crypto hub, the Law Commission has concluded

Its report, published this week, shows how the law can accommodate digital assets like NFTs (non-fungible tokens) and cryptocurrencies. The Commission found that the flexibility of common law has worked well to date, although some residual uncertainty remains.

It recommends legislation to confirm the existence of a distinct third category of personal property, to more clearly protect the unique features of digital assets. It suggests a nuanced approach so as to recognise that a variety of intangible assets such as crypto-tokens, export quotas or types of carbon emissions allowance can be objects of personal property rights.

Second, it recommends the creation of a panel of industry-specific technical experts, legal practitioners, academics and judges to provide non-binding advice to courts. Third, it proposes a bespoke legal framework to facilitate the entering into, operation of and enforcement of collateral arrangements regarding crypto-tokens and crypto-assets. Fourth, it recommends statutory law reform to clarify whether certain digital assets fall within the scope of the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No 2) Regulations 2003.

Professor Sarah Green, Law Commissioner for Commercial and Common Law, said: ‘The use and importance of digital assets has grown significantly in the law few years.

‘The flexibility of the common law means that the legal system in England and Wales is well placed to adapt to this rapid growth. Our recommendations for reform and development of the law therefore seek to solidify the legal foundation for digital assets.’

Justice Minister Mike Freer said: ‘We must ensure our law remains equipped to meet the complexities of these technologies well into the future, and we will carefully consider these findings as we look to further strengthen the future of our globally-renowned legal system.’

Issue: 8031 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Cyber
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Carey Olsen—Kim Paiva

Group partner joins Guernsey banking and finance practice

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

Morgan Lewis—Kat Gibson

London labour and employment team announces partner hire

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Foot Anstey McKees—Chris Milligan & Michael Kelly

Double partner appointment marks Belfast expansion

NEWS
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has not done enough to protect the future sustainability of the legal aid market, MPs have warned
Writing in NLJ this week, NLJ columnist Dominic Regan surveys a landscape marked by leapfrog appeals, costs skirmishes and notable retirements. With an appeal in Mazur due to be heard next month, Regan notes that uncertainties remain over who will intervene, and hopes for the involvement of the Lady Chief Justice and the Master of the Rolls in deciding the all-important outcome
After the Southport murders and the misinformation that followed, contempt of court law has come under intense scrutiny. In this week's NLJ, Lawrence McNamara and Lauren Schaefer of the Law Commission unpack proposals aimed at restoring clarity without sacrificing fair trial rights
The latest Home Office figures confirm that stop and search remains both controversial and diminished. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort University analyses data showing historically low use of s 1 PACE powers, with drugs searches dominating what remains
Boris Johnson’s 2019 attempt to shut down Parliament remains a constitutional cautionary tale. The move, framed as a routine exercise of the royal prerogative, was in truth an extraordinary effort to sideline Parliament at the height of the Brexit crisis. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC dissects how prorogation was wrongly assumed to be beyond judicial scrutiny, only for the Supreme Court to intervene unanimously
back-to-top-scroll