Court Dismisses Bitcoin SV Investors 8.9 Billion Pound Claim Against Binance

The United Kingdom’s 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. In a judgment handed down on May 21, the court ruled that investors who held BSV through the delisting period (classified as “sub-class B”) were not entitled to billions in speculative damages based on BSV’s hypothetical growth. These investors had claimed over 8.9 billion British pounds in damages, asserting that Binance’s delisting deprived holders of the chance to profit from BSV’s potential rise to a “top-tier cryptocurrency” like Bitcoin (BTC) or Bitcoin Cash (BCH).

The court rejected this “foregone growth effect” theory, stating, “BSV was obviously not a unique cryptocurrency without reasonably similar substitutes,” pointing to the representative’s own use of Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash as comparators. Sub-class B’s 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. “They had a duty to mitigate their losses,” wrote Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos. “They cannot recover losses that they could reasonably have mitigated.”

The appeal also challenged the Tribunal’s application of the “market mitigation rule,” arguing that such issues should be left for trial. 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. An additional argument concerning the “loss of a chance” to benefit from future price gains was also struck down. The court ruled it “flawed as a matter of principle,” noting that “cryptocurrencies are, by their nature, volatile investments.”

Binance’s limited strike-out application ultimately succeeded, with the court stating that even if some holders were unaware of the delisting, “they could never claim more than the total value of their holding before the delisting events plus any quantifiable consequential losses.”

This ruling underscores the complexities involved in legal disputes within the cryptocurrency industry, particularly when it comes to the valuation and mitigation of losses related to delisted tokens. The court’s decision to dismiss the speculative damages claim highlights the importance of investors taking proactive measures to mitigate potential losses, rather than relying on hypothetical future gains. The judgment also reinforces the principle that freely tradable assets, such as cryptocurrencies, are subject to market mitigation rules, which require damages to be assessed based on the value of the asset at the time of the delisting event.