Singapore Judge Says Crypto Not Money
In recent years, legal processes in various jurisdictions worldwide have seen judges comment on whether cryptocurrency is actually money. The latest such determination has been made by Justice Vinodh Coomaraswamy who outlined in a Singapore court that while being a component of financial transactions, cryptocurrencies are not money.
The consideration emerged in a recent court hearing at Singapore’s High Court in a case involving the Algorand Foundation and failed Singapore-based hedge fund, Three Arrows Capital (3AC). Justice Coomaraswamy’s comments arose due to a discussion in the midst of the court proceedings involving the Judge and counsel representing the Algorand Foundation.
Seashells as money
In setting out his rationale for the need for 3AC to be wound up, Daniel Chan, a lawyer for the WongPartnership law firm that was representing the Algorand Foundation in the proceedings, told the judge that despite foreign currencies not being recognized as legal tender in Singapore, or used broadly as a medium of exchange within the city state, those foreign currencies are recognized by Singapore law as money. Using that analogy Chan suggested that by implication, the same scenario should be considered where cryptocurrencies are concerned.
The judge provided a counterpoint: “What if you had a [community] in the world that used seashells as its internal medium of exchange? Would the Singapore courts have to recognize that as money.” Chan claimed that the judge had used an extreme example although Coomaraswamy remained steadfast in his view, pointing out that seashells had indeed been used as a form of money in the distant past.
Coomaraswamy proceeded to dismiss the Algorand Foundation’s winding up application. He acknowledged that the Foundation did have standing in bringing the application. However, as he determined that cryptocurrency couldn’t be classed as money, on that basis he dismissed the application. In conveying his decision, he stated: “The word indebtedness, in my view, must require a debt which is in fiat currency. Determining whether or not a particular intangible, such as cryptocurrency, is money would require a detailed examination of evidence which is not appropriate in the context of insolvency.”
Legal tender
Thus far, bitcoin has been recognized as legal tender in two countries — El Salvador and the Central African Republic. In 2020, a French court referred to the leading cryptocurrency as money, agreeing that Bitcoin loans can be recognized as customer loans in the same way as loans denominated in fiat currencies. Earlier that year, an Australian court recognized bitcoin as a legally legitimate form of investment. In the United States, a Federal court recognized bitcoin as “money” or “funds” in a prosecution taken against Silk Road website operator Ross Ulbricht.
There have been many similar instances in courts globally where judges have had to grapple with the consideration of whether bitcoin and crypto more generally can be regarded as money. Similar to the difficulty authorities are having in regulating cryptocurrency, it’s an issue that in most cases lacks complete clarity and in which we can expect further discussions on, similar to this most recent consideration in the Singaporean high court.
