Evidentiary Challenges in the Attribution of Electronic Evidence in Disputes Arising from Smart Technology Transfer Contracts Based on Public Blockchains

Meysam Bashiri; Zeinab Pourkhaghan Shahrezaei; Seyed Mohammad Hadi Mahdavi

Authors

Meysam Bashiri Department of Private Law, Na.C., Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0009-0000-4923-8800
Zeinab Pourkhaghan Shahrezaei Department of Law, Isf.C., Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran https://orcid.org/0009-0006-7852-5773
Seyed Mohammad Hadi Mahdavi Department of Law, Na.C., Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran Author https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5611-5347

Keywords:

attribution of evidence, public blockchain, smart contract, public-key appearance rule, secure electronic signature.

Abstract

In smart technology transfer contracts concluded on public blockchain platforms (such as Ethereum), establishing the attribution of data, transactions, or algorithmic outputs to a contracting party entails fundamental evidentiary challenges. The concealment of real-world identities behind public keys, the possibility of insider attacks by employees of either contracting party, and cybersecurity vulnerabilities in log-storage infrastructures disrupt the three principal links in the chain of attribution. Using a descriptive-analytical method and drawing on comparative sources, particularly German and United States case law, the authors conclude that recognizing the “public-key appearance rule” as a judicial presumption, requiring the use of X.509 digital certificates, incorporating “non-repudiation” and “segregation of duties” clauses into contracts, and establishing standardized frameworks for the attribution of evidence in decentralized environments are indispensable measures. Furthermore, unless the concept of a “secure electronic signature” is redefined so as to expressly encompass blockchain-based public keys, and unless clear evidentiary rules are developed for decentralized environments, courts will, in practice, be unable to reliably establish the identity of contracting parties in disputes arising from smart contracts.

References

Adu-Amankwa, N. A. N., Rahimian, F. P., Dawood, N., & Park, C. (2023). Digital twins and blockchain technologies for building lifecycle management. Automation in Construction, 155, 105-134.

Aouidef, Y., Ast, F., & Deffains, B. (2021). Decentralized justice: A comparative analysis of blockchain online dispute resolution projects. Frontiers in Blockchain Review, 1-18.

Assaf, M., Hussein, M., Alsulami, B. T., & Zayed, T. (2022). A mixed review of cash flow modeling: Potential of blockchain for modular construction. Buildings, 12, 20-54.

Aydinmehr, M. (2025). A legal examination of smart contracts in Iranian law with emphasis on evidentiary admissibility, validity and judicial enforcement. Modern Jurisprudence and Law(6), 1-19.

Buchwald, M. (2020). Start contract dispute resolution: The inescapable flaws of blockchain-based arbitration. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 168, 139-163.

Cheng, J. C. P., Liu, H., Gan, V. J. L., Das, M., Tao, X., & Zhou, S. (2023). Construction cost management using blockchain and encryption. Automation in Construction, 152, 104841.

Dehghani Tafti, M., Afzalimehr, M., & Eskini, R. (2021). A comparative study of the law applicable to digital smart contracts from a private international law perspective in the Iranian legal system and the Rome I Regulation. Modern Technologies Law(4), 203-229.

Delkhoun Asl, R., Goldouzian, I., & Kalantari, K. (2022). A comparative study of the probative value of electronic evidence in criminal proceedings in the Iranian and French legal systems. Legal Studies of Cyberspace(1), 16-33.

Ferreira, A. (2023). Smart contracts and the law. In Blockchain and the Law (pp. 125-143).

Haddadi, S. (2024). Arbitration in smart contracts: Legal challenges of on-chain and off-chain dispute resolution. Economic and Commercial Law Research(2), 87-116.

Hassani, M. A., Bazai, G., & Shahmansouri, A. (2021). Identifying factors affecting a blockchain technology maturity model with emphasis on the blockchain ecosystem. Business Management(52), 1-22.

Hunhevic, J. J., Motie, M., & Hall, D. M. (2022). Digital building twins and blockchain for performance-based (smart) contracts. Automation in Construction, 133, 103981.

Jomezadeh Behabadi, K. (2020). Legal challenges of using smart contracts in joint ventures [Doctoral dissertation, Shahid Beheshti University].

Judgment of 16 February 2023: 1 BvR 1547/19 and 1 BvR 2634/20, 165 363 (2023). https://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/SharedDocs/Entscheidungen/DE/2023/02/rs20230216_1bvr154719.html

Kamel, M. A., Bakhoum, E. S., & Marzouk, M. M. (2023). A framework for smart construction contracts using BIM and blockchain. Scientific reports, 13(1), 102-137.

Karami Moghaddam, R. (2025). The role of smart contracts in enhancing transparency and justice in dual-role platforms in Iranian and American administrative law. New Research in Administrative Law(7), 452-477.

Madani, F. (2023). Conditions and obstacles to electronic smart contracts and practical and legal solutions for overcoming them [Master’s thesis, Kar Higher Education Institute, Qazvin].

Mafike, S. S., & Mawela, T. (2026). An enterprise framework for blockchain interoperability. Electronic Markets, 36, 29-51, Article 14.

Mozaffari, M., & Naser, M. (2021). The role of smart contracts in securing individuals’ property rights. Legal Research(95), 253-275.

Natanelov, V., Cao, S., Foth, M., & Dulleck, U. (2022). Blockchain smart contracts for supply chain finance: Mapping the innovation potential in Australia-China beef supply chains. Journal of Industrial Information Integration, 30, 100389.

Nejatzadegan, S., & Soltani, M. (2022). Assessing the general validity requirements of smart contracts under Iranian and American law. Legal Research, 25, 303-339.

Nogaroli, R. (2025). Ethical and legal aspects of artificial intelligence (AI) in medical service contracts. In Medical Liability and Artificial Intelligence (pp. 123-206).

Park, J., Jeong, S., & Yeom, K. (2025). Blockchain transaction refinery: A traceability refinement mechanism to improve the analysis of permissioned blockchain transactions. Journal of King Saud University Computer and Information Sciences, 37, 1-36, Article 325.

Rabbani Mousavian, S. A. (2021). Rules governing smart contracts in Imami jurisprudence and positive law. Islamic Jurisprudence and Law Research(17), 178-210.

Saghafian, A., Sadri, S. M., Jamshidirad, M. S., & Amirpour, H. (2021). The effect of blockchain technology on the jurisprudential and legal status of cryptocurrencies and money issuance. Iranian Political Sociology(4), 292-315.

Singh, A. K., Kumar Varadhaiya, G. R. P., Hu, J., & Irfan, M. (2023). Investigation of barriers and mitigation strategies to blockchain technology implementation in construction industry: An interpretive structural modeling approach. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 30(38), 89-136.

Valipour, A. (2025). Challenges of admitting digital evidence in civil and criminal proceedings: A comparative study of Iran and advanced legal systems Seventh International and Eighth National Conference on Law and Political Science,

Vecellio Segate, R. (2026). Metaverse: Yet another jeopardy for the constitutional social contract? In Law and Politics of Virtual Worlds (pp. 51-95).

Waqar, A., Qureshi, A. H., Othman, I., Saad, N., & Azab, M. (2023). Exploration of challenges to deployment of blockchain in small construction projects. Ain Shams Engineering Journal, 102362.

Wu, L., Lu, W., & Xu, J. (2022). Blockchain-based smart contract for smart payment in construction: A focus on the payment freezing and disbursement cycle. Frontiers of Engineering Management, 9(2), 177-195.

Zamanian, M., & Vatani, Z. (2022). Enhancing the efficiency of documentary credits through private blockchain technology and smart contracts: A comparative assessment of legal compatibility. Legal Research, 25, 445-477.