WEBVTT - Global Legal Fallout From FTX

0:00:02.240 --> 0:00:05.279
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Crypto, a dearly Bloomberg I heard podcast

0:00:05.640 --> 0:00:09.000
<v Speaker 1>and I'm Emily Nicole Bloomberg, crypto blogger. I'm in today

0:00:09.039 --> 0:00:24.959
<v Speaker 1>for Stace Marie Ishmael. It's Thursday Janum. You've probably heard

0:00:25.000 --> 0:00:31.680
<v Speaker 1>financial regulators refer to crypto as the wild West. But

0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:35.960
<v Speaker 1>instead of shootouts, sheriffs and Lucky Luke, in crypto, you

0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:40.600
<v Speaker 1>can get financial experimentation, hackers, and pretty extreme risk taking

0:00:40.680 --> 0:00:44.080
<v Speaker 1>in the hopes of yielding extreme returns. In some cases

0:00:44.360 --> 0:00:48.120
<v Speaker 1>with people with their hard earned savings, people allegedly wronged

0:00:48.159 --> 0:00:50.959
<v Speaker 1>by crypto are increasingly turning to the law for redress.

0:00:51.800 --> 0:00:54.480
<v Speaker 1>The only problem is how do you fit something so

0:00:54.560 --> 0:00:58.240
<v Speaker 1>new into laws that are often centuries old. That's the

0:00:58.240 --> 0:01:01.120
<v Speaker 1>conundrum that lawyers and creditors are confronting in the case

0:01:01.160 --> 0:01:04.440
<v Speaker 1>of ft X, the crypto exchange that collapsed into bankruptcy

0:01:04.560 --> 0:01:09.000
<v Speaker 1>last year. In this episode, we discussed the legal complexities

0:01:09.080 --> 0:01:12.360
<v Speaker 1>underlying the ft X bankruptcy and how the rules change

0:01:12.400 --> 0:01:15.960
<v Speaker 1>across jurisdictions from the sunny Bahamas to the cloudy skies

0:01:16.000 --> 0:01:19.880
<v Speaker 1>of England. Today I am joined by Fisa Osman, a

0:01:20.080 --> 0:01:24.679
<v Speaker 1>UK barrister. My practice is a cross border litigation and

0:01:24.880 --> 0:01:30.440
<v Speaker 1>asset recovery with a spin on crypto related matters, and

0:01:30.480 --> 0:01:34.800
<v Speaker 1>Way Lawyer, a pseudonymous animated penguin who in real life

0:01:34.920 --> 0:01:38.720
<v Speaker 1>is actually a lawyer at a top UK law firm.

0:01:38.840 --> 0:01:41.600
<v Speaker 1>Way Lawyer asked not to be identified by name because

0:01:41.640 --> 0:01:43.800
<v Speaker 1>he's not authorized to speak on the record by the

0:01:43.840 --> 0:01:46.880
<v Speaker 1>company he works for. I mean, the reason that anonymous

0:01:46.959 --> 0:01:50.880
<v Speaker 1>is largely because this is a lot of fun. Being

0:01:51.000 --> 0:01:54.600
<v Speaker 1>darks is such a big deal. In two you go, oh,

0:01:54.600 --> 0:01:56.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, you know the farming team, But it turns

0:01:56.600 --> 0:01:58.080
<v Speaker 1>out they all scan do you anywhere? And when do

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:01.280
<v Speaker 1>we did by? And I finally quite musing that one

0:02:01.280 --> 0:02:04.680
<v Speaker 1>of the leading cryptal Twitter authorities. It's just a penguin

0:02:04.680 --> 0:02:08.519
<v Speaker 1>in the suit. So let's set the scene so fire style.

0:02:08.600 --> 0:02:12.400
<v Speaker 1>When the Bahamas based fd X filed for bankruptcy in November,

0:02:12.880 --> 0:02:14.760
<v Speaker 1>it kicked off a chain of events that in brold

0:02:14.880 --> 0:02:18.320
<v Speaker 1>quite a few different legal systems. Can you explain a

0:02:18.320 --> 0:02:21.440
<v Speaker 1>bit for us what that mishmash looks like? You know,

0:02:21.480 --> 0:02:24.079
<v Speaker 1>where are we talking about here? Well? I think mishmash

0:02:24.160 --> 0:02:27.080
<v Speaker 1>is probably exactly the right word. Although orbit not a

0:02:27.120 --> 0:02:30.280
<v Speaker 1>technical term, it's probably the best description you can get

0:02:30.840 --> 0:02:33.280
<v Speaker 1>as we know, if I can call it if you like,

0:02:33.360 --> 0:02:37.320
<v Speaker 1>the Mothership entity was a Bahamas based company which is

0:02:37.360 --> 0:02:41.840
<v Speaker 1>regulated in the Bahamas under their regime, and of course

0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:46.120
<v Speaker 1>SPF did reside there for at the material time, so

0:02:46.280 --> 0:02:50.200
<v Speaker 1>all concentration was upon the Bahamas for the right reasons,

0:02:51.160 --> 0:02:54.359
<v Speaker 1>the actual governing law when it's a government law. The

0:02:54.400 --> 0:02:57.840
<v Speaker 1>agreements that were between users and f t X were

0:02:57.880 --> 0:03:00.480
<v Speaker 1>actually English law agreements, and if you look at the

0:03:00.560 --> 0:03:03.280
<v Speaker 1>user agreements, it does actually stipulate that the law of

0:03:03.280 --> 0:03:06.240
<v Speaker 1>those user of gives is the law of England. So

0:03:06.280 --> 0:03:09.320
<v Speaker 1>you have English law which is governing the relationships between

0:03:09.840 --> 0:03:13.440
<v Speaker 1>the entity and the users in a company which is

0:03:13.480 --> 0:03:16.440
<v Speaker 1>domicid in the Bahamas. And that really perhaps was the

0:03:16.480 --> 0:03:19.560
<v Speaker 1>first opening salvos to the whole train of litigation that

0:03:19.600 --> 0:03:24.120
<v Speaker 1>took place. Afterwards, you then have the twist where because

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:28.160
<v Speaker 1>SPF was effectively ejected from the board, then moves to

0:03:28.160 --> 0:03:32.400
<v Speaker 1>the US and into US bankruptcy, and that really was

0:03:32.440 --> 0:03:35.280
<v Speaker 1>the start of the jurisdiction dispute between the US and

0:03:35.360 --> 0:03:37.960
<v Speaker 1>the Bahamas. And as much to be said as to

0:03:38.000 --> 0:03:41.440
<v Speaker 1>whether the Bahamas were the right jurisdiction to actually start

0:03:41.480 --> 0:03:44.800
<v Speaker 1>the process of insolvency and liquidation or whether it was

0:03:44.920 --> 0:03:47.240
<v Speaker 1>right to move to the US under a Chapter eleven

0:03:47.640 --> 0:03:51.839
<v Speaker 1>and for the new directors of FTX to commence over there.

0:03:52.360 --> 0:03:54.760
<v Speaker 1>And that's a question which is still yet to be

0:03:55.520 --> 0:03:57.440
<v Speaker 1>fully resolved, although it's got there. It's a lot further

0:03:57.440 --> 0:03:59.320
<v Speaker 1>forward than it than it was, say even a few

0:03:59.360 --> 0:04:02.360
<v Speaker 1>days ago. And we'll see if we look at the

0:04:03.080 --> 0:04:05.400
<v Speaker 1>way that ft X was structured, at least in terms

0:04:05.440 --> 0:04:09.880
<v Speaker 1>of the big pairent entity, it had reaches all across

0:04:10.120 --> 0:04:12.200
<v Speaker 1>the globe really like we had ft EXTRA pan and

0:04:12.240 --> 0:04:15.360
<v Speaker 1>ft X Europe. And how complicated is that making this

0:04:15.480 --> 0:04:19.239
<v Speaker 1>situation right now? There is a lot of international relations

0:04:19.279 --> 0:04:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and international diplomacy in place here, because when you've got

0:04:22.640 --> 0:04:24.880
<v Speaker 1>a company that's gone under UM, you need to have

0:04:24.960 --> 0:04:27.839
<v Speaker 1>one you know what we call it is quite a

0:04:27.839 --> 0:04:30.840
<v Speaker 1>main proceeding, but essentially you need one jurisdiction to take

0:04:30.880 --> 0:04:33.360
<v Speaker 1>the lead on the insolvency because otherwise, if you had,

0:04:33.440 --> 0:04:37.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, multiple jurisdictions claiming to lead in song at

0:04:37.040 --> 0:04:39.360
<v Speaker 1>the same time, then how do you administer the assets

0:04:39.360 --> 0:04:43.880
<v Speaker 1>of the mountinational group UM. Many sort of jurisdictions that

0:04:43.960 --> 0:04:46.560
<v Speaker 1>have very fairly developed legal structures have signed up to

0:04:46.680 --> 0:04:51.120
<v Speaker 1>something called the Instantral model law in cross Bordel insolvency,

0:04:51.400 --> 0:04:54.960
<v Speaker 1>which it's it's sort of the international treaty where which

0:04:55.000 --> 0:04:59.520
<v Speaker 1>determines who gets to run which insolvency and sets the

0:04:59.520 --> 0:05:03.320
<v Speaker 1>sort sets the rules of the game. Unfortunately, the Bahamas

0:05:03.440 --> 0:05:06.680
<v Speaker 1>is not a party to that, so we end up

0:05:06.680 --> 0:05:09.920
<v Speaker 1>in this position where we're kind of going back to default. Uh,

0:05:09.960 --> 0:05:13.000
<v Speaker 1>you know default common law ruse as to who gets

0:05:13.000 --> 0:05:16.480
<v Speaker 1>to claim jurisdiction. But at the same time, UM, the

0:05:16.560 --> 0:05:20.160
<v Speaker 1>US is often able to claim very wide jurisdiction when

0:05:20.200 --> 0:05:23.720
<v Speaker 1>it comes to, you know, someone filing for Chapter eleven.

0:05:24.080 --> 0:05:27.360
<v Speaker 1>For instance, when when this all kicked off, there was

0:05:27.400 --> 0:05:30.440
<v Speaker 1>a lot of questions, UM in the spaces to how

0:05:30.480 --> 0:05:33.800
<v Speaker 1>can FTX file for Chapter eleven when it's not even

0:05:33.839 --> 0:05:36.279
<v Speaker 1>in the US. And the answer to that is, well,

0:05:37.200 --> 0:05:39.640
<v Speaker 1>pretty much anyone and everyone can fill from Chapter eleven.

0:05:39.720 --> 0:05:43.600
<v Speaker 1>Is fairly established case law in the US that if

0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:47.240
<v Speaker 1>you have assets in the US, any sort of assets whatsoever,

0:05:47.720 --> 0:05:50.400
<v Speaker 1>you can fall from Chapter eleven, even if that asset

0:05:50.880 --> 0:05:53.880
<v Speaker 1>is a bank account which you've set up in order

0:05:53.920 --> 0:05:56.080
<v Speaker 1>to pay a US lawyer. So you could be in

0:05:56.240 --> 0:06:00.719
<v Speaker 1>Latin America running a you know, business in Latin America

0:06:00.839 --> 0:06:03.200
<v Speaker 1>with your suppliers in Europe and Asia and whatnot, and

0:06:03.279 --> 0:06:05.800
<v Speaker 1>never do anything the US until you go under. You

0:06:05.920 --> 0:06:07.920
<v Speaker 1>call us lawyer and say, hey, I want to do

0:06:07.960 --> 0:06:11.159
<v Speaker 1>a Chapter eleven? Can I pay your retainer? By paying

0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:15.880
<v Speaker 1>the retainer, you become eligible for the Chapter eleven process.

0:06:15.920 --> 0:06:19.159
<v Speaker 1>It's a difficult one and what we've seen so far

0:06:19.320 --> 0:06:21.480
<v Speaker 1>is exactly as you kind of said like that. There's

0:06:21.480 --> 0:06:23.880
<v Speaker 1>been a bit of a dispute I guess we'd say

0:06:24.000 --> 0:06:26.200
<v Speaker 1>between the different reagions as to how they want to

0:06:26.240 --> 0:06:29.440
<v Speaker 1>approach this, with tex As new executives in Delaware being

0:06:29.560 --> 0:06:31.760
<v Speaker 1>very vehement that they are in charge, but the Bahama

0:06:31.839 --> 0:06:34.360
<v Speaker 1>is saying that they're in charge and and f ire Star.

0:06:34.440 --> 0:06:37.920
<v Speaker 1>How have they been getting along so far and what

0:06:37.920 --> 0:06:40.279
<v Speaker 1>what kind of moves that they made to date that

0:06:40.400 --> 0:06:44.160
<v Speaker 1>kind of sees them working together to solve these issues. Well,

0:06:44.160 --> 0:06:48.920
<v Speaker 1>they haven't really been getting on. That has changed is

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:52.240
<v Speaker 1>probably a slight, thank thankfully, thank thankfully, it's there has changed.

0:06:52.440 --> 0:06:55.320
<v Speaker 1>I'll come on too that in the moment. But when

0:06:55.320 --> 0:06:58.080
<v Speaker 1>I say historically, I mean it's not in terms of time.

0:06:58.360 --> 0:07:01.440
<v Speaker 1>This hasn't been a history or event because it's it's

0:07:01.440 --> 0:07:04.200
<v Speaker 1>really started to implode within the matter what weeks ago,

0:07:04.520 --> 0:07:06.719
<v Speaker 1>but still in the compass of what we're talking about.

