{"id":291971,"date":"2026-08-10T16:00:00","date_gmt":"2026-08-10T14:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/?p=291971"},"modified":"2026-08-10T10:31:02","modified_gmt":"2026-08-10T08:31:02","slug":"the-future-of-dispute-resolution-tiac-as-a-forum-for-digital-assets-disputes","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dailyjus.com\/index.php\/2026\/08\/10\/the-future-of-dispute-resolution-tiac-as-a-forum-for-digital-assets-disputes\/","title":{"rendered":"The Future of Dispute Resolution: TIAC as a Forum for Digital Assets Disputes"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n\n\n\n

THE AUTHORS<\/strong>:
Anton Maltsev<\/a><\/strong>, <\/strong>FCIArb, Partner, Dispute Resolution Practice at Melling, Voitishkin & Partners, Moscow<\/strong>; Vice President of the Board, Russian Arbitration Association<\/strong>
Diana Bayzakova<\/a><\/strong>, <\/strong>Director, Tashkent International Arbitration Centre<\/strong><\/a> at the Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Uzbekistan<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n\n\n\n
<\/div>\n\n\n\n

In just the last five years, the world has been reshaped by the pandemic, major geopolitical changes, slowing international trade, and worsening conflict dynamics. These developments have redrawn the map for international business. Governments have become more involved in supply chains through sanctions and tariffs, and trade patterns have shifted.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Technological innovation has assumed a pivotal role in mitigating the challenges arising from the growing fragmentation of global trade. Advances in automation, digitalization, e-commerce, and cryptocurrencies have provided new mechanisms for enhancing efficiency in international business.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As a result, it is not just how businesses operate that has changed \u2013 it is also how they now resolve their disputes. Many businesses now choose dispute resolution venues strategically. Forum neutrality, rigorous confidentiality, technological proficiency, and cost-effectiveness are key determinants in the choice of forum.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The changing commercial environment requires a fresh method for managing disputes.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Standard litigation \u2014rigid, public, and drawn-out\u2014 operates too slowly for the fast-moving digital economy. Arbitration delivers confidentiality, allows parties to choose qualified experts, and permits tailored procedures, making it a far more efficient remedy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Recent examples illustrate this development.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

A foreign crypto-mining firm places millions of dollars worth of high-tech servers in a foreign data center. Its local partners then use a complex corporate shell game to seize the assets, liquidating the contractual front company while continuing to send invoices. When the scheme is revealed, a criminal investigation becomes stuck: local authorities in certain countries may be simply unprepared to deal with digital evidence and unable to assess the lost crypto assets. With the suspect fleeing the country, the dispute remains in legal limbo. This highlights the paralysis that can occur when corporate fraud meets slow-moving state legal systems (See,<\/em> A.P. v. R.E., Internal Affairs Department Notice of Declination to Open Investigation, 2024, document provided on a confidential basis, on file with the author).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Another case shows arbitration\u2019s advantage. Two parties team up to set up a crypto-mining joint venture, and agree on profit sharing. An investor is based in one country and the operator is based in another. The parties hold the crypto profits in borderless digital wallets. However, with signed agreements that confirm a large debt, collecting the funds can present significant challenges. The parties therefore design a novel payment mechanism through an international crypto exchange. Unfortunately, this arrangement may not be honored either. A simple debt collection becomes a complex international enforcement puzzle, making a forum whose awards are recognized globally under treaties like the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York, 1958) (the “New York Convention<\/strong>“)<\/a> an absolute necessity (See,<\/em> A. v. A.D.<\/em>, Request for Arbitration, 2025, document provided on a confidential basis, on file with the author).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These cases reveal common traits of technology-related disputes: intricate technical evidence, intellectual property scrutiny, and a demand for speed. State courts, burdened by caseloads, often lack the specialized expertise and expedited mechanisms needed. Moreover, court proceedings are typically not confidential.  Effective arbitration is a two-part solution that requires both a supportive legal seat and a modern, adaptable institution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n\n

The Importance of a Modern Seat: The Case of Uzbekistan<\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n

Arbitration fails unless parties anchor agreements in a safe, stable seat \u2013and this is especially true for digital economy disputes where the legal status of a technology may be uncertain. The arbitral award may be exposed to the risk of being set aside in the country of the seat, which, in turn, can make the arbitral award unenforceable in other countries (Art. V(1)(e) of the New York Convention<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Uzbekistan stands out in East and Central Asia for welcoming the digital economy. It has moved quickly to provide high-quality legislation that legalizes and encourages cryptocurrency mining. Sources<\/a> rank Uzbekistan as the first in Central Asia\/Caucasus and thirty-third worldwide in terms of crypto adoption. It recognizes<\/a> cryptocurrency as property, legalizes mining subject to certain requirements, and is considered a friendly location for crypto investments.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

But is a crypto-friendly regulatory framework enough to choose a country as a dispute resolution venue?<\/p>\n\n\n\n

To arbitrate digital disputes efficiently, consider:<\/p>\n\n\n\n