通过部分驳回比特币SV（BSV）投资者的集体诉讼，英国上诉法院削弱了成千上万的持有人的希望

在法院判决与技术一样影响轨迹的生态系统中，本周发布的一项裁决削弱了成千上万的比特币SV（BSV）投资者的希望。

An ecosystem where court decisions appear to factor into crypto trajectories as much as technologies, the UK Court of Appeal has partially dismissed a class action lawsuit against Binance and several other exchanges.

英国上诉法院的一个生态系统似乎将法院判决与技术构成一样多的加密轨迹，部分驳回了针对Binance和其他几次交易所的集体诉讼。

The ruling, issued on Tuesday, May 21, puts at least a temporary halt to a legal process that began five years ago with the aim of obtaining 8.9 billion pounds sterling (about 11.9 billion dollars) in compensation from Binance, Kraken, ShapeShift, and Bittylicious for the delisting of Bitcoin SV (BSV).

该裁决于5月21日星期二发布，至少暂时停止了五年前的法律程序，其目的是从Binance，Kraken，Shapeshift，Shapeshift和Bittylicalious获得89亿英镑的Sterling（约119亿美元），以使比特币SV（BSV（BSV）善意。

The plaintiffs, a group of BSV investors, were targeting the platforms for allegedly causing major financial damage by delisting the crypto in April 2019. Their claims, however, have been rejected by the Court of Appeal, which spotted several flaws in the legal arguments presented.

原告是一群BSV投资者，目的是针对该平台，目的是涉嫌通过在2019年4月授予加密货币造成重大财务损失。但是，上诉法院拒绝了他们的主张，该法院在提出的法律论点中发现了几个缺陷。

The essence of the decision lies in the fact that plaintiffs could not claim compensation based on a speculative projection of future Bitcoin SV performance. As the judges noted, legal tools are not meant to guarantee hypothetical profits in such an uncertain market.

该决定的本质在于这样一个事实，即原告无法基于对未来比特币SV绩效的投机性预测的赔偿。正如法官指出的那样，法律工具并不是要保证在如此不确定的市场中的假设利润。

The lower court had erred in including such a claim in its decision.

下级法院在其裁决中犯了这一主张。

Another crucial point in the case concerned the legal notion of “loss of chance”, i.e., the theoretical possibility of benefiting from future gains. Thus, plaintiffs argued that by delisting BSV, platforms caused them to lose a financial opportunity.

该案中的另一个关键点是关于“失去机会丧失”的法律概念，即从未来收益中受益的理论可能性。因此，原告辩称，通过将BSV推荐，平台使他们失去了财务机会。

This approach was “fundamentally flawed in principle”, stated the Court of Appeal, adding that “cryptos are, by nature, volatile investments”.

上诉法院说，这种方法“从根本上是有缺陷的”，并补充说：“从本质上讲，加密货币是动荡的投资”。

The Court also noted that even if some investors were not immediately aware of the BSV delisting, their legal recourse was strictly limited. At best, they could claim compensation equal to the value of their initial investment before delisting, plus direct and quantifiable losses, but certainly not hypothetical unrealized profits.

法院还指出，即使某些投资者没有立即意识到BSV的推荐，他们的法律追索也受到严格限制。充其量，他们可以要求赔偿等于其在脱颖而出之前的初始投资价值，再加上可量化的损失，但肯定不是假设的未实现的利润。

This distinction introduces potentially structuring case law. Jurisdictions could now consider that speculation on the future performance of a crypto asset does not constitute legally reparable harm.

这种区别引入了潜在的结构判例法。司法管辖区现在可以考虑，对加密资产的未来绩效的猜测并不构成合法赔偿的危害。

This decision could have consequences far beyond the BSV case. By invalidating the speculative basis of the complaint, British justice reinforces the principle of individual investor responsibility when faced with factors amplifying falls in the case of crypto market volatility. It could also serve as a reference in other ongoing disputes, notably those opposing exchanges to users harmed by delistings or perceived manipulations.

该决定可能会产生远远超出BSV案件的后果。通过使投诉的投机基础无效，英国司法在面对加密市场波动的情况下面临放大因素时的责任原则。它也可以作为其他持续争议的参考，尤其是那些与因脱颖而出或感知的操纵伤害的用户进行的交流。