
London’s High Court rules that Chinese law, rather than English law, must govern ownership claims to 61,000 Bitcoin.
Chinese fraud victims seeking to recover 61,000 Bitcoin seized by the British government lost a key legal battle after London’s High Court ruled that Chinese law governs claims to the multi-billion-dollar assets.
AI-generated summary
The dispute stems from an investment fraud scheme orchestrated by Zhimin Qian between 2014 and 2017.
Chinese fraud victims seeking to recover 61,000 Bitcoin seized by the British government have lost a key legal battle after London’s High Court ruled that Chinese law, rather than English law, should govern claims to the assets.
On Monday, Justice Mark Turner rejected arguments for applying English law or a combination of English and Chinese law to the victims’ ownership claims. The judge ruled that Chinese law must determine whether the claimants have property rights in the seized Bitcoin, leaving the validity of claims for subsequent proceedings.
“The relevant damage occurred in China. The Applicants parted with their money in China,” Turner wrote. “The contractual relationships thereby induced were entered into in China.”
The dispute stems from an investment fraud scheme orchestrated by Zhimin Qian between 2014 and 2017, with British authorities seizing the assets during a money-laundering investigation. In March, victims challenged a proposed compensation arrangement involving a Chinese redress scheme, arguing that it could leave British authorities with much of the gains from Bitcoin’s appreciation.
The victims had sought to apply English law because it could have allowed them to claim direct ownership of the Bitcoin, rather than merely seek compensation as creditors. However, the UK ruling does not determine who ultimately owns the seized assets, with the victims’ property rights under Chinese law still to be assessed.
Fraud victims plan to appeal Bitcoin ruling
According to a Financial Times report, Law firm Fieldfisher, which represents claimants in the dispute, is pursuing an appeal against Turner’s ruling.
Despite the ruling, the case will remain before the High Court in London rather than being transferred to a Chinese court. FT reported that the next stage will involve expert evidence on Chinese law to determine whether the victims can establish ownership interests in the Bitcoin.
The Crown Prosecution Service told the FT that a further hearing would examine how Chinese law applies and whether any victims can establish an interest in the seized assets.
The dispute involves more than 128,000 investors reportedly affected by the fraud, according to earlier Cointelegraph coverage. In March, Cointelegraph reported that law firm Candey represented about 5,700 victims.
Prosecutors previously argued that certain claims could allow a smaller group of victims and litigation funders to recover more than their actual losses.
The seized Bitcoin is currently worth more than $5 billion, according to CoinGecko.
AI outlook — possibilities, not facts
Law firm Fieldfisher will pursue an appeal against Justice Turner’s ruling.
Very likely · Within months
Next stage will involve expert evidence on Chinese law in the High Court.
Very likely · Within months

South Korea's Supreme Court has established standardized procedures under Rule 3280 allowing courts to seize, transfer, and liquidate debtors' cryptocurrency to satisfy civil claims, effective November 1.

The CFTC issued two proposals defining event contracts as federal swaps while excluding casino-style gambling, as state-federal jurisdictional battles over prediction markets like Kalshi and Polymarket move toward a potential Supreme Court showdown.

The Texas Business Court dismissed a derivative lawsuit against Coinbase directors, ruling that Texas's mandatory pre-suit demand requirement applies to claims even if they originated while the company was incorporated in Delaware.

The NFL filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to review a Third Circuit ruling that classified Kalshi's sports prediction contracts as CFTC-regulated swaps, arguing instead that such contracts create new risk and should fall under state gambling oversight, citing concerns about manipulation, underage access, and CFTC understaffing.

Federal prosecutors told Judge Katherine Polk Failla that an appeals ruling upholding Bitcoin Fog founder Roman Sterlingov's conviction supports trying Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm in Manhattan.

Federal prosecutors cited the Bitcoin Fog appeals court ruling as supplemental authority against Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm's acquittal motion, arguing New York venue is proper.