比特幣SV（BSV）投資者針對Binance的集體訴訟被駁回

英國上訴法院駁回了比特幣SV（BSV）投資者針對Binance提起的133億美元集體訴訟中的大多數。

The Court of Appeal in the UK has dismissed most of a $13.3 billion class action suit filed by Bitcoin SV (BSV) investors against Binance. The lawsuit, which was filed by BSV Claims Limited, claimed that Binance and other major exchanges engaged in an illegal agreement to delisted BSV from their exchanges in 2019.

英國上訴法院駁回了比特幣SV（BSV）投資者對Binance提出的133億美元集體訴訟訴訟中的大多數。該訴訟是由BSV索賠有限公司提起的，聲稱Binance和其他主要交易所進行了非法協議，以使BSV在2019年從其交流中脫穎而出。

According to the lawsuit, the move to delist BSV was part of a broader conspiracy to enrich themselves at the expense of BSV investors, who were deprived of the opportunity to see BSV’s potential growth and market value be realized. However, in its May 21 ruling, the court sided with Binance, stating that the damages claimed by BSV investors were speculative and not supported by legal principles.

根據訴訟，向Delist BSV的舉動是一個更廣泛的陰謀，以犧牲BSV投資者為代價，而BSV投資者則被剝奪了看到BSV的潛在增長和市場價值的機會。但是，在5月21日的裁決中，法院支持Binance，並指出，BSV投資者所要求的損害是投機性的，沒有法律原則的支持。

The panel of judges, led by Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, found that the so-called “foregone growth effect” theory, which suggests that BSV would have reached price levels comparable to Bitcoin or Bitcoin Cash, could not stand. The ruling also noted that investing in BSV as a tradable asset allowed investors to mitigate their losses after it was removed from exchanges.

由勞斯萊斯大師杰弗裡·沃斯（Geoffrey Vos）領導的法官小組發現，所謂的“置換增長效應”理論表明，BSV將達到與比特幣或比特幣現金相當的價格水平，無法忍受。該裁決還指出，投資BSV作為可交易資產，允許投資者從交易所中刪除損失後減輕損失。

The prosecuting team showed that BSV investors viewed Bitcoin and Bitcoin Cash as alternatives, further weakening the claim that BSV was irreplaceable or unique.

起訴小組表明，BSV投資者將比特幣和比特幣現金視為替代品，進一步削弱了BSV不可替代或獨特的說法。

Sir Geoffrey Vos wrote, “They cannot recover losses that they could reasonably have mitigated. The law required the claimants to take reasonable steps to reduce their losses when the asset remained tradeable on other platforms.”

杰弗裡·沃斯爵士（Geoffrey Vos）爵士寫道：“他們無法收回能夠合理減輕的損失。法律要求索賠人採取合理的步驟，以減少資產在其他平台上可交易時減少損失。”

The court’s approval of the “market mitigation rule” makes investors responsible for acting prudently in the open market. If you had BSV at its delisting, designated as “sub-class B”, the judgment meant you had to sell or swap it for other cryptocurrencies to avoid further losses.

法院對“緩解市場規則”的批准使投資者負責在公開市場上謹慎行事。如果您將BSV的推薦給了“子級B”，則判決意味著您必須將其出售或換成其他加密貨幣，以避免進一步的損失。

The ruling also stated that damages should be assessed shortly after the delisting to measure the BSV value at the time. This aligns with the ruling on the class action claims against food manufacturers over the "generation factor" in a 2021 case.

該裁決還指出，損害賠償應在脫落後不久評估，以衡量當時的BSV值。這與2021年的“生成因素”對集體訴訟的裁決一致。

The appeal discussed the “loss of a chance” argument, where some claimed they would have potential gains if BSV hadn't been delisted. The judges deemed this opinion incorrect, highlighting that cryptocurrencies' volatility and the uncertainty of future market movements made such damages impossible to quantify.

上訴討論了“失去機會”的論點，其中一些人聲稱，如果BSV沒有被淘汰，他們將獲得潛在的收益。法官認為這一觀點是不正確的，強調了加密貨幣的波動性和未來市場變動的不確定性，因此無法量化這種損害。

The court added that the damages should be based on facts instead of speculative scenarios. This aligns with a 2006 case concerning a missed airline flight, where the court emphasized the need for damages to be based on real events and not unquantifiable possibilities.

法院補充說，損害應基於事實而不是投機性情況。這與2006年的案件有關，該案件涉及一架錯過的航空航班，法院強調需要基於真實事件而不是無法量化的可能性的損害賠償。

Consequently, the court limited the lawsuit’s scope and eliminated most of the class action’s demands for financial loss. This decision lessens the legal burden on Binance and other exchanges, such as Kraken and ShapeShift, which faced similar claims.

因此，法院限制了訴訟的範圍，並消除了集體訴訟對財務損失的大多數要求。這一決定減少了面臨類似主張的Braken和ShapeShift等義務和其他交流的法律負擔。

However, smaller claims from investors who couldn't access their BSV after its delisting or who sold their holdings despite suffering a loss can still be pursued. These claims, brought by members of "sub-class A" and "sub-class C", respectively, will proceed.

但是，投資者的較小索賠仍無法訪問BSV，但仍可以追求損失的損失。這些主張分別由“子類A”和“子類C”的成員提出。

The court stressed that any compensation awarded in these cases would be limited to the actual value lost, not speculative future gains. This aligns with a 2013 case concerning a deceased partner's pension rights, where the court ruled that damages should be based on the value of the asset at the time of loss.

法院強調，在這些情況下授予的任何賠償都將僅限於損失的實際價值，而不是投機性的未來收益。這與2013年有關死者合夥人的養老金權利的案件保持一致，法院裁定損害應基於損失時資產的價值。

The BSV Investors lawsuit is among several high-profile cases facing Binance in global jurisdictions. In a separate legal matter, Binance recently filed a motion to dismiss a $1.76 billion lawsuit from the FTX estate, arguing that internal fraud at FTX caused its collapse.

BSV投資者的訴訟是全球司法管轄區均值的幾項備受矚目的案件之一。在另一項法律事務中，Binance最近提出了一項動議，駁回了FTX遺產的17.6億美元訴訟，認為FTX的內部欺詐導致其崩潰。

This decision by the Court of Appeal has significant implications for the cryptocurrency industry and could influence pending class action suits against major exchanges.

上訴法院的這一決定對加密貨幣行業產生了重大影響，並可能影響尚待集體訴訟對重大交易所的訴訟。

As the court states, investors must actively manage their holdings, especially when assets remain tradeable. It also clarifies that the courts are not prepared to pay damages based on speculative price projections or uncertain future events.

正如法院所說，投資者必須積極管理其持股，尤其是當資產保持可交易時。它還澄清說，法院不准備根據投機價格預測或不確定未來事件賠償賠償。