header-logo header-logo

Crypto law: not clear cut?

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

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll