Bitcoin SV Claims Limited by Court Ruling

The UK Court of Appeal has partially dismissed a $13.3 billion lawsuit against Binance and other exchanges. The case involved allegations of anti-competitive conduct

The UK Court of Appeal has partially dismissed a $13.3 billion lawsuit against Binance and other exchanges over the 2019 delisting of Bitcoin SV (BSV).

The case arose when BSV holders sued Binance, Kraken, ShapeShift, and Bittylicious for allegedly anti-competitive conduct that drove down the token’s price.

The plaintiffs argued that Binance’s decision to delist BSV limited the coin’s chance to grow like Bitcoin (BTC) or Bitcoin Cash (BCH), claiming $13.3 billion in damages—352 times the value of BSV held at the time.

However, the court found this claim unsustainable, noting that BSV had viable substitutes and lacked uniqueness in the market. It ruled that holders cannot base losses on the hypothetical growth of unrelated tokens.

Moreover, the court applied the market mitigation rule to dismiss claims based on future price speculation after the delisting became public. It emphasized that crypto tokens are volatile and similar to shares and other tradable financial assets.

The ruling confirms that damages must reflect actual loss, not missed opportunities from possible market movement, as the court prioritized a realistic assessment of financial harm.

The court’s decision has limited Binance’s legal risk and significantly reduced the potential payout.

Binance, Kraken, ShapeShift, and Bittylicious were accused of delisting BSV to damage its value and prevent it from reaching the same levels as BTC or BCH.

The ruling has narrowed the case’s scope, with only limited access and sale timing claims remaining viable.

Those who could not access or sell BSV immediately after the delisting may still have a case, but the court ruled that losses must be concrete and measurable.

After the delisting, some users had difficulty accessing their BSV on Binance, while others sold quickly and recorded immediate, quantifiable losses. These claims could proceed.

However, the court struck down the main claim, which sought to hold Binance liable for the difference between BSV’s price at the time of delisting and the potential highs it could have reached if listed.

Binance argued that the claimants retained ownership of BSV and could act freely after the delisting event. The court agreed, stating that knowledge of the delisting removed any responsibility from Binance.

This finding significantly undermined the larger claim for damages, which aimed to compensate users for the potential gains they missed out on due to Binance’s actions.

Despite dismissing the main claim, the British judges allowed smaller claims against Binance to continue.

These include cases where users could not access their BSV following the delisting action, or sold quickly and recorded immediate, quantifiable losses.

These claims could proceed under a revised legal framework, with a much lower total exposure.

The court stressed that only the pre-delisting value and proven additional losses could be claimed. Binance remains involved but with reduced liability and no obligation to cover projected gains.

Meanwhile, Binance continues to dominate crypto trading, with Dune Analytics reporting over $5 billion in daily wallet volume. The UK is also increasing regulatory oversight, mandating detailed transaction reporting from 2026.

Binance and other platforms must comply with growing legal and regulatory scrutiny across the crypto industry.