The judicial ruling for the return of the cryptocurrency sent erroneously could constitute a precedent


A blog post on the December 12 Commercial Law of the Oxford University Law School points out possible repercussions on encryption requests lost and stolen following a case in a Canadian court at the start of this issue. 39; year.

In the post, the SAFE researcher Frankfurt Grygoriy Pustovit notes the case of Copytrack Pte Ltd against Wall. The British Columbia Superior Trial Court ruled that the Ethereum token (ETH), which were erroneously sent by the plaintiff, Singapore startup blockchain Copytrack, to the defender, Brian Wall, must be returned to Copytrack.

The defendant mistakenly received 530 Ethereum coins from Copytrack instead of 530 CopyTrack tokens (CPY) that he would have had to receive after participating in the initial supply of Copytrack Coins (ICO). The Ethereum amounted to $ 495,000 ($ 370,482), while the value of the CPY tokens that it intended to purchase was $ 780 Canadian ($ 583) at the time.

"This precedent can have major repercussions on the execution of claims related to the lost or stolen cryptocurrency," says Pustovit, as the ruling allows the appellant to track down and retrieve tokens "in any hands that the Ether Tokens can currently be held" .

As professional digital asset tracking services develop, the legitimate owners of certain assets may track them down on a public registry and apparently replenish the tokens once they appear in the wallet of an exchange. Pustovit states that blockchains are not governed solely by their code, but also by the laws of the jurisdictions concerned.

While observing that cross-border enforcement of several national laws and regulations could prove difficult, the blog states that the encrypted businesses will probably comply with the judgments in the jurisdictions in which they have strategic interests.

Pustovit also states that the Canadian court "missed the opportunity" to define the legal nature of cryptocurrencies because "it could not be managed through summary judgment". Since the defendant had died, "there would have been no practical utility in sending this matter to the trial" The court then ruled that the Ethereum tokens are simply owned by the claimant and must be returned. Requests for conversion and detention remained uncertain.

While the legal status of cryptocurrencies in the jurisprudence remains confused, "there is a growing number of decisions recognizing that other intangible assets, eg funds, actions and mining interests, may be subject to conversion and holding requests. "

It is said that Canada is one of the most crypto-friendly countries, with its favorable industry regulation and low energy costs for crypto mining. In the summer of 2018, the Canadian government issued a draft official regulation for encrypted operators and payment operators.

Additional reporting by Helen Partz

[ad_2]Source link