Those who invested in Bitcoin should not expect to get it back!
On October 12, the UK High Court ruled in the “Qian Zhimin case” (Blue Sky Gerrard case) that Chinese investors’ claims to property rights in the Bitcoins involved should be governed by Chinese law, not British law. The case involves more than 61,000 Bitcoins.
The ruling shows that the investment fraud occurred in China between 2014 and 2017, involving funds of about 40.228 billion yuan (about 4.1 billion pounds), some of which were used to buy Bitcoin. In 2018, British police seized related devices and some private keys, including those Bitcoins.
The court held that the investors’ location, the place where the false statements were made, the place where the funds were paid, and the place where the Bitcoins were originally purchased were all mainly in China, and rejected the investors’ arguments relying on British law and asset tracing rules.
This ruling only resolved the issue of applicable law. It has not yet determined whether the investors own these Bitcoins, nor has it decided how the assets should be distributed. Further review of specific rights and evidence will still be required under Chinese law.
On October 12, the UK High Court ruled in the “Qian Zhimin case” (Blue Sky Gerrard case) that Chinese investors’ claims to property rights in the Bitcoins involved should be governed by Chinese law, not British law. The case involves more than 61,000 Bitcoins.
The ruling shows that the investment fraud occurred in China between 2014 and 2017, involving funds of about 40.228 billion yuan (about 4.1 billion pounds), some of which were used to buy Bitcoin. In 2018, British police seized related devices and some private keys, including those Bitcoins.
The court held that the investors’ location, the place where the false statements were made, the place where the funds were paid, and the place where the Bitcoins were originally purchased were all mainly in China, and rejected the investors’ arguments relying on British law and asset tracing rules.
This ruling only resolved the issue of applicable law. It has not yet determined whether the investors own these Bitcoins, nor has it decided how the assets should be distributed. Further review of specific rights and evidence will still be required under Chinese law.