The Dekagram: 14th August 2023

• Published date: 14 August 2023
• Law Firm: Deka Chambers
• Author: Ms Sarah Prager

Our eye was caught this week by a recent judgment by Mellor J in a cryptocurrency case. Not that the subject matter of the claim especially concerns travel and cross border practitioners; but the question of whether a party can rely on determinations of fact made in one case as evidence in another matter is one of universal application.

Wright v Coinbase, Wright v Payward [2023] EWHC 1893 (Ch)

Dr Wright claims to be the creator of the Bitcoin System; the person who wrote the original Bitcoin code and (using a pseudonym) published a White Paper describing it. He is bringing four actions for passing off in the Business and Property Courts. At the heart of each of these actions is the question of whether he was the person who wrote the Code and then the White Paper under an assumed name. Mellor J has the pleasure and privilege of hearing all four actions, and heard a CMC on 25^th and 26^th May during which, amongst other issues such as the Defendants' application for security for costs (at [45] to [91]), he considered (at [27] to [44]) the status of findings of fact made in previous proceedings. That issue arose because both sets of Defendants wished to amend their Defences to plead that:

The First Claimant is and has been involved in various proceedings, in this jurisdiction and overseas, in which his evidence (including documentary evidence adduced by him) has been the subject of serious adverse...