You are always going to have disagreements about what the words mean in the context of particular a case. I can see smart contract tools continuing to evolve t

You are always going to have disagreements about what the words mean in the context of particular a case. I can see smart contract tools continuing to evolve to help draft or validate contract language. There are some enterprise contract management systems that do some this already. But, if things go sideways, IRL facts have to be interpreted in view of the contract you will still need lawyers and courts. Also, not sure how equitable grounds for breach could be accounted for. A person can have the law (contract, statutes, etc.) squarely on her side and still lose a case because of equitable reasons that are not anticipated by the contract or statutes at play. 2 + 2 doesn't always equal 4 in a court of law. And, if such systems become available, it seems unlikely that contracts will more understandable to layman. Instead of trusting their lawyers or legalese, people will have to trust the code/proofs. edit: typos 2x