If a smart contract operates against the user’s intent, potential recourse is based on either common contract law, regulatory frameworks, dispute resolution processes, and/or blockchain governance. Common contract law should permit remedies if the smart contract execution is not what the mutual intent of the contracting parties was, or if it includes fraud or a programming mistake. Courts may have authority to reform, rescind, or result in damages. And similarly, if a smart contract is not mutually intended due to unfair clauses or deceptive practices, consumer protection laws may come into play, but the most beneficial impact may be in regulated industries like finance and real estate dealing with unregulated contracts (such as Bank of America or another bank issuing contracts). Yet, jurisdiction challenges arise since smart contracts operate on decentralized networks, creating difficulty enforcing potential rights. As it relates to dispute, parties may use hybrid contracts to invoke use of smart contracts while, a contracting party can define a legal proceeding Kingdom court jurisdiction is a legal agreement or an agreement to having legal elements such as like an agreement to arbitrate, or define that the arbitration would be defined under governing laws, or an agreement to use decentralized dispute resolution (such as Kleros or another similar platform). In some circumstances, or with some coding protocols, parties may look solely to blockchain governance to resolve. For example, multi-signature contracts (or another similar coding protocol) might help the contracting parties collectively resolve post-execution code delays or mistakes if parties agree to modify the code. And then in the case of consent of the majority of maybe all other contracting parties, there might be the ability to even get each decentralized network to simply intervene or simply agree with protocol or process to fix the problems or errors (as in even in the Ethereum DAO hard fork). And finally, if none of these other remedies provide potential outcome benefitting, parties might engage legal proceedings. However, once again, getting a decentralized system agreement is extremely challenging. To minimize all these potential problems with executing a smart contract or providing the best protections, legal and technical audits and pre-dispute terms and agreements, and using hybrid contracts to ensure legal fallback, should be evaluated and employed as a process.