The Legal Challenges of Blockchain in Relation to the Legal Professions

Blockchain technology was initially conceived as a disintermediation tool based on algorithmic trust, aiming to challenge the traditional role of trusted third parties in legal and economic relationships. By relying on distributed, immutable, and transparent ledgers, blockchain claims to offer an alternative to centralized institutions, particularly in the fields of evidence, contracts, and authentication. However, a legal analysis demonstrates that this promise of disintermediation remains largely relative. While blockchain enables technical certification of data and the automated execution of obligations through smart contracts, it does not ensure valid contract formation, effective protection of the weaker party, or compliance with the fundamental requirements of evidentiary law. The absence of control over consent, legal capacity, defects of will, and lawfulness highlights the structural limits of purely algorithmic normativity. Similarly, internal dispute resolution mechanisms inspired by alternative dispute resolution (ADR) models often fail to provide the guarantees of impartiality, competence, and legitimacy required under positive law. In this context, legal professions, particularly judges and notaries, should not be viewed as obsolete, but rather as institutions that are difficult, if not impossible, to replace. This study advocates for a hybrid approach in which blockchain functions as a legal tool rather than an autonomous normative system. Finally, regulation appears inevitable, yet it must be implemented cautiously, not to precede technological development, but to accompany it once sufficient maturity has been achieved.