{"id":28090,"date":"2025-05-22T12:46:50","date_gmt":"2025-05-22T12:46:50","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dogewisperer.com\/?p=28090"},"modified":"2025-05-22T12:46:50","modified_gmt":"2025-05-22T12:46:50","slug":"uk-court-partially-dismisses-bitcoin-sv-investors-lawsuit-against-binance","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dogewisperer.com\/?p=28090","title":{"rendered":"UK court partially dismisses Bitcoin SV investor\u2019s lawsuit against Binance"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\"UK<\/p>\n

The United Kingdom\u2019s Court of Appeal has partially dismissed a lawsuit brought by Bitcoin SV investors against major crypto exchanges, including Binance, for allegedly conspiring to delist the token in 2019.<\/p>\n

In a judgment<\/a> handed down on May 21, the court ruled that investors who held BSV through the delisting period (classified as \u201csub-class B\u201d) were not entitled to billions in speculative damages based on BSV\u2019s hypothetical growth.<\/p>\n

These investors had claimed over 8.9 billion British pounds ($11.9 billion) in damages, asserting that Binance\u2019s delisting deprived holders of the chance to profit from BSV\u2019s potential rise to a \u201ctop-tier cryptocurrency\u201d like Bitcoin (BTC<\/a>) or Bitcoin Cash (BCH<\/a>).<\/p>\n

The court rejected this \u201cforegone growth effect\u201d theory, stating, \u201cBSV was obviously not a unique cryptocurrency without reasonably similar substitutes,\u201d pointing to the representative\u2019s own use of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash as comparators.<\/p>\n

Sub-class B\u2019s central claim was that delisting led to a missed opportunity to benefit from price appreciation. However, the court determined that those investors had ample chance to mitigate losses by selling or reinvesting in other crypto assets.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey had a duty to mitigate their losses,\u201d wrote Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos. \u201cThey cannot recover losses that they could reasonably have mitigated.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"UK
UK court ruling against Bitcoin SV investor\u2019s lawsuit. Source: Caselaw<\/em><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Related: <\/strong><\/em>Bitcoin SV investors attempt to resurrect 2019 Binance lawsuit<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Court strikes down \u201closs of a chance\u201d argument<\/h2>\n

The appeal also challenged the Tribunal\u2019s application of the \u201cmarket mitigation rule,\u201d arguing that such issues should be left for trial.<\/p>\n

The court dismissed that notion, stating the rule clearly applies to freely tradable assets like BSV, and that the damages must be measured shortly after the delisting.<\/p>\n

An additional argument concerning the \u201closs of a chance\u201d to benefit from future price gains was also struck down. The court ruled it \u201cflawed as a matter of principle,\u201d noting that \u201ccryptocurrencies are, by their nature, volatile investments.\u201d<\/p>\n

Binance\u2019s limited strike-out application ultimately succeeded, with the court stating that even if some holders were unaware of the delisting, \u201cthey could never claim more than the total value of their holding before the delisting events plus any quantifiable consequential losses.\u201d<\/p>\n

Related: <\/strong><\/em>Binance wants arbitration for all members of securities class suit<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Binance seeks to dismiss FTX lawsuit<\/h2>\n

On May 16, Binance filed a motion to dismiss a $1.76 billion<\/a> lawsuit filed by the FTX estate, arguing that the claims are legally flawed and an attempt to shift responsibility for FTX\u2019s collapse.<\/p>\n

The exchange stated the downfall of FTX stemmed from internal fraud, not external manipulation, citing Sam Bankman-Fried\u2019s conviction on multiple fraud charges.<\/p>\n

Binance has asked the court to dismiss all claims with prejudice. The FTX estate has not yet filed its response.<\/p>\n

Magazine: <\/strong><\/em>TradFi is building Ethereum L2s to tokenize trillions in RWAs: Inside story<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n