PANAMA Law and Practice Contributed by: Teresa Carballo and Edgar Young, Pacifica Legal
tions, and actions involving sums of money or mov- able effects as movable property. That said, this remains an analogical classification, not a settled crypto-specific rule. There is no developed Panamanian court precedent yet confirming exactly how a court would classify crypto-assets in a prop- erty dispute. The SMV stated in Opinion 07-2018 that, under current Panamanian law, cryptocurrencies are not, by themselves, securities, money, or electronic currency, but that does not prevent them from being treated as private assets for civil and commercial pur- poses. The legal remedies are broadly the same as for other assets: contractual claims, ownership claims, dam- ages, unjust enrichment, fraud claims, injunctive relief, and, where appropriate, criminal complaints. The practical enforcement is different. In tangible property cases, a court can identify, seize, or deliver the physical asset. With crypto-assets, the key issue is control. Evidence will usually include wallet addresses, private-key control, multi-signature authority, custody records, transaction hashes, block- chain analytics, exchange records, corporate approv- als, and contractual documents. The Civil Code allows movable and immovable prop- erty to be reclaimed through ownership actions; Arti- cle 583 provides that movable and immovable prop- erty may be re-vindicated, while Article 450 states that possession of movable property acquired in good faith is equivalent to title, subject to the right of a per- son who lost the movable property or was unlawfully deprived of it to reclaim it. In the context of crypto- assets, a court would likely focus on who has lawful title or contractual entitlements and who has practical control over the wallet, account, or keys. Enforcement is much easier when a custodian, an exchange, an escrow agent, a trust, or a similar entity holds assets. It is harder where assets are fully self- custodied and have already been moved beyond the defendant’s control. Panama has no crypto-specific rule for when owner- ship of crypto-assets transfers. In practice, a transfer
should be determined by the parties’ agreement and the transfer of control. For ordinary contracts, Article 1109 of the Civil Code provides that contracts are perfected by consent and bind the parties not only to what is expressly agreed but also to consequences arising from good faith, usage, and law. Article 1112 requires consent, a cer- tain object, and a cause of obligation, and Article 1113 provides that consent is formed by offer and accept- ance. For sales, Article 1215 defines a sale as a contract in which one party undertakes to deliver a determinate thing and the other party pays a certain price in money or a sign representing money. Delivery rules are also relevant: Article 1232 treats delivery as placing the thing in the buyer’s power and possession; Article 1233 deals with delivery of movable property; and Article 1234 provides that, for incorporeal property, delivery may occur by placing title documents in the buyer’s power or by allowing the buyer to exercise the right with the seller’s consent. For self-custodied crypto-assets, the cleanest posi- tion is that transfer occurs when the asset is moved on-chain to the recipient’s wallet, or when the recipi- ent otherwise obtains exclusive control, subject to the parties’ agreed confirmation standard. For custodied crypto-assets, transfer may occur by book entry or account credit under the custodian’s terms, though this may create a contractual claim against the custo- dian rather than direct possession of the asset. The contract should clearly specify when the trans- fer occurs: upon smart-contract execution, after a specified number of confirmations, upon credit to a custodial account, or upon release from escrow or multisignature control. It should also address failed transactions, mistaken transfers, forks, chain reorgan- isations, compromised keys, and sanctioned wallet addresses. For tokenised real-world assets, the token and the underlying asset must be separated. Transferring a token does not automatically transfer legal title to real estate, shares, intellectual property, or other reg- istered assets if Panamanian law requires a public
460 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook