CONTRACT AS AN ALGORITHM: INTRODUCTORY CONSIDERATIONS

  • Predrag Cvetković Redovni profesor Pravnog fakulteta u Nišu
Keywords: contract, algorithm, smart contracts, pseudocode, formal logic

Abstract


Legal norms contained in the contract (also in the statutes, bylaws) and written in natural language can be subject of algorithmic conversion in certain phases of the contract circle (implementation, monitoring, control, interpretation). Application of the blockchain concept as a structural pattern opens the possibility of creating a contract with automated fulfillment: execution: a "smart" contract. Algorithmization is understood as a process that allows the text of the contract to be translated into a format that is understandable to software developers. To this end, the use of the following methodologies is proposed: design of pseudocode, application of formal logic`s symbols and flowchart. Successful conversion of legal prose into code requires cooperation between lawyers and programmers. The framework of that cooperation is the establishment of the so-called  "Legal Expert System"-LES): LES is a program conceived by lawyers  allows the algorithm to solve the problem of contract execution. Contract algorithmization should convert contracts from prose to code, while preserving its validity and efficiency. The sate of the art of the smart contracts’ contract developoment does not allow those contracts to regulate commercially complex scenarios: therefore, de lege lata, the application of smart contracts as a complete replacement for traditional (analogous) contracts is excluded. A potential objects of algorithmization are the primary instructions aimed at executing the characteristic performance of the contract. Contract algorithmization is an ongoing process and is here to stay. The significance of this process is indisputable: its scope, dynamics and assumptions are still only partially defined and tested. The necessary condition (but not a sufficient one is the view of the contract as an algorithm to be legitimized in the process of defining the contractual provisions. Further development will depend on the functioning of other elements in the environment in which coded contracts would function, and perhaps most of all on the commercial response to the whole process: to create contract as an algorithm must become a commercially viable behavior to be widely applied.

References

Allen, L. E. (1956). Symbolic logic: A razor-edged tool for drafting and interpreting legal documents. Yale LJ, 66, 833.

Ashley, K. D. (2017). Artificial intelligence and legal analytics: new tools for law practice in the digital age. Cambridge University Press.

Barraclough, T., Fraser, H., & Barnes, C. (2021). LEGISLATION AS CODE FOR NEW ZEALAND.

Brookshear, J. G. (2012). Computer science: an overview. Boston: Addison-Wesley.

CHRISTODOULOU, M., SZCZYGIEŁ, E., KŁAPA, Ł., & KOLARZ, W. (2018). Algorithmic and Programming.

Cvetković, P. (2021). СИНТЕЗА ПРАВНОГ ТЕКСТА И ПРОГРАМСКОГ КОДА: СЛУЧАЈ РИКАРДИЈАНСКОГ УГОВОРА. Зборник радова Правног факултета у Нишу, (90), 61-76.

Cvetković, P. (2020). Блокчејн као правни феномен: уводна разматрања. Зборник радова Правног факултета у Нишу, (87), 127-144.

Diver, L. E. (2019). Digisprudence: the affordance of legitimacy in code-as-law. University of Edinburgh, doctoral thesis.

Flood, M. D., & Goodenough, O. R. (2017). Contract as automaton: the computational representation of financial agreements. Office of Financial Research Working Paper, (15-04). Приступљено: 10. 09. 2021. https://ccl.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/OFRwp-2015-04_Contract-as-Automaton-The-Computational-Representation-of-Financial-Agreements.pdf

Goldoni, M. (2015). The politics of code as law: towards input reasons. In: Reichel, J. and Lind, A.S. (eds.) Freedom of Expression, the Internet and Democracy. Brill: Leiden, pp. 115-133

Jovanović, N. (2005). Uvod u programiranje. Viša poslovna školam str. 51-91.

Kaulartz, M (2019). Smart Contract Dispute Resolution in Fries, Martin, and Boris P. Paal. Smart contracts. Mohr Siebeck,

Кoch, K. L. (2005). A Multidisciplinary Comparison of Rules-Driven Writing: Similarities in Legal Writing, Biology Research Articles, and Computer Programming. Journal of Legal Education, 55(1/2), 234-251.

Kuhn, T. (2014). A survey and classification of controlled natural languages. Computational linguistics, 40(1), 121-170.

Lauslahti, K., Mattila, J., & Seppala, T. (2017). Smart contracts–How will blockchain technology affect contractual practices?. Etla Reports, (68).

Lawrence Lessig, Code: Version 2.0 (Basic Books 2006)

Lipshaw, J. M. (2018). The Persistence of “Dumb” Contracts. Приступљено 10. 07. 2020. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeffrey_Lipshaw/publication/326475422_The_Persistence_of_'Dumb'_Contracts/links/5c3b4db7a6fdccd6b5a9e41f/The-Persistence-of-Dumb-Contracts.pdf

Sergot, M. J., Sadri, F., Kowalski, R. A., Kriwaczek, F., Hammond, P., & Cory, H. T. (1986).

Surden, H. (2012). Computable contracts. UCDL Rev., 46, 629.

Susskind, R. E. (1986). Expert systems in law: A jurisprudential approach to artificial intelligence and legal reasoning. The modern law review, 49(2), 168-194.

The British Nationality Act as a logic program. Communications of the ACM, 29(5), 370-386. Приступљено: 20. 09. 2021. http://www.doc.ic.ac.uk/~rak/papers/British%20Nationality%20Act.pdf

Van Emden, M. H., & Kowalski, R. A. (1976). The semantics of predicate logic as a programming language. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 23(4), 733-742.

Von Haller Grønbæk, М. (2016). Blockchain 2.0, Smart Contracts And Challenges. Приступљено 02. 03. 2020. https://www.twobirds.com/~/media/pdfs/in-focus/fintech/blockchain2_0_martinvonhallergroenbaek_08_06_16.pdf

Werbach, K., & Cornell, N. (2017). Contracts ex machina. Duke LJ, 67, 313.
Published
2022/01/26
Section
Original Scientific Paper