In previous blogs, various cases involving Dr Craig Wright, who claims to be the creator of Bitcoin under the pseudonym of Satoshi Nakamoto have been discussed, (see links at the bottom of this article).
The flow of litigation involving Dr Wright appears to show no sign of stopping. In 2021 and 2022, two cases were started, one where Dr Wright was the Defendant and one where he was the Claimant (Crypto Open Patent Licence v Wright & Wright and others v BTC Core and others).
Those two cases were ordered to be case-managed together. These claims appear to be aggressively litigated on both sides. In September 2023, Mr Justice Mellor conducted a hearing listed in respect of five applications: two made by Crypto Open Patent Licence (COPL); and three by Dr Wright. One of COPL’s applications was dealt with by consent before the commencement of the hearing, being an application for Dr Wright to show chain of custody in respect of the documents he primarily relied upon in support of his case that he is Satoshi Nakamoto.
The balance of the applications was principally to do with requests for further information, an application for Dr Wright to adduce evidence on autism spectrum disorder with a view to the Court making reasonable adjustments as to his cross examination when he is in the witness box and application to exclude evidence that Dr Wright viewed as hearsay evidence.
The outcome of the applications was:
1. A number of COPL’s requests for further information were agreed by Mr Justice Mellor and Dr Wright was ordered to provide responses in respect of the same;
2. Dr Wright’s application to rely upon evidence as to the impact of ASD on his ability to give evidence was granted with permission for COPL to file and serve a report in response;
3. Dr Wright’s application for further information was dismissed on the basis that the issues had already been sufficiently ventilated and did not appear to relate to a matter in issue in the case; and
4. An order allowing Dr Wright’s application to exclude hearsay evidence of two experts.
A particularly interesting part of the judgment is in respect of the Court’s consideration of Dr Wright’s application in respect of expert evidence in relation to his ASD condition. The Court considered CPR PD 1A – Participation of Vulnerable Parties or Witnesses, which states as follows:
“1. The overriding objective requires that, in order to deal with a case justly, the court should ensure, so far as practicable, that the parties are on an equal footing and can participate fully in proceedings, and that parties and witnesses can give their best evidence. The parties are required to help the court to further the overriding objective at all stages of civil proceedings.
- Vulnerability of a party or witness may impede participation and also diminish the quality of evidence. The court should take all proportionate measures to address these issues in every case.”
Comment
Clearly, whether adjustments need to be made will be different in each case but it is certainly an issue that should be borne in mind as a trial approaches.
Earlier this month, the case proceeded to a hearing to determine whether Dr Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto. The judgment is awaited in respect of the same. Given the breadth of litigation to date involving Dr Wright’s claims that he is Satoshi Nakamoto, a finding that Dr Wright did not invent Bitcoin could well result in previous cases being appealed out of time.
How can we help?
Kevin Modiri is a Partner in our expert Dispute Resolution team, specialising in commercial disputes, insolvency, inheritance disputes, data breach claims and defamation claims.
If you have any questions concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us