English High Court Rules Tether’s USDT Stablecoin Counts as Property

As a seasoned crypto investor with a keen eye for legal intricacies, I find the recent ruling by England’s High Court of Justice regarding Tether’s USDT stablecoin as a significant milestone in the crypto industry. Having navigated through countless market fluctuations and regulatory uncertainties, it is heartening to see our digital assets gaining recognition under established legal frameworks.

As a crypto investor, I recently learned that the High Court of Justice for England and Wales has ruled that Tether’s USDT stablecoin, the leading one by market capitalization, can be categorized as property. This decision comes just a day after the U.K. government initiated legislation to clarify the status of cryptocurrencies in our jurisdiction. In simpler terms, this means my USDT holdings are considered a type of asset under English and Welsh law.

In his court submission made on Thursday, Judge Richard Farnhill stated that USDT (Tether) is subject to property rights under English law. This digital currency can be traced and it holds the same potential to become a part of a trust, just like any other physical or digital property.

The case was brought by Fabrizio D’Aloia, who said he was the victim of a cryptocurrency scam, and relates mainly to crypto exchange Bitkub, named as one of seven defendants including two unidentified people and Binance, the largest crypto exchange by volume traded. The case against Binance was settled, according to the filing.

In simpler terms, D’Aloia stated that he was tricked into transferring approximately 2.5 million pounds (equivalent to $3.3 million) in cryptocurrencies USDT and Circle’s USDC to an unknown individual. This suspect then moved the funds across several digital wallets before they were cashed out as real money by another unidentified person through Gate and Bitkub platforms.

On Wednesday, the government put forward a proposal to categorize cryptocurrencies similarly to traditional property. This bill was prepared by an independent organization known as the Law Commission, and it was initially discussed in Parliament for the first time. The decision made by Farnhill aligns with the bill’s view that crypto isn’t considered “something you possess,” which includes items like money and cars, nor is it “something you act upon,” such as debt or stocks. However, it is still categorized as property overall.

Nonetheless, the judge sided with Bitkub, stating that D’Aloia holds no right to sue the company since it didn’t receive anything from him.

According to the court document, the lawsuit brought forth by D’Aloia against the cryptocurrency trading platform Aux Cayes Fintech was dismissed.