It was affirmed by the UK Court of Appeals that losses sustained by BSV holders following the 2019 delisting should have been mitigated, resulting in the dismissal of damage claims amounting to £9 billion.
A high-profile legal challenge brought by BSV Claims Ltd—seeking up to £9 billion in damages related to the 2019 delisting of Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV)—was dismissed by the UK Court of Appeals.
Allegations were made by BSV Claims, representing approximately 243,000 BSV holders, that the coordinated delisting actions undertaken by Binance, Kraken, ShapeShift, and other exchanges had violated competition law and caused significant damage to the value of BSV.
Damages were being sought by a subgroup of approximately 75,000 investors who continuously held BSV from April 2019 to July 2022, not only for their initial losses but also for the “missed appreciation,” based on a speculative assumption that BSV might have risen to the ranks of leading cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin (BTC).
Market Mitigation Rule Affirmed by Court in BSV Delisting Case
The lawsuit had not been struck out by the Competition Appeal Tribunal, but the range of compensable damages was previously restricted by the tribunal.
That position was upheld by the Court of Appeal, which ruled that individuals aware of the delistings had the opportunity to mitigate their losses by liquidating their BSV holdings and reallocating to other tradable cryptocurrencies.
It was emphasized by the court that the claimants were not entitled to pursue compensation amounting to hundreds of times the value of the assets allegedly harmed by the defendants. Additionally, it was determined that BSV lacked uniqueness, as similar investment opportunities had been readily available.
The judgment criticized the Tribunal for not issuing a clearly defined order, stating that greater procedural clarity could have prevented the need for an appeal.
However, it was decisively ruled by the Court of Appeal that a trial was not necessary to assess whether members of sub-class B had feasible alternatives, with the “market mitigation rule” being reaffirmed as the governing principle.
Court Rejects Speculative Damages in BSV Delisting Lawsuit
It was also contended by BSV Claims that the damages ought to encompass the “loss of a chance” for BSV to have developed into a top-tier cryptocurrency.
This claim was also dismissed by the court, which concluded that it did not meet the required legal standards and amounted merely to unfounded market speculation.
The theory of damages presented by the representative, which was based on the assumption that BSV could have achieved a rise comparable to Bitcoin’s, was determined to be lacking in both legal precedent and practical credibility.
The claim was based on a projected 352-fold increase from BSV’s value prior to its delisting, a projection that was deemed implausible by the court for the purpose of awarding legal compensation.
An official order encapsulating the appellate judgment issued on May 21 is expected to be finalized collaboratively by the involved parties in due course. The legal proceedings are still ongoing for other investor subgroups, especially those who either sold BSV shortly after the delisting or lost access to their holdings entirely on platforms such as Kraken and Binance.
