header-logo header-logo

09 February 2024 / Sam Healey
Issue: 8058 / Categories: Features , Profession , Crypto , Cybercrime , Cyber
printer mail-detail

Crypto law: not clear cut?

157343
Sam Healey explores the legal liabilities of crypto platforms in digital transactions
  • Cryptocurrencies present a range of challenges, including jurisdictional issues and identifying wrongdoers and liability.
  • Crypto platforms must comply with anti–money laundering (AML) regulations and be registered with the FCA. But more legal clarity is needed.

In the rapidly evolving world of cryptocurrencies, questions of legality and responsibility are beginning to take centre stage. One of the most prominent among these concerns is the liability of cryptocurrency platforms when investors are scammed or their cryptoassets are stolen.

To shed light on this topic, we must first outline the duties and responsibilities these platforms bear, and explain what rights and avenues for recompense an investor might have in the aftermath of a scam that targets digital assets.

Cryptoasset exchange providers are virtual spaces where users can trade, hold or sell their cryptoassets. They are similar to traditional financial institutions in some aspects, although distinct in operation given the nature of how the business takes place. So the question of liability

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll