header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
07 July 2023 / Lauren Pardoe
Issue: 8032 / Categories: Features , Profession , Cyber , Technology , Cybercrime
printer mail-detail

Cryptocurrency watch: tiptoeing through the tulips

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
129411
Could software developers be held accountable in cryptocurrency hacking cases? Lauren Pardoe considers the definition of ‘fiduciary’ in a fast-developing area of the law
  • A recent jurisdiction challenge has raised the question of whether cryptocurrency network developers are accountable as fiduciaries.
  • The Court of Appeal concluded it is possible for developers to meet the fiduciary definition.
  • This may have implications for victims of cryptocurrency fraud.

Cryptocurrency is a new and fast-developing area, in which there has to date been little in the way of judicial intervention, and in which there is little regulation. The argument lies in whether the developers of cryptocurrency networks, working on behalf of bitcoin owners, are accountable as fiduciaries if such networks are hacked, as seen in Tulip Trading Ltd (a Seychelles company) v Van Der Laan and others [2023] EWCA Civ 83, [2023] All ER (D) 27 (Feb).

Case summary

This claim was brought by a Seychelles-registered company, Tulip Trading Ltd, which is the owner of some bitcoin (valued at approximately $4bn as of April 2021), held across four cryptocurrency

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

Read All
Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: No such thing as a ‘Welsh seat’
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
NLJ this week: Jury reform risks justice for efficiency’s sake
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
NLJ this week: Crypto fightback offers ‘new frontier for law’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
NLJ this week: Time to revive the duty to report crime?
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
NLJ this week: When are experts truly ‘necessary’?
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll