Startup Copytrack has achieved cancellation of incorrect transactions in the court despite the death of the recipient

0

Startup Copytrack has achieved cancellation of incorrect transactions in the court despite the death of the recipient

The uncertainty of the legal status of cryptocurrencies and the lack of a developed regulatory framework makes cryptologist carefully monitor all sorts of precedents. The Supreme court of the canadian province of British Columbia adopted a curious solution here, and access to the cryptocurrency after the death of the owner of the purse, and the cancellation of the transaction, the sender where said error.

The case set out in the judgment, is as follows: the plaintiff, a Singaporean company Copytrack specializing in management of digital content and copyright compliance in September 2017-February 2018 spent the ICO, in which an investor allocated her tokens CPY.

The defendant, Brian wall, took part in the ICO, expressing their desire to receive tokens CPY 530. However, as a result of a technical error Сopytrack transferred to the given address on 15 February 2018 not their tokens, and the same amount of air.

The cost of tokens CPY 530 at that date was estimated at 780 canadian dollars, while the cost 530 coins ether — 495 thousand canadian dollars.

Discovering his mistake, Copytrack immediately suggested the wall to return the resulting error in the air, but he never did.

Transaction parties exchanged letters on the matter, the wall had previously agreed to the return air and even ask for the address of the purse to Fund it 16 Feb.

Despite the fact that the address has been provided, funds have not been transferred, although the court found that during the period February 16-23 specified amount in the air was at the address of the purse wall.

And already on February 25 live from the purse of the wall was allocated to five other locations — the defendant, an unknown third party has undertaken these transactions without his knowledge and consent, i.e. the wall said that his wallet got hacked, means that he has agreed to return Copytrack, was kidnapped.

In the trial the wall died — it happened in may 2018.

Until the parties had enough time to debate on the legal status of cryptocurrencies in General and ether in particular, and whether the disputed batch of ether under the definition of property or is a digital form of money.

However, in September 2018, the judge came to the conclusion that regardless of the circumstances, to refuse Copytrack in its lawsuit claim “would be unfounded and unfair”. So, the court recognized the right Copytrack track and claim back these by mistake, funds in the amount 529,83 ether.

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.