E87v4 27 wang faye fangfei 2014 law of electronic

E.87.V.4)
27
Wang, Faye Fangfei. 2014. Law of Electronic Commercial Transactions. 2nd ed.
London: Routledge.
28
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, Art.
29(1).
Electronic copy available at:

International Journal for Research in Law
Volume 2 | Issue 4 (1) | ISSN-2454-8715
23
On other hand, Cryptocurrency is the electronic currency that is
released on the conclusion of the contract, but there‘s an ongoing
debate as to the validity of cryptocurrency as a valid consideration
for the contract. Scholars like Joshua A.T. Fairfield
29
and Dr. Faye
Fangfei Wang, consider cryptocurrency as valid consideration for a
contract. The European Court of Justice in Skatteverket case
30
,
expressly accepted Cryptocurrency transactions to be valid ones.
iv. Technological Neutrality:
The principle of technological neutrality means that the Electronic
Communications Convention is intended to provide for the coverage
of all factual situations where information is generated, stored or
transmitted in the form of electronic communications, irrespective of
the technology or the medium used.
Technological neutrality is particularly important in view of the
speed of technological innovation and development, and helps to
ensure that the law is able to accommodate future developments and
does not quickly become outdated. The concern to promote media
neutrality raises other important points. In the world of paper
documents, it is impossible to guarantee absolute security against all
kinds of fraud and transmission errors.
31
29
Joshua A.T. Fairfield. 2014. ―Smart Contracts, Bitcoin Bots, and Consumer Protection.‖
Wash. & LeeL. Rev. Online 36 . -
online/vol71/iss2/3
30
Skatteverket v. David Hedqvist (C-264/14), EU:C:2015:718; [2016] S.T.C. 372; [2015]
B.V.C. 34; [2015] S.T.I. 3240.
31
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, United Nations Convention on
the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts, United Nations
Publications, 2007, page 26.
Electronic copy available at:

International Journal for Research in Law
Volume 2 | Issue 4 (1) | ISSN-2454-8715
24
VI. LEGALITY OF CRYPTOCURRENCY TRANSACTIONS
A) THE U.S. STATE PRACTICE
Bitgold, bitcoin and cryptocurrency transactions have existed since 2009.
However, the legal recognition of Bitcoin from the U.S. courts, came five
years later.
In 2014, a US Court in SEC v. Trenton T. Shavers
32
recognized that Bitcoin
is a currency and that transactions through the use of Bitcoin are similar to
currency transactions and that the Courts have the jurisdiction to hear the
cases involving cryptocurrency transactions. As held by Magistrate Judge
Amos Mazzant, ―cryptocurr ency (expressly bitcoin) can be used as money
(it can be used to purchase goods and services, pay for individual living
expenses, and exchanged for conventional currencies), it is a currency or
form of money. This ruling allowed for the SEC to have jurisdiction over
cases of securities fraud involving cryptocurrency.‖ It was a case where the