• news-banner

    Expert Insights

Digital assets consultation by the Law Commission


The Law Commission has launched a consultation on draft legislation relating to digital assets (Consultation). The Consultation centres on the question of how the law can be reformed to introduce a new category of personal property rights. This new category would accommodate certain digital assets, including crypto-tokens and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). The purpose of the Consultation is to test whether the draft legislation successfully implements the recommendations set out in an earlier June 2023 report. 

The Consultation on digital assets has potentially significant implications given the importance of property rights. In contrast to other personal rights (such as contractual rights or privacy rights) that are recognised against an individual who has assumed a legal duty, property rights are recognised ‘against the whole world’. Further the proposed legislation would, if enacted, align England and Wales with other common law jurisdictions (such as Australia, the United States and Singapore) which have concluded that crypto-tokens are capable of being objects of personal property rights. 

Traditionally the law has recognised two categories of property: (1) things in possession (i.e. an object that is capable of possession, such a gold coin) and (2) things in action (i.e. personal property enforceable by legal action, such as debts). However, the Law Commission recommends a “third category” of personal property rights for digital assets which – “do not sit easily in either of the traditionally recognised categories of things in possession or things in action (at least in the narrow sense)”. Central to the Consultation is the idea that a thing should not be deprived of legal status as an object of personal property rights just because it is not a thing in possession or a thing in action. 

Draft legislation

Clause 1 in the draft Bill reads as follows: 

“Objects of personal property rights 

A thing (including a thing that is digital in nature) is capable of being an object of personal property rights even though it is neither -

  1. a thing in possession, nor
  2. a thing in action.”

Third category and what it means

The Law Commission’s draft legislation refers to “third category” in a technologically neutral manner in that it does not refer to any single or class of (digital) asset, or any protocol, system, network or technological feature but rather to things that are – “digital in nature”. This was not originally part of the recommendation in the Final Report. The Law Commission interestingly acknowledges that its definition of the third category if a thing is “somewhat circular” in nature.

The definition is deliberately fluid and the Law Commission explains that, while things that are “digital in nature”, are the main impetus behind the draft legislation, the new category could include non-digital things. The Law Commission adds that the proposed text has been widely drafted with a view to facilitating common law development. 

This approach fits on with existing case law, such as AA v Persons Unknown where the High Court held in 2019 that cryptocurrencies were a form of property. While Mr Justice Bryan expressly recognised the difficulty in the classification of crypto-tokens, he stated that they could be objects of personal property rights while not strictly being considered as things in action.

What falls within the third category?

The Law Commission has not given a strict definition or circumstances under which a digital asset falls under the third category. However, it identifies distinguishing qualities within the category that are helpful in future case analysis, including – “the form of computer code, electronic, digital or analogue signals”. This is in line with the Law Commission’s expectation that intangible things and assets that are difficult to predict may develop under the third category.

The Law Commission also refers to how common law does not arbitrarily define “things in action” or “things in possession”. Similarly, it aims to apply this flexible approach to “a third thing” that is capable of being an object of personal property rights.

What falls outside the third category?

While the Law Commission does not identify “hard boundaries around the third-thing category”, it delineates examples that do not fall under the third category. This includes certain digital assets, such as – “

Pure information – that is, the intangible, abstract thing that is information, distinct from the means by or on which that information is recorded.

(2) Certain digital assets, such as (in most but not necessarily all cases):

  1. digital files and records
  2. email accounts and certain in-game assets
  3. domain names.”


The draft legislation on digital assets is pivotal in recognising that certain assets including crypto-tokens and NFTs are capable of being recognised at law as property. It would provide commercial certainty and confidence in relation to the growing use and interoperability of digital assets. 

The Law Commission is asking stakeholders the following three questions – “

  1. Do you agree with the general approach of the draft Bill, and agree that it will achieve the desired effect?
  2. What do you consider the positive impact of the Bill to be? Could you quantify them (for example, by how much in £ or days/hours might a dispute be reduced)?
  3. What do you consider the costs and/or risks of the Bill to be?”

The consultation is currently seeking views from stakeholders on the draft legislation. The deadline for responses is 22 March 2024.

Our thinking

  • IBA Annual Conference 2024

    Charlotte Ford


  • Is a Big Mac meat or chicken? Thoughts on the recent General Court decision

    Charlotte Duly

    Quick Reads

  • Tortious liability: Supreme Court brings relief for directors

    Olivia Gray


  • Stephen Burns and Katie Bewick write for New Law Journal on shareholders’ rights after Zedra

    Stephen Burns

    In the Press

  • Rhys Novak writes for Solicitors Journal on what legal advisors need to know about dawn raids

    Rhys Novak

    In the Press

  • Employment Law & Worker Rights - The Conservative Party’s Manifesto

    Nick Hurley


  • "Has anyone seen my cat?" - Pet-Nups and Pet Disputes between Unmarried Couples

    Jessie Davies

    Quick Reads

  • Employment Law & Worker Rights - The Liberal Democrats Manifesto

    Nick Hurley


  • The Africa Debate: Africa’s role in a changing global order

    Matthew Hobbs

    Quick Reads

  • Re UKCloud: The importance of exercising control over a fixed charge asset

    Cara Whiffin


  • Bloomberg quotes Dominic Lawrance on pledges to scrap preferential tax treatment for non-doms

    Dominic Lawrance

    In the Press

  • Consumer Duty Board Report

    Richard Ellis


  • Standard of repair put to the test - Estates Gazette Q&A

    Emma Humphreys


  • LIDW: Is arbitration an effective process for disputes involving state interests: a panel discussion of concerns raised in Nigeria v. P&IDL [2023] EWHC 2638

    Richard Kiddell


  • Injunctions against potential protesters - Estates Gazette Q&A

    Samuel Lear


  • Michael Powner, Isobel Goodman and Hauwa Ottun write for Law 360 on the Tips Act

    Michael Powner

    In the Press

  • LIDW: An Era of Constant Change – an event to explore the General Counsel’s role in delivering sustainable growth whilst managing global ESG risks

    Caroline Greenwell


  • Emily Chalkley writes for The Times on how best to use employee influencers

    Emily Chalkley

    In the Press

  • LIDW: Liability imposed on UK Directors and how to mitigate the risks

    Claudine Morgan


  • The Lawyer covers our Training Contract support, in light of the shift to the SQE

    Karen Stages

    In the Press

Back to top