Options
Guillaume, Florence
Nom
Guillaume, Florence
Affiliation principale
Fonction
Professeure ordinaire
Email
florence.guillaume@unine.ch
Identifiants
Résultat de la recherche
Voici les éléments 1 - 4 sur 4
- PublicationAccès libreDecentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) Before State Courts: How can private international law keep up with global digital entities?(2024)The Lisbon Centre for Research in Private Law (CIDP)'s research project Lisbon DAO Observatory is on a mission to find answers to the questions regarding the legal challenges and the current legal state of decentralised autonomous organisations (DAOs) and similar arrangements that will help shape future legislative action. In April 2023, the project held an international conference on DAO regulation that gathered top-tier scholars, industry players and practitioners from all over the world to discuss how any prospective legislative intervention, recognition or regulation of DAOs should be crafted. This volume is the result of the knowledge shared and gained during this ground-breaking conference and includes discussions on the future form of regulation (direct legislative intervention, self-regulation or no regulation) as well as on major topics such as mandatory decentralisation, legal personality, governance structures, limited liability, plus crucial sectorial issues, including dispute resolution, civil liability, tax law and conflict of laws.
- PublicationAccès libreBlockchain Dispute Resolution for Decentralized Autonomous Organizations: The Rise of Decentralized Autonomous JusticeFor the past twenty years, the use of the Internet has facilitated international commercial relations between people who do not know each other and who are geographically distant. Disputes resulting from e-commerce have undermined the supremacy of state courts, which have proved unable to provide an appropriate response to small claims arising in an international context and raising delicate questions as to jurisdiction and applicable law. The length, cost and complexity of the procedure, as well as the risk associated with the international enforcement of the judgment are deterrent factors that led e-commerce platforms to develop online dispute resolution (ODR). Thanks in part to the removal of intermediaries, the transfer of cryptocurrencies and other crypto assets using blockchain technology has further facilitated international commercial relations. The decentralized and distributed characteristics of blockchain technology and the pseudonymity of its transactions has led to a new economy growing independently from nation states. This technology has brought an additional degree of complication in the application of private international law (PIL) rules by removing the illusion that online transactions can be linked to the territory of a state. Smart contracts also allow the creation of digital entities that can enter into commercial relations. The first decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) was the source of a resounding dispute between parties with diverging interests, which had to be urgently resolved without any access to state courts or a dispute resolution mechanism. This case revealed the risk of disputes in the blockchain environment and the resulting legal uncertainty, and led to the emergence of various models of blockchain dispute resolution (BDR) mechanisms (BDRs) inspired by the solutions developed in e-commerce. This chapter deals with the application of PIL rules to the resolution of disputes involving DAOs. The authors first analyze what is a DAO and whether DAOs legally qualify as companies. What is at stake is the legal personality of DAOs and their capacity to conduct legal proceedings. The authors then examine whether disputes involving DAOs may be brought before state courts. This analysis highlights the problems related to the location, pseudonymity, and uncertainty regarding the legal personality of the participants of the blockchain environment, which challenge the jurisdiction of state courts in case of a dispute. The authors then draw on the experience acquired in the field of e-commerce to examine the advisability of setting up alternative dispute resolution mechanisms available to the actors of the blockchain environment. Based on an analysis of existing BDRs, the authors examine whether and how BDRs are likely to avoid a denial of justice and bring legal certainty to disputes related to contractual relationships with DAOs formalized through smart contracts as well as disputes related to the governance of DAOs. The authors find that a BDR decision which can be directly enforced through smart contracts confers effective justice to the actors of the blockchain environment. Finally, the authors address the more delicate issue of the enforcement of a BDR decision on non-crypto assets. This approach shows that a type of justice based on cryptoeconomic incentives challenges the concept of fair justice. This could be an impediment to obtaining the assistance of state authorities for the enforcement of a BDR decision outside of the blockchain environment as this type of decision could be considered contrary to public policy. The analysis is mostly based on Swiss private international law and major private international law conventions. In this chapter, the authors outline the contours of a new private justice system designed to provide decentralized autonomous justice to the actors of the crypto economy.
- PublicationAccès libre
- PublicationAccès libreDAO, code et loi : le régime technologique et juridique de la decentralized autonomous organization(2021)
; Les organisations décentralisées autonomes (Decentralized Autonomous Organizations ; DAOs) sont des nouvelles formes d’organisations sociales déployées dans l’environnement dématérialisé de la blockchain dont la gouvernance est définie par le code informatique (smart contracts). Ces entités constituées en dehors du droit, sans contrainte juridique, sont intrinsèquement internationales et ne peuvent pas être rattachées à un État spécifique. Le groupe de travail international COALA (Coalition of Automated Legal Applications), composé d’experts issus des milieux juridique et technologique, travaille depuis plusieurs années à la définition d’un cadre juridique pour les DAOs. La loi type de COALA sur les DAOs, qui est en phase de consultation, propose un cadre juridique souple qui est adapté aux caractéristiques et besoins particuliers des DAOs, ainsi qu’à leurs développements futurs, tout en offrant la sécurité juridique nécessaire pour les DAOs et leurs participants. Le groupe de travail a mené une enquête approfondie sur les dispositions du droit des sociétés, en s’appuyant sur une approche fondée sur les principes, pour identifier les objectifs de politique législative ainsi que les principes sous-jacents aux règles de droit existantes. Cette analyse comparative a permis de mieux comprendre quelles sont les équivalences fonctionnelles et réglementaires qui peuvent être fournies par les moyens technologiques à disposition des DAOs pour remplir les exigences légales applicables aux entités juridiques pouvant être considérées comme analogues aux DAOs. La loi type sur les DAOs est fondée sur les principes d’équivalence fonctionnelle et réglementaire en énonçant les caractéristiques technologiques qui doivent être remplies par une DAO pour être considérée comme équivalente à une société. La loi type sur les DAOs est conçue comme un guide des meilleures pratiques pour les DAOs et vise à aider les États à moderniser leur droit des sociétés afin de tenir compte de l’apparition de nouveaux modèles d’organisation sociale entièrement numériques. Dans les États qui adopteront ou transposeront la loi type sur les DAOs dans leur système juridique national, une DAO constituée conformément aux exigences de la loi type sera reconnue comme une entité juridique. Pour permettre aux DAOs d’être considérées comme des entités juridiques dans le plus grand nombre possible d’États, la loi type prévoit un niveau minimum de droits et d’obligations qui sont généralement reconnus dans la plupart des législations nationales relatives aux entités juridiques qui peuvent être considérées comme analogues aux DAOs.