0:07:07.120 --> 0:07:11.680
<v Speaker 1>I refer to historically the relationship between the US debtors

0:07:11.720 --> 0:07:14.160
<v Speaker 1>and the liquidators in the Bahamas. I think there are

0:07:14.160 --> 0:07:17.120
<v Speaker 1>three points to make here. First of all, I have

0:07:17.280 --> 0:07:21.600
<v Speaker 1>sympathy with the Bahamas in this sense. It is a

0:07:21.680 --> 0:07:25.880
<v Speaker 1>Bahamian regulated entity, and I think it is right for

0:07:26.000 --> 0:07:30.080
<v Speaker 1>the Bahamas and regulated entity regulators to say, look, we

0:07:30.480 --> 0:07:33.520
<v Speaker 1>have given this thing a license. It is supposed to

0:07:33.520 --> 0:07:37.400
<v Speaker 1>comply with our licensing conditions. It hasn't. Therefore, we have

0:07:37.480 --> 0:07:40.360
<v Speaker 1>taken appropriate steps that are in our law in order

0:07:40.400 --> 0:07:42.680
<v Speaker 1>to resolve that issue, and in order to keep the

0:07:42.680 --> 0:07:45.320
<v Speaker 1>integrity of the Bahamas as a jurisdiction, which is good

0:07:45.320 --> 0:07:48.280
<v Speaker 1>for crypto and good for users as well, I think

0:07:48.320 --> 0:07:50.480
<v Speaker 1>it is right for the Balhams to say, you know what,

0:07:50.680 --> 0:07:53.760
<v Speaker 1>we'll deal with this. Uh. The second point is this,

0:07:54.160 --> 0:07:58.400
<v Speaker 1>without significant information sharing between the Bahamas and the US,

0:07:58.480 --> 0:08:02.400
<v Speaker 1>you're going to have Bahamian activity which is sitting in

0:08:02.440 --> 0:08:06.440
<v Speaker 1>a silo in respect and in comparison to what's happening

0:08:06.480 --> 0:08:08.600
<v Speaker 1>in the US, and that is not good for recovery.

0:08:08.960 --> 0:08:11.600
<v Speaker 1>The third point is this it does cause a risk

0:08:11.720 --> 0:08:15.960
<v Speaker 1>of inconsistent rulings between two different jurisdictions, the Bahamas and

0:08:16.000 --> 0:08:19.000
<v Speaker 1>the US, and that is quite important. I'll give one

0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:23.960
<v Speaker 1>very important example of that. It's probably the most important example,

0:08:24.440 --> 0:08:27.880
<v Speaker 1>and it's this. There is a live argument as to

0:08:27.920 --> 0:08:32.240
<v Speaker 1>whether the digital assets are in fact assets which belong

0:08:32.600 --> 0:08:35.480
<v Speaker 1>to the estate, whether they fall out that, whether they

0:08:35.520 --> 0:08:37.800
<v Speaker 1>fall out of the bankruptcy estate, or they do not.

0:08:37.920 --> 0:08:40.200
<v Speaker 1>Now there's been a lot of debate about this. I

0:08:40.320 --> 0:08:43.920
<v Speaker 1>have a particular point of view. Um some legal analysists

0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:46.120
<v Speaker 1>do agree with me. Others take a take a different view.

0:08:46.160 --> 0:08:50.000
<v Speaker 1>But there needs to be some sort of determination as

0:08:50.000 --> 0:08:52.480
<v Speaker 1>to whether those digital assets for within the estate. Now

0:08:52.480 --> 0:08:55.840
<v Speaker 1>where should that determination be made? Number One, there is

0:08:55.880 --> 0:08:59.480
<v Speaker 1>already an action for the claratory judgment as to whether

0:08:59.520 --> 0:09:01.880
<v Speaker 1>these assets fall out of the estate or not, which

0:09:01.880 --> 0:09:05.320
<v Speaker 1>has already started in the US. That's on foot. But

0:09:05.679 --> 0:09:08.960
<v Speaker 1>because again we're looking at English law, there is a

0:09:09.000 --> 0:09:12.840
<v Speaker 1>good argument to say that the best jurisdiction to determine

0:09:12.920 --> 0:09:17.080
<v Speaker 1>what we have termed that trust argument, whether the assets

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:20.720
<v Speaker 1>digital assets are held on trust, is in fact the Bahamas.

0:09:20.960 --> 0:09:24.240
<v Speaker 1>Because the Bahamas is a common law jurisdiction which looks

0:09:24.280 --> 0:09:26.400
<v Speaker 1>at Bohemian case or first, but if it does not

0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:30.120
<v Speaker 1>find English case law highly persuasive because of these agreements

0:09:30.160 --> 0:09:34.880
<v Speaker 1>are English English law agreements, there is a very good

0:09:35.000 --> 0:09:39.160
<v Speaker 1>argument I suggest that in fact, the right jurisdiction and

0:09:39.200 --> 0:09:43.280
<v Speaker 1>the right judiciary to determine that particular point is the

0:09:43.280 --> 0:09:47.480
<v Speaker 1>Bahamas instead of the US. After the break, I'll be

0:09:47.520 --> 0:09:50.640
<v Speaker 1>talking with Fissile and Vassie about the changes being made

0:09:50.720 --> 0:10:02.720
<v Speaker 1>to English law that could affect crypto in future. And

0:10:02.760 --> 0:10:05.720
<v Speaker 1>so then, Lassie, I mean, it's not as simple, I

0:10:05.760 --> 0:10:08.920
<v Speaker 1>guess as the you know, looking at where these different

0:10:09.000 --> 0:10:13.640
<v Speaker 1>jurisdictions are. Because also in the Bahamas, liquidators there took

0:10:13.920 --> 0:10:16.440
<v Speaker 1>a certain amount of assets for themselves were not too

0:10:16.440 --> 0:10:19.840
<v Speaker 1>sure how much exactly, with potentially the permission of sand

0:10:19.840 --> 0:10:23.040
<v Speaker 1>Bank of Freed back when this bankruptcy process first started.

0:10:23.400 --> 0:10:27.280
<v Speaker 1>And that's also kind of worsening the spat, right I

0:10:27.320 --> 0:10:31.160
<v Speaker 1>think I wouldn't say that the liquid dators took the

0:10:31.280 --> 0:10:34.600
<v Speaker 1>money for themselves, not for themselves, but for the like

0:10:34.640 --> 0:10:37.400
<v Speaker 1>it is in for customers. Yeah, local customers. Correct if

0:10:37.440 --> 0:10:39.960
<v Speaker 1>you're if you're referring to the amount they claim they

0:10:39.960 --> 0:10:42.240
<v Speaker 1>see three point five billion dollars at the point of

0:10:43.000 --> 0:10:45.600
<v Speaker 1>value Tree or five billion dollars in early November. The

0:10:45.760 --> 0:10:48.760
<v Speaker 1>market value of it is now apparently around three hundred

0:10:48.760 --> 0:10:52.640
<v Speaker 1>million dollars if you're referring to debtporol of assets. Considering

0:10:52.720 --> 0:10:57.920
<v Speaker 1>the company legitimately went into a Bahamas provisional liquidation process,

0:10:58.120 --> 0:11:01.640
<v Speaker 1>it is you know, not strange at all that the

0:11:01.640 --> 0:11:03.840
<v Speaker 1>provisional liquid is should be in control of their amount

0:11:03.880 --> 0:11:06.800
<v Speaker 1>of money. Of that sum of money that the issue

0:11:06.840 --> 0:11:10.280
<v Speaker 1>arises because exactly as we've discussed, when you've got the

0:11:10.360 --> 0:11:14.000
<v Speaker 1>US and the Bahamas both certain jurisdiction, someone has to

0:11:14.040 --> 0:11:16.600
<v Speaker 1>administer how you deal with that money. And there are

0:11:16.600 --> 0:11:20.320
<v Speaker 1>many sort of operational issues, and they're also the legal arguments,

0:11:20.360 --> 0:11:23.320
<v Speaker 1>which is Faisal has just you know, laid out, and

0:11:23.320 --> 0:11:25.720
<v Speaker 1>it's made a very very good point, um, just to

0:11:25.720 --> 0:11:28.000
<v Speaker 1>add on to that as well, um that there certainly

0:11:28.120 --> 0:11:32.000
<v Speaker 1>is politics at play here. Both jurisdictions have a very

0:11:32.120 --> 0:11:36.480
<v Speaker 1>vested interest not to be embarrassed by this whole FTX situation.

0:11:36.600 --> 0:11:40.960
<v Speaker 1>So there certainly is you know, pressure on both ends

0:11:41.240 --> 0:11:44.560
<v Speaker 1>to do something about it. And it's also worth noting

0:11:44.640 --> 0:11:48.440
<v Speaker 1>that I think fis alluded to be earlier about Samding

0:11:48.520 --> 0:11:51.760
<v Speaker 1>effectively kicked out from the board. The timeline of events

0:11:51.760 --> 0:11:55.560
<v Speaker 1>that's happened is the Bahamas put the Mahman entity into

0:11:55.960 --> 0:11:59.959
<v Speaker 1>provisional liquidation and then a couple of days later after

0:12:00.000 --> 0:12:01.880
<v Speaker 1>the extented in the chapter eleven process, and it's a

0:12:01.960 --> 0:12:06.360
<v Speaker 1>voluntary Chapter eleven process. So Sam signed the papers to

0:12:06.480 --> 0:12:09.720
<v Speaker 1>give up power and put in the chapter eleven process,

0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:11.880
<v Speaker 1>and he didn't spend the weeks afterwards saying I wish

0:12:11.880 --> 0:12:14.320
<v Speaker 1>I hadn't done that. So clearly there was some sort

0:12:14.320 --> 0:12:17.600
<v Speaker 1>of pressure on Sam to, you know, step aside, let

0:12:17.840 --> 0:12:19.679
<v Speaker 1>these guys run it, and these guys want to run

0:12:19.720 --> 0:12:24.000
<v Speaker 1>in the US, so that's as usual. That's a really

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:27.840
<v Speaker 1>important point. Just two quick points. I've alluded to the

0:12:27.880 --> 0:12:31.240
<v Speaker 1>fact that this is historic, but all of the particular

0:12:31.320 --> 0:12:34.880
<v Speaker 1>issues that I have raised, I have patently been recognized

0:12:34.920 --> 0:12:38.440
<v Speaker 1>by the parties, and there seems to be now sensible

0:12:39.000 --> 0:12:42.480
<v Speaker 1>coordination and understanding about how the process you should run

0:12:42.480 --> 0:12:44.760
<v Speaker 1>in parallel. So that's that's a very important thing. And

0:12:44.800 --> 0:12:47.880
<v Speaker 1>just one other point to touch on very briefly. We

0:12:47.960 --> 0:12:53.079
<v Speaker 1>haven't spoken about how the criminal prosecutions, which are definitely

0:12:53.120 --> 0:12:55.400
<v Speaker 1>taking place in the United States and may well take

0:12:55.440 --> 0:12:58.640
<v Speaker 1>place in the Bahamas will touch upon all these issues

0:12:58.679 --> 0:13:02.400
<v Speaker 1>in regards to the jurisdictional spat in respective insolvency. And

0:13:02.440 --> 0:13:05.600
<v Speaker 1>the reason I say that is because host criminal conviction

0:13:05.800 --> 0:13:09.760
<v Speaker 1>in either one or both jurisdictions there maybe have locations

0:13:09.800 --> 0:13:12.439
<v Speaker 1>for confiscation and for for tua of oursets how that

0:13:12.480 --> 0:13:17.680
<v Speaker 1>will intersect with one or other of the insolvency proceedings

0:13:17.760 --> 0:13:19.960
<v Speaker 1>are going on. It is something to be seen. So

0:13:20.360 --> 0:13:22.960
<v Speaker 1>it's not just a rivalry between the Bahamas in the US.

0:13:23.000 --> 0:13:26.720
<v Speaker 1>There's a right between the insolvency jurisdiction and the criminal

0:13:26.840 --> 0:13:30.000
<v Speaker 1>jurisdiction in the US and in the Bahamas. And this

0:13:30.040 --> 0:13:34.920
<v Speaker 1>is what makes this uniquely interesting and complex. And you've

0:13:34.960 --> 0:13:38.520
<v Speaker 1>been both probably kept quite busy this year by the

0:13:38.559 --> 0:13:42.160
<v Speaker 1>spate of high profile crypto bankruptcies that have been happening.

0:13:42.440 --> 0:13:46.640
<v Speaker 1>And then yeah, see, I'm interested to understand how you

0:13:46.679 --> 0:13:50.840
<v Speaker 1>think that the international bit of FTX, how all of

0:13:50.880 --> 0:13:54.440
<v Speaker 1>this like multiple jurisdictions that we're facing here, How does

0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.880
<v Speaker 1>that look similar or not similar to the bankruptcies we've

0:13:57.920 --> 0:14:01.599
<v Speaker 1>seen before, like Celsius and three hours all. Oh, that

0:14:01.840 --> 0:14:09.719
<v Speaker 1>is a very very try and keep I'll try, I'll

0:14:09.720 --> 0:14:11.719
<v Speaker 1>try and I'll try and keep it shot shot and

0:14:11.760 --> 0:14:13.839
<v Speaker 1>seat is possible. I think in short, when you look

0:14:13.840 --> 0:14:16.040
<v Speaker 1>at Sales and Voyager and they were acting very much

0:14:16.160 --> 0:14:19.280
<v Speaker 1>like you know, quote unquote crypto banks, where you would

0:14:20.080 --> 0:14:23.080
<v Speaker 1>deposit money with them, and when you've disposited money with them,

0:14:23.120 --> 0:14:24.520
<v Speaker 1>it gives them the right to, you know, go and

0:14:24.720 --> 0:14:28.320
<v Speaker 1>un yield on an interest on it um. With FTS,

0:14:28.320 --> 0:14:31.280
<v Speaker 1>it's very different. FTX had no right to deal with

0:14:31.840 --> 0:14:34.400
<v Speaker 1>the client's assets in that way. The terms make it

0:14:34.520 --> 0:14:37.440
<v Speaker 1>very clear that FTS not allowed to land up their

0:14:37.440 --> 0:14:40.640
<v Speaker 1>customers money. They were not allowed to rehypothegate or do

0:14:40.680 --> 0:14:43.240
<v Speaker 1>anything with those assets. But they did. And that's what

0:14:43.440 --> 0:14:47.320
<v Speaker 1>turned a case of it all poor management, you know,

0:14:47.800 --> 0:14:52.000
<v Speaker 1>essentially poor risk management into what looks like alright, fraud

0:14:52.000 --> 0:14:55.680
<v Speaker 1>and theft also within that, I guess. Far a start,

0:14:55.720 --> 0:14:58.440
<v Speaker 1>we've been talking a lot about how English or is

0:14:58.560 --> 0:15:00.640
<v Speaker 1>very key in this case, but because of the way

0:15:00.640 --> 0:15:03.960
<v Speaker 1>the ft x is terms of service was structured. But

0:15:04.040 --> 0:15:07.040
<v Speaker 1>English law itself is kind of undergoing a bit of

0:15:07.040 --> 0:15:09.280
<v Speaker 1>a transformation at the moment when it comes to shassets.

0:15:09.320 --> 0:15:11.480
<v Speaker 1>We had an episode earlier this year where we talked

0:15:11.520 --> 0:15:14.280
<v Speaker 1>to the Law Commission about the proposals they've made to

0:15:14.920 --> 0:15:17.960
<v Speaker 1>reassess how we view digital assets as property, at least

0:15:17.960 --> 0:15:22.160
<v Speaker 1>in this country. What will those kinds of changes mean

0:15:22.320 --> 0:15:25.280
<v Speaker 1>for if we have bankruptcies like this in future and

0:15:25.360 --> 0:15:28.040
<v Speaker 1>English straw, as they hope, becomes a little bit of

0:15:28.040 --> 0:15:31.000
<v Speaker 1>an international de facto for this area. Yeah, again, it's

0:15:31.000 --> 0:15:34.400
<v Speaker 1>an interesting question, and without going into too much depth,

0:15:35.760 --> 0:15:38.040
<v Speaker 1>I think the best way to deal with it is

0:15:38.040 --> 0:15:40.800
<v Speaker 1>as follows that there the Law Commission has looked at

0:15:41.200 --> 0:15:43.720
<v Speaker 1>whether the law in effect needs to be for want

0:15:43.760 --> 0:15:47.920
<v Speaker 1>of better term, updated with respects with respect to crypto,

0:15:47.960 --> 0:15:51.040
<v Speaker 1>digital assets and so on. And the conclusion it came to,

0:15:51.360 --> 0:15:55.080
<v Speaker 1>especially in regards to the treatment of crypto was property,

0:15:55.600 --> 0:16:01.040
<v Speaker 1>is that in fact the English jurisprudence is it's it um,

0:16:01.080 --> 0:16:03.840
<v Speaker 1>it is sufficient in order to deal with aspects such

0:16:03.880 --> 0:16:05.760
<v Speaker 1>as this. And if we look at what's happening here,

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:10.240
<v Speaker 1>a lot of this is trust based related legal arguments. Now,

0:16:10.280 --> 0:16:13.760
<v Speaker 1>trust law and equity is not exactly a modern invention

0:16:13.840 --> 0:16:16.440
<v Speaker 1>of English jurisprudence, so it's been around for quite a

0:16:16.440 --> 0:16:18.720
<v Speaker 1>while and I know we're reaching the end of this,

0:16:18.880 --> 0:16:20.720
<v Speaker 1>but I just wanted to add on to what Faiso

0:16:20.760 --> 0:16:23.120
<v Speaker 1>was saying and it's often been said that, you know,

0:16:23.240 --> 0:16:26.280
<v Speaker 1>the trust is the greatest creation of English law, and

0:16:26.320 --> 0:16:30.320
<v Speaker 1>I fully agree with that, and trust law is in

0:16:30.360 --> 0:16:32.400
<v Speaker 1>my opinion, from what I've seen in the in the

0:16:32.440 --> 0:16:36.200
<v Speaker 1>space generally, it's going to become very relevant because in

0:16:36.240 --> 0:16:39.840
<v Speaker 1>the crypto space, you know, the legal infrastructure often isn't

0:16:39.840 --> 0:16:45.160
<v Speaker 1>in place to document on chain arrangements, commercial arrangements, and

0:16:45.200 --> 0:16:48.080
<v Speaker 1>therefore that there often is a default to using a

0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:52.560
<v Speaker 1>trust argument whenever something goes wrong. For instance, you know, if,

