Subcourt Update: Blockchain->Non Technical


Non Technical

(Blockchain->Non Technical)


Court Purpose

This subcourt is for small non-technical blockchain disputes. It is used for disputes on challenged tokens from Kleros Token² Curated Registry Dapp, Cryptoasset Transfer and Exchange Listing agreement escrow disputes.

  • Token² Curated Registry: A curated list of verified tokens submitted by users. This includes, logo,
    token name, contract address and ticker.
  • Cryptoasset Transfer Escrow: This escrow can be used by users to safely and securely transfer cryptoassets between two parties, even if one cryptoasset is on a chain other than Ethereum. Funds are locked in a smart contract until the other party has complied with the agreement or a dispute is brought. An example use case could be transferring ETH for BTC P2P without knowledge of the other party. You deposit ETH into the escrow, the other party sends BTC and you release ETH.
  • Exchange Listing Agreement Escrow: This escrow can be used to delegate listing of tokens to token listing agents. A reward is paid to the agent if the token is appropriately listed on the agreed upon exchange.

Required Skills

Jurors do not need a deep blockchain technical knowledge or coding skills but do need the ability to read blockchain explorers, look at cryptoassets listed on exchanges, understand how to verify a transaction and cross reference on-chain data.


  • Someone submits the PNK token with the address “0x87c260900c391559fd2816c9fbf078de37e2f520”. Someone challenges the listing as incorrect as the real PNK address is “0x93ed3fbe21207ec2e8f2d3c3de6e058cb73bc04d”.
  • Parties make a contract to exchange 1 BTC for 30 ETH. After the deadline agreed in the contract, the address of the BTC buyer still hasn’t been credited.
  • Contractor agreed to list clients token or coin in both USD and DAI pairings but did not deliver USD.



  • In escrow disputes involving privacy coins where “view key’s” are needed, those should be provided
    as evidence before the end of the evidence period.


We update this court to also allow exchange listing agreements.


Shouldn’t we move this to a file specific to Escrow policies as this does not apply to all interactions with Non-technical court. Seems like an unnecessary policy at such a high level.


Would you like to make a “Cryptoasset transfer section” for this policy to be in?


The proposal has been put to vote.


Maybe it’s own specific court is a better idea yes.


I’d say so yes. Unfortunately it’s already been put to a vote so that will have to wait for another month or so. We shouldn’t have rushed the voting on the newer proposals in my opinion.


I think the amount of disputes we will have there does not justify a new court.
But anyways, if you don’t like it, you can vote no.

It was important to have a new batch of votes for the Blockchain->Technical court to be ready for the ERC20 badge required for


The subcourt has been updated.