- High Court confirms cryptocurrency is property, grants proprietary injunction and protective orders (AA v Persons Unknown)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Dispute Resolution analysis: In granting an interim proprietary injunction further to a cyberattack and payment of ransom in Bitcoin, the High Court embraced the UK Jurisdictional Task Force (UKJT) Legal Statement on Cryptoassets and Smart Contracts and, importantly, confirmed that cryptoassets are property. The interim injunction was also supported by ancillary orders intended to better police and protect it, including orders: (i) for a private hearing; (ii) preservation of the applicant’s anonymity (given the risk of further cyberattacks); (iii) to identify those responsible and now holding the Bitcoin; and (iv) for alternative service given the urgency and to seek to preserve the Bitcoin. The case exemplifies the court’s responsiveness in granting urgent relief and ancillary orders in respect of sophisticated cyber incidents in an increasingly complex FinTech landscape. Written by Danielle Carr, partner, at Rosenblatt Limited.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial