Policy & Regulation·Aug 17, 2023
DeFiance Capital Secures Interim Victory in Dispute With 3AC
DeFiance Capital Secures Interim Victory in Dispute With 3ACSingapore’s DeFiance Capital, a Web3 and crypto investment firm, has notched up a small triumph in its ongoing $140 million legal clash with failed Singaporean crypto hedge fund, Three Arrows Capital (3AC).Photo by Sasun Bughdaryan on UnsplashFavorable rulingAccording to a statement provided via a Medium blog post by DeFiance Capital Founder and CEO Arthur Cheong on Tuesday, the High Court of Singapore has delivered a favorable ruling for the firm, endorsing its preference for jurisdiction in Singapore, rather than the British Virgin Islands, which had been advocated by 3AC.The tussle between 3AC and DeFiance Capital centers around the ownership of certain assets. The liquidators appointed by the British Virgin Islands Court, from Teneo, assert that these assets essentially belong to 3AC’s creditors. However, DeFiance Capital argues vehemently that these assets must be partitioned and returned to its stakeholders.Struggle over assets and jurisdictionAt the heart of the matter are assets totaling $115 million, encompassing digital currencies and non-fungible tokens (NFTs), which currently remain under the control of DeFiance Capital. Additionally, there are 69 SAFE (simple agreement for future equity)/SAFT (simple agreement for future tokens) agreements linked to 3AC. Although Teneo places the collective worth of these assets at roughly $141 million, DeFiance Capital’s estimation is more conservative, pegging it at around $120 million.Beyond asset ownership, jurisdiction has become a pivotal point of contention in the legal discourse. DeFiance Capital has steadfastly advocated for legal proceedings to take place in Singapore, where it operates, as opposed to the British Virgin Islands. The recent ruling from the High Court of Singapore lends support to this stance, challenging Teneo’s argument.DeFiance articulated its position, asserting: “Our position was that all the important witnesses and documents are in Singapore and the dispute ought to be heard by the Singapore Courts to ensure all relevant evidence would be available.”With the court’s decision aligning with DeFiance’s jurisdictional preference, the firm hopes that this development will pave the way for more substantive engagement between the parties, rather than being embroiled in procedural wrangling. The firm believes that this will allow the focus to shift towards addressing the core issues at hand.Business riftThe genesis of this legal saga dates back to 2020 when DeFiance was established as part of the 3AC group, operating autonomously under the stewardship of its founder, Arthur Cheong. The rift escalated in February 2022, when Cheong declined 3AC’s proposal to relocate to Dubai, eventually leading to the formation of two Singapore-based firms in May of that year.Furthermore, in the same month, DeFiance extended a loan of $35 million worth of USDC to 3AC, effectively becoming a creditor. Complications arose when 3AC’s founders transferred legal rights related to DeFiance Capital, a transaction that remained incomplete as 3AC filed for bankruptcy.In light of the ongoing dispute, 3AC asserted that DeFiance’s assets should be harnessed to settle its debts. However, DeFiance firmly stood its ground, upholding its ownership claims over the assets.With liquidators advocating for resolution in the British Virgin Islands — a move that DeFiance rejected due to its Singaporean management ties with 3AC — the stage was set for the legal clash that has now taken a notable turn with this recent court ruling.
