INTERNATIONAL AND HISTORICAL ANALYSIS OF NEGOTIABLE OBLIGATIONS IN THE CONTEXT OF DIGITAL CURRENCIES
Back to articles of current journal| PDF: |  |
Author(s): | Uspenskiy M. A., |
| Number of journal: | 3(76) | Date: | September 2026 |
| Annotation: | This article continues the long-term testing of the author’s previously advanced hypothesis regarding the qualification of Bitcoin and other digital currencies as organizational (framework) obligations. Originally developed on the basis of the Russian civil law and the doctrine of obligations, the hypothesis is now corroborated by reference to the institutions of the English legal tradition, and, above all, to Indian contract law as one of the most developed systems in terms of law-application practice over the past several centuries. It is further demonstrated that the Bitcoin protocol meets all the requirements imposed on a framework (umbrella) agreement under the Indian Contract Act of 1872. The three principal and most pressing objections raised by the common law against recognizing digital currencies as a chose in action – uncertainty of contract terms, absence of intention to create legal relations, and lack of consideration — find no support upon careful analysis of case law and legal doctrine. Special attention is devoted to the historical dimension of the problem: it is revealed that attempts to combine a property title and rules of conduct into a single transferable instrument were periodically undertaken in legal history – from English tally sticks to German mining shares (Kux) – but invariably encountered a dependence on a third party. The Bitcoin protocol represents a logical, yet qualitatively new, culmination of this trajectory, for the first time merging participants’ obligations and technical regulations into a single alienable object of civil rights. Owing to the shared doctrinal roots of common law, these findings extend to its entire family – from the United States to the United Kingdom and the jurisdictions that inherited their legal systems. Consequently, the proposed hypothesis acquires a truly universal, supranational, and harmonizing character, which is particularly significant given the cross-border nature of cryptocurrency transactions. | ||
| Keywords: | Bitcoin, digital currency, cryptocurrency, organizational obligation, framework (umbrella) agreement, common law, Indian contract law, consideration, acceptance by conduct, analogy of law |
||
| For citation: | Uspenskiy M. A. International and historical analysis of negotiable obligations in the context of digital currencies. Biznes. Obrazovanie. Pravo = Business. Education. Law. 2026;3(76):219—226. DOI: 10.25683/VOLBI.2026.76.1737. |
||