ANALYSIS OF THEORIES ON THE LEGAL CAPACITY OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SYSTEMS IN CROSS-BORDER COMMERCIAL RELATIONS
Keywords:
cross-border trade, artificial intelligence, legal capacity, quasi-subject, electronic person, artificial intelligence liability, international tradeAbstract
This article examines the legal capacity of artificial intelligence systems in cross-border commercial relations. It analyses the views of domestic and foreign scholars regarding the possibility of recognising artificial intelligence as a subject of law, as well as the related issues of legal liability. Based on the conducted analysis, the author presents his position on the matters under consideration. The study explores the possibility of recognising artificial intelligence as a subject of law, its role in contractual relations, and the issues associated with intellectual property, personal data security, and liability for damage caused. It also examines the approaches adopted by the Romano-Germanic, Anglo-Saxon, and Islamic legal systems towards the regulation of artificial intelligence, as well as legal trends in the European Union, the United States, and other jurisdictions. The study substantiates that, at the present stage, recognising artificial intelligence as an independent subject of law would be premature. Nevertheless, the further development of technology does not preclude the possibility of recognising artificial intelligence as a quasi-subject possessing a distinct legal status. The article also substantiates the need to recognise artificial intelligence as an object of legal regulation in cross-border commercial relations and to establish an appropriate framework governing liability.
Downloads
References
Abbott, R. (2016). I think, therefore I invent: Creative computers and the future of patent law. Boston College Law Review, 57(4), 1079–1126. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2727884
Bayern, S. (2016). The implications of modern business-entity law for the regulation of autonomous systems. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 7(2), 297–309. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X00005729
Born, G. B. (2014). International commercial arbitration (2nd ed.). Kluwer Law International.
Bradford, A. (2020). The Brussels effect: How the European Union rules the world. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190088583.001.0001
Bryson, J. J., Diamantis, M. E., & Grant, T. D. (2017). Of, for, and by the people: The legal lacuna of synthetic persons. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 25(3), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10506-017-9214-9
Burri, M. (2017). The governance of data and data flows in trade agreements: The pitfalls of legal adaptation. UC Davis Law Review, 51(1), 65–133.
El-Kady, R. (2026). Navigating the intersection of law and innovation: The criminal legal framework for self-driving cars in the AI-driven automotive industry. In A. Skeja, V. Ramadani, N. Sadiku-Dushi, M. Dabić, M. Valeri, & G. Keskin (Eds.), Navigating AI in business: Strategies and insights across disciplines (pp. 365–387). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-02526-5_20
Emon, A. M. (2010). Islamic natural law theories. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199579006.001.0001
European Parliament. (2017, February 16). European Parliament resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on civil law rules on robotics (2015/2103(INL)) (P8_TA(2017)0051). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2017-0051_EN.html
Fazal, M. A. (2026). AI and Islamic jurisprudence: Re-reading contemporary fatwās for ethical possibilities in techno-social forms of life. Islamic Studies Review, 5(1), 91–116. https://doi.org/10.56529/isr.v5i1.540
Gulyamov, S. S., & Bozarov, S. S. (2022). Strategies and future prospects of development of artificial intelligence: World experience. World Bulletin of Management and Law, 9, 66–74. https://scholarexpress.net/index.php/wbml/article/view/841
International Chamber of Commerce, & World Trade Organization. (2025, December 11). Adopting AI for trade: Business insights to inform policy and practice. https://iccwbo.org/news-publications/report/adopting-ai-for-trade-business-insights-to-inform-policy-and-practice/
Mitchell, A. D., & Mishra, N. (2019). Regulating cross-border data flows in a data-driven world: How WTO law can contribute. Journal of International Economic Law, 22(3), 389–416.
Retto, J. (2017, November). Sophia, first citizen robot of the world. Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/321319964_SOPHIA_FIRST_CITIZEN_ROBOT_OF_THE_WORLD
Shrestha, S. (2021). Nature, nurture, or neither? Liability for automated and autonomous artificial intelligence torts based on human design and influences. George Mason Law Review, 29(1), 375. https://lawreview.gmu.edu/print__issues/nature-nurture-or-neither-liability-for-automated-and-autonomous-artificial-intelligence-torts-based-on-human-design-and-influences/
Solum, L. B. (1992). Legal personhood for artificial intelligences. North Carolina Law Review, 70(4), 1231–1287. https://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol70/iss4/4/
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law. (2024, July 15). UNCITRAL Model Law on Automated Contracting finalized by the UN Commission on International Trade Law. United Nations Information Service. https://unis.unvienna.org/unis/pressrels/2024/unisl362.html
Wagner, G. (2019). Robot liability. In S. Lohsse, R. Schulze, & D. Staudenmayer (Eds.), Liability for artificial intelligence and the Internet of Things: Münster colloquia on EU law and the digital economy IV (pp. 25–62). Nomos. https://doi.org/10.5771/9783845294797-25
Zarkadakis, G. (2018). Do we need new laws for artificial intelligence? World Economic Forum.
