Mistakes in Algorithmic Trading of Cryptocurrencies.
How should the doctrine of unilateral mistake apply when a programming error results in a buyer's algorithmic trading programme accepting an offer generated by the seller's trading programme to exchange cryptocurrencies at 250 times the current market rate? How should the knowledge element be adapte...
| Published in: | Modern Law Review Vol. 83; no. 6; pp. 1343 - 1354 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Wiley-Blackwell
Nov2020
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=146973635&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 146973635 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00267961 D8H jtl: Modern Law Review issn: 00267961 maglogo: Y pubinfo: dt: Nov2020 vid: 83 iid: 6 pid: 480 pub: Wiley-Blackwell artinfo: ui: 146973635 10.1111/1468-2230.12574 ppf: 1343 ppct: 11 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 164KB tig: atl: Mistakes in Algorithmic Trading of Cryptocurrencies. aug: au: Loke, Alexander su: Cryptocurrencies Appellate courts Documentation International law Human rights sug: subj: Cryptocurrencies Appellate courts Documentation International law Human rights ab: How should the doctrine of unilateral mistake apply when a programming error results in a buyer's algorithmic trading programme accepting an offer generated by the seller's trading programme to exchange cryptocurrencies at 250 times the current market rate? How should the knowledge element be adapted given that algorithmic trading necessarily means that the traders' minds were not engaged at the moment the contract was formed? These novel issues came before the Singapore Court of Appeal in Quoine Pte Ltd v B2C2 Ltd. The decision further cautions customers of cryptocurrency exchanges not to assume that they have property rights in the cryptocurrencies held by the exchange and to examine carefully the nature of asset holding arrangement found in the documentation. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Modern Law Review is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Modern Law Review holder: Wiley-Blackwell dt: @attributes: year: 2020 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|