Debate contribution: Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on 18 March 2025.

MLA

Mr John O'Dowd

Party at the time

Sinn Féin

Date

18 March 2025

Type

Debate contribution (made as a minister)

Business

Executive Committee Business

Heading

Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill: Legislative Consent Motion

Assembly identifier

Official Report component 4860379

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Go raibh maith agat, a LeasCheann Comhairle.

The legislative consent motion (LCM) relates to the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill. It is a short Bill, containing just one substantive provision, and the proposal is that it be extended to this jurisdiction. The law relating to personal property rights in this jurisdiction, as is the case in England and Wales, was developed by common law, whereby private law principles and associated rights relating to personal property were traditionally divided into two broad categories: things in possession, which include things that are tangible and capable of being physically possessed, and things in action, which are legal rights or claims enforceable by action, such as debts or the right to sue for breach of contract. With the emergence of digital assets in the modern world — for example, crypto-tokens — the Law Commission of England and Wales reviewed the extent to which those types of assets challenged the two traditional categories in order to determine whether the law required reform to accommodate them. The commission found that the courts in England and Wales were moving towards recognition of a distinct third category of personal property — things to which property rights relate — and that they have accommodated and protected features unique to certain digital assets. However, there is as yet no definitive judicial position on the matter, and there is no certainty as to when the position will be arrived at. The commission's report concluded that, although digital assets do not fit within the two traditional categories, certain types of digital assets are things to which property rights relate and, as such, should be regarded as belonging to a separate category. The majority of respondents to the commission's consultation were in support of that approach, with the senior judiciary calling on the commission for provisions that would facilitate the most effective development of common law. The Bill provides statutory clarity and will unlock for the courts the opportunity to develop common law principles, with a more efficient focus on the attributes or characteristics of the thing in question and of the legal treatment that should be offered to it. The Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill, which was introduced in the House of Lords on 11 September 2024, gives effect to the commission's recommendation for the introduction of minimal legislation to confirm, on a statutory footing, the existence of a third category of personal property rights capable of accommodating the unique characteristics of certain digital assets in the modern world. The previous Finance Minister accepted the offer to extend the Bill's provisions here. She initiated a short, targeted consultation with local stakeholders, which ran as the matter progressed through Westminster's timetable, in parallel to seeking Executive approval, which was obtained on 21 November. She also referred the Bill to the Committee for Finance. Officials provided oral and written briefings to the Committee. Following receipt of written and oral evidence in the House of Lords, the Bill was debated in Westminster on 3 February, during which it was amended to include this jurisdiction in its territorial scope. I laid the legislative consent memorandum on 10 February, and the Committee for Finance agreed through its report to the Assembly, which was published on 12 February, that it was content with the proposal to extend the provisions of the Bill to here by way of an LCM. I thank Executive colleagues and Finance Committee members for their support and timely consideration of the matter. I will briefly mention the consultation with local stakeholders. Two responses were received: from the Law Society and the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB). Both were positive and highlighted the fact that the extension of the Bill to here will create clarity and legal certainty sooner than might otherwise be the case through the courts and that such a delay could lead to divergence and put businesses in this jurisdiction at a disadvantage compared with those in England and Wales. I turn now to the motion under consideration. Essentially, it is a short, technical Bill. It does not create any new rights, obligations or legal duties. It does not remove or dilute any existing rights or obligations or force or encourage the use of digital assets. It confirms in statute the existence of another category of things that can attract personal property rights, thereby seeking to reduce ambiguity in transactions involving digital assets. However, the Bill does not define the boundaries of a third type of property or determine its legal treatment. It leaves that for the courts to develop via common law. In doing so, it will reduce the time spent by the courts here on questions of the categorisation of objects under personal property rights and will allow them to focus instead on the substantive issues before them, reducing legal fees for the individuals and businesses involved. The Bill ensures that our laws are modern, up to date and future-proofed and that we are an attractive place in which to deal with digital assets. I commend the Bill to the House.

845 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 12:08 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification