Skip to Primary Navigation

Skip to main content

Victims of cryptocurrency theft cannot pursue claims in conversion

Bitcoin and sterling
Photo: Matt Cardy/Getty Images

Vanessa Whitman I CMS, Kushal Gandhi | CMS, Rachel Harrison | CMS+1

3 min read
 Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window/tab) Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window/tab)

The judgment raises the question of whether there should be legislation to make a conversion-like cause of action apply to cryptocurrency.

In Ping Fai Yuen v Fun Yung Li & Another [2026] EWHC 532 (KB), the High Court has found that a victim of cryptocurrency theft cannot pursue a remedy in the tort of conversion. This is because OBG v Allan [2007] UKHL 21 is binding authority that only tangible assets can

Register for free to keep reading

To continue reading this article and unlock full access to GRIP, register now. You’ll enjoy free access to all content until our subscription service launches in early 2026.

  • Unlimited access to industry insights
  • Stay on top of key rules and regulatory changes with our Rules Navigator
  • Ad-free experience with no distractions
  • Regular podcasts from trusted external experts
  • Fresh compliance and regulatory content every day
Register for free
Sign in
, , , , ,