The Supreme Court of British Columbia has ruled in favor of blockchain startup Copytrack that accidentally sent 530 ETH to an investor.
The Supreme Court of British Columbia, Canada has just settled a case that will potentially set the precedent for accidental cryptocurrency transfers in the future. Blockchain startup Copytrack had mistakenly sent 530 ETH to a cryptocurrency investor who had participated in the company’s initial coin offering. The ruling, posted October 4, explained that the startup intended to track and recover the cryptocurrency and was now authorized to do so.
The investor in question, Brian Wall, reportedly purchased 530 Copytrack tokens during the token sale. Instead of sending him CPY tokens as was originally intended, the startup ended up erroneously sending 530 ETH to his wallet instead. According to documents released by the court,
The value of the CPY Tokens intended to be transferred was about $780 CDN. The value of the Ether Tokens that were transferred was about $495,000 CDN.
At today’s market value, 530 ETH would be valued at around $119,800, whereas the equivalent amount of CPY tokens would barely amount to even $25.
The court ordered Brian Wall to return all the ETH tokens immediately, which he had refused to do at a previous date. However, Wall claimed that his Ethereum wallet had been compromised and he was unable to return the tokens. The court statement read,
On February 25, 2018, the Ether Tokens were transferred out of the Wall Wallet into five different wallets. Wall asserts that these transfers were made by an unknown third party who unlawfully accessed his wallet without his knowledge or consent. This gives rise to his principal defence to Copytrack’s claim, namely that he no longer has control of the Ether Tokens and is therefore unable to return them.
Making the situation even messier, Brian Wall has since passed away, which leaves Copytrack with no clear path for future investigation. Ultimately, Copytrack now has legal authorization to track down the tokens, but it remains to be seen whether or not it will be successful in its endeavor. Regardless, the Supreme Court’s decision will set a lasting precedent in similar cases.