 [2025] HKCFI 4941, P, a victim of cryptocurrency theft, sought and was granted 

 and unknown person(s) with control over wallet addresses of the traced cryptocurrencies 

P sought to join and obtain discovery against the operators of the cryptocurrency exchange platform, Binance, described as “Binance Operators”. The application was contested by Binance Holdings Ltd and later Nest Services Ltd, both of whom operate Binance.

At the first substantive hearing, DHCJ MC Law SC held 

that P could not seek interim relief against “Binance Operators” as “persons unknown” because the identity of at least one entity was known: 

[2020] 1 WLR 2802. Further, concerns were raised that the formulation of “unknown persons” was too wide, potentially encompassing innocent persons: 

 was discharged and the hearing adjourned for further argument.

At the second substantive hearing, notwithstanding that there was a serious question to be tried, the proprietary injunction was discharged:

, there was no justification to proceed on an 

basis against Binance. The fact that P wished to proceed 

against D1 on the ground that D1 was allegedly the thief did not justify P’s lack of notice to Binance.

, there was material non-disclosure. P failed to disclose (1) relevant pre-injunction correspondence with Binance on the fact that one of the frozen addresses consisted of pooled funds from various users of Binance and (2) the potential defences of Binance (e.g. relating to the nature of the address as a pooled fund).

, the application for re-grant was dismissed: because (1) the Court cannot allow considerations of P’s case being an alleged theft by D1 to undermine the public interest/policy objectives in requiring full and frank disclosure, (2) the material non-disclosure was not innocent, and (3) P was a foreign plaintiff such that it was unclear that he could satisfy the undertaking as to damages.

, instructed by Henry Yu & Associates, for P (first substantive hearing only). 

 and Sharon Yuen, instructed by HSF, for the 3

成员

加入天博

引述成员

关于最新判案书的更多文章

CFI Applies Established Principles on Ex Parte Applications in Cryptocurrency Theft and Discharges Worldwide Mareva and Proprietary Injunctions

关于

成员

实习

最新动向