CONCLUSION
This article has proven that it is possible to maintain the hallmarks of DLT, namely its autonomy, nonrepudiability, and a-nationality, while arriving at just and socially acceptable outcomes from a legal perspective. This symbiosis has been achieved by respecting the results of blockchain transfer as a fact and imposing an obligation for a reverse transfer in case they are incompatible with the requirements of justice. The correction that is necessary from a legal perspective is thus done in a form that is compatible with the technology.
Unless it can be proven that such a corrective obligation exists, the distribution of assets foreseen by the technology should be presumed to be legitimate. The private key should therefore be legally protected against hacking, fraud, coercion, or other forms of misappropriation. These cases can be solved by using the general rules of tort law.164 There is thus no need to define a national law governing the blockchain or developing a special lex cryptographica.
The solution proposed here can also solve the problem of crypto asset transfers outside of the blockchain (e.g., in case of a succession). The transfer is done by virtue of the applicable law. Any person that is illegally in possession of the private key is under an obligation to turn over the key to the legitimate successor and desist from any use.
In sum, there is no law applying to the blockchain transaction as such. Yet there are laws surrounding it, like
164. See, e.g., RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 922 (1979) (discussing return of converted chattel); RESTATEMENT (SECOND) OF TORTS § 222A (1965) (explaining what constitutes conversion); RESTATEMENT (FIRST) OF TORTS § 223 (1934) (describing ways of committing conversion). ***
contract law, tort law, or succession law. These laws must accept the social reality that is created by the blockchain transfer. They should regard such transfer as a fact, but not necessarily as conclusive with regard to the legal situation. Law as a normative system has the power to require reverse transfers. Indeed, it must use this power where injustice looms. But otherwise, it should abstain from interfering with the functioning of the selfcontained transfer system that is DLT.