“Strategic Advocacy” secured the return of funds paid in cryptocurrency

The law firm “Strategic Advocacy” successfully represented a client in a complex case involving the recovery of funds paid in cryptocurrency. Such cases are rare, and there is virtually no case law on this issue, as the specific nature of cryptocurrency transfers makes it extremely difficult to prove receipt of funds and identify the recipient.

The crux of the matter

The buyer agreed with the seller to purchase a house worth $190,000. The parties agreed to a payment plan, including the use of cryptocurrency. Over the course of a year, the buyer transferred cryptocurrency to the seller in an amount equivalent to $175,000.

When the buyer proposed proceeding with the property transfer, the seller stated that he had no intention of selling the house. During the court proceedings, in an attempt to avoid liability, he claimed that he had not received any funds from the buyer.

The situation was complicated by the fact that no written contract had been signed between the parties, and payments were made via cryptocurrency wallets.

Evidentiary Issues in the Case

Cryptocurrency transfers have their own unique characteristics: they are more difficult to track and link to a specific individual. Ukraine also lacks established legal mechanisms that would make it easy to identify the owner of a crypto wallet.

Therefore, in this case, it was necessary not only to prove the fact of the transfer itself, but also to confirm that the recipient of the cryptocurrency was indeed the seller.

Evidence in the case

During the court proceedings, an expert in cryptocurrency technology was called to testify, explaining to the court the specifics of tracking cryptocurrency transactions and the difficulty of identifying the owner of a crypto wallet.

In addition, correspondence between the parties was submitted to the court, which included the crypto wallet address to which the transfers were made.

At the same time, law enforcement agencies were investigating a criminal case regarding the possible misappropriation of these funds. After all, it was unclear whether the seller had intended to misappropriate the funds from the very beginning or had reneged on the agreements after receiving them.

As part of the investigation, a search was conducted during which a mobile phone was seized. It was subsequently established that the phone number appearing in the correspondence belonged to the seller. These circumstances served as crucial evidence in court.

Court ruling

Based on the evidence presented, the court ruled in favor of the buyer and ordered the seller and his wife to pay $175,000.

After the decision became final, the defendant voluntarily returned the funds to the client.

This case demonstrates that even in situations involving the use of cryptocurrency and the absence of written agreements, the parties’ rights can be protected in court provided there is sufficient evidence and the work of a qualified team of lawyers.