0:16:53.120 --> 0:16:54.880
<v Speaker 1>if and when we get to the point where a

0:16:54.960 --> 0:16:58.200
<v Speaker 1>massive now implodes inherently, there's going to be a trust

0:16:58.280 --> 0:16:59.920
<v Speaker 1>argument is to you know, who's been acting as a

0:17:00.000 --> 0:17:04.280
<v Speaker 1>trust you for the doubt being a decentralized autonomous organization

0:17:04.320 --> 0:17:06.879
<v Speaker 1>a bit like a little crypto company without any of

0:17:06.920 --> 0:17:09.399
<v Speaker 1>the structure. It's like a little cryptal company, except it

0:17:09.440 --> 0:17:13.680
<v Speaker 1>doesn't have any real legal structure or wrapper to it. Yeah,

0:17:13.760 --> 0:17:16.440
<v Speaker 1>and everything's governed on change. Yeah, I mean lactually, and

0:17:16.480 --> 0:17:19.200
<v Speaker 1>I've been geeking out on the legal implications of dolls

0:17:19.240 --> 0:17:21.120
<v Speaker 1>for a little while now, such as it's so much

0:17:21.160 --> 0:17:22.639
<v Speaker 1>so I think people are just getting bored of us.

0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:24.480
<v Speaker 1>They haven't got bored of us already, but he makes

0:17:24.520 --> 0:17:27.399
<v Speaker 1>an excellent point that if there is to be a

0:17:27.440 --> 0:17:30.520
<v Speaker 1>development in the law, it's how probably how dolls it

0:17:30.640 --> 0:17:33.639
<v Speaker 1>to be treated. Are they unincorporated corporated associations? Are their

0:17:33.640 --> 0:17:36.280
<v Speaker 1>partnerships and there's something different, etcetera. So there is some

0:17:36.400 --> 0:17:38.760
<v Speaker 1>development law regards to that, and I think as well

0:17:38.800 --> 0:17:41.480
<v Speaker 1>when it comes to tracing of assets and intern remedies

0:17:41.480 --> 0:17:44.879
<v Speaker 1>and freezing orders and disclosure and so on, that's probably

0:17:44.880 --> 0:17:49.520
<v Speaker 1>more procedural than it is hard edged law substantive. But

0:17:49.640 --> 0:17:52.680
<v Speaker 1>I think that's something which is already starting to develop

0:17:52.720 --> 0:17:56.960
<v Speaker 1>here in England and probably developed even more just getting

0:17:57.000 --> 0:18:00.000
<v Speaker 1>the right tools in place in order to recover assets

0:18:00.040 --> 0:18:03.960
<v Speaker 1>and get information in a work because those are assessments.

0:18:04.320 --> 0:18:06.439
<v Speaker 1>That information is held in a different way with crypto

0:18:06.480 --> 0:18:09.720
<v Speaker 1>than it is with judicial last great, well, thank you

0:18:09.760 --> 0:18:12.840
<v Speaker 1>both for joining me. That was really interesting, absolute pleasure.

0:18:12.960 --> 0:18:16.280
<v Speaker 1>Thank you very much. Thank you fire Style and Wasassie.

0:18:16.760 --> 0:18:18.920
<v Speaker 1>You can find more of my reporting on the Bloomberg

0:18:19.000 --> 0:18:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Terminal and on Bloomberg dot com. For more, be sure

0:18:21.880 --> 0:18:29.880
<v Speaker 1>to check out our twice weekly newsletter, Bloomberg Crypto. This

0:18:29.920 --> 0:18:32.960
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg Crypto, a daily podcast from Bloomberg and I

0:18:33.080 --> 0:18:36.320
<v Speaker 1>Heeart Radio. For more shows from I Heeart Radio, visit

0:18:36.320 --> 0:18:39.640
<v Speaker 1>the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get

0:18:39.680 --> 0:18:43.520
<v Speaker 1>your podcasts. Send us your comments, questions, or suggestions for

0:18:43.560 --> 0:18:49.359
<v Speaker 1>the show to Crypto at Bloomberg dot net. The supervising

0:18:49.400 --> 0:18:53.160
<v Speaker 1>producer of Bloomberg Crypto is Vicky Vergelina. Our senior producer

0:18:53.240 --> 0:18:57.160
<v Speaker 1>is Janet Babin. Our producers are Mohammed Faruk and Sharon Burriro.

0:18:57.640 --> 0:19:00.159
<v Speaker 1>Our associate producers are Ty Butler and Moses is on

0:19:00.280 --> 0:19:04.960
<v Speaker 1>the Blake Maples is our engineer. Original music by Leo Sidron.

0:19:06.119 --> 0:19:08.520
<v Speaker 1>I'm Stacy Maria Shmael. We'll be back tomorrow