法的介入:智能合约纠纷的司法救济

Legal Intervention:Judicial Remedies for Smart Contract Disputes

智能合约在运行中呈现排斥法律的自我解决特性,但技术信任依然存在补强的需求,同时,“不学习”的法律规范面对智能现实亟待调整。以司法介入智能合约纠纷,实质上存在法律与技术双向需求,即智能合约的法律与法治的智能合约。司法介入智能合约的边界,应坚守效率与公正的价值考量,对比例原则的四阶内涵作符合智能合约纠纷解决的新调整,并将比例原则精细化应用于不同的智能合约纠纷类型。介入的具体路径可依据智能合约争议大小规模的不同性质,采取在线争议解决方式或仲裁、诉讼等线下争议解决方式。此外,司法程序应从管辖、审理和执行三阶段进行自身调整以对接智能合约纠纷的解决,并提供对于两种性质争议解决结果的再救济程序。

Smart contracts,featuring self-resolution,excludes law in their operation.However,there is still a need to strengthen technological trust,and the“non-learning”legal norms need to be adjusted in the face of smart technolo-gy.In essence,there exists a two-way demand for law and technology for judicial intervention in smart contract dis-putes,that is,the law of smart contracts and smart contracts based on the rule of law.The boundary of judicial inter-vention should adhere to the value considerations of efficiency and justice,make new adjustments to the four connota-tions of the principle of proportionality in line with the resolution of smart contract disputes,and apply the principle of proportionality to different types of smart contract disputes.Based on the size and scale of smart contract disputes,ju-dicial intervention can be online or offline dispute resolution such as arbitration and litigation.In addition,the judicial procedure should adjust itself through the three stages of jurisdiction,trial and execution to coordinate the resolution of smart contract disputes,and provide re-remedy procedures for the resolution of the two types of disputes.