ARTICLE
to bring its claim in another jurisdiction or against the many other Bitcoin software developers who were not joined to the claim. The Court’s obiter comments could also have broader relevance. The Court considered it potentially arguable that developers could be under some form of duty not to introduce malicious software bugs, act in their own interests to the detriment of users, allow software defects to go unremedied, or compromise the security of a Bitcoin network. These comments may indicate that there is space for claims which are less ambitious than TTL’s and where it is clearer that developers have acted improperly. In further obiter comments, the Court interpreted the two interim decisions that had considered the question of where cryptocurrency is situated. For the Court, the better view was that they had decided that cryptocurrency is situated not where its owner is domiciled, but where it is resident. This interpretation will be significant if it is followed in future; in respect of a corporation, country of residence can be much more difficult to ascertain than domicile. Of significance for English lawyers in particular is that this jurisdiction remains at the vanguard of a nascent area of dispute resolution. It will be difficult for serious practitioners to ignore these implications for long. Advising clients in this space The cryptocurrency space raises difficult issues for clients and practitioners and is very likely to require specialist advice. It involves complex technology, cross-border issues, novel questions of law and regulatory developments which are gathering pace domestically and abroad. Moreover, when digital assets are lost, there are particularly significant barriers to recovery. Such assets can be moved out of reach with speed, and through a mix of “on-chain” transactions (publicly but anonymously recorded) and “off-chain” transfers (not so recorded). Most cryptocurrency litigation in this jurisdiction has followed a similar model: a victim of a digital asset loss seeks a proprietary injunction and freezing and/or disclosure orders against persons unknown and/or the cryptocurrency exchange with which the assets were held. Tulip Trading is a different breed of case and may be part of a wider expansion in the sorts of cryptocurrency litigation arising in this jurisdiction.
John Davies (c), Edward Solomons (l) and Charles Falconer (r) at John’s Presidential Dinner, Lincoln’s Inn.
John Davies – OBI T UA RY –
W
e are deeply saddened to record the death of John Davies, a former President of Westminster & Holborn Law Society. John was an enthusiastic secretary of Holborn Law Society and following the merger of the Holborn and the Westminster Societies in 2001 he served as our new Society’s second President in 2002-2003.
Harmish Mehta
After reading English at St Catherine’s College Oxford he qualified as a solicitor in 1965. He joined Pattinson & Brewer in 1977 and was the firm’s much-loved and respected Senior Partner for many years until his retirement in 2019.
Matthew Allan
John’s main area of practice was commercial conveyancing, acting for many of his firm’s trade union clients. He was a long time member of the WHLS Professional Matters Committee, invariably injecting good sense and good humour into its deliberations.
Senior Legal Assistant Astraea Group
Solicitor-Advocate Astraea Group
John Wardell QC, Bobby Friedman and Sri Carmichael of Wilberforce Chambers, instructed by Ontier LLP, appeared for Tulip Trading Limited; James Ramsden QC of Astraea Group, instructed by Bird & Bird LLP, appeared for 12 defendants; Matthew Thorne of 4 Pump Court, instructed by O'Melveny & Myers LLP, appeared for two defendants.
John had a wonderful gift for friendship and his sudden death has devastated his former colleagues and friends and robbed him and his wife Brenda of a well-deserved post-retirement life of English cricket and Italian sunshine. We send our condolences to Brenda and to their sons and grandchildren. There will be a fuller appreciation in the next edition of Central London Lawyer. CENTRAL LONDON LAWYER | 19
