Services
Cryptocurrency & Digital Asset Disputes
Advice, evidence review and strategic preparation for cryptocurrency claims and disputes.
Speak directly to Ryan Williams about your matter. Call for a free, no-obligation initial discussion.
The initial discussion is to understand your matter and whether RWS can assist. Any further work and fees will be agreed before work begins.
A cryptocurrency dispute may begin with a loss, an unexpected restriction on an account or a claim that someone else's assets have passed through your wallet. The records can be technical, the parties may be overseas and an urgent decision may be needed.
The starting point is to establish what happened, what the evidence supports and which legal rights may be involved.
Ryan Williams brings experience of cryptocurrency litigation to RWS, including his work for Kyrrex at Healys LLP on the challenge that led to a successful Court of Appeal decision in September 2026.
RWS provides independent advice, document review, analysis of disputed evidence and strategic preparation within its non-reserved consultancy role.
Ryan Williams is currently suspended from practice as a solicitor. He does not practise as a solicitor through RWS. RWS is an independent legal consultancy providing non-reserved services only and is not an SRA-authorised solicitors' firm. Please read the Regulatory Information for his current status and the limits of the service.
Experience of the Kyrrex appeal
While practising at Healys LLP, Ryan Williams acted for Kyrrex and prepared and filed its appeal. He continued working on the matter until his suspension took effect. Kyrrex then instructed The Brooke Law Group LLP, which conducted the appeal.
The appeal was argued by Brad Pomfret KC, Mark Lorrell and Ian Chai. On 28 September 2026, the Court of Appeal allowed Kyrrex's appeal in Gary Jones v Persons Unknown [2026] EWCA Civ 1212.
The dispute concerned an earlier order requiring the transfer of approximately 98.2 Bitcoin. Kyrrex had not been a party to the original proceedings, but its account was debited following the transfer.
The Court held that Kyrrex was directly affected and could challenge the order under CPR 40.9. It set aside the relevant parts of the earlier order.
The decision illustrates the importance of reliable tracing evidence, a proper understanding of exchange arrangements and careful attention to the rights of people affected by an order. The Court left questions about ownership and repayment for further determination.
That experience informs Ryan's approach to the documents, the competing arguments and the practical decisions a client faces.
Read the Court of Appeal judgment →
See also: Jones v Kyrrex — CPR 40.9 and the rights of non-parties
Who RWS can assist
RWS welcomes enquiries from individuals and businesses concerning civil cryptocurrency disputes, subject to an assessment of the work required and its permitted scope.
This may include:
People whose cryptocurrency has been misappropriated or who need an assessment of a proposed civil claim.
Account holders facing restrictions, deductions or disputed withdrawals.
Exchanges, custodians and businesses responding to allegations concerning customer assets.
People whose assets or account rights have been affected by proceedings involving someone else.
Clients seeking an independent view of a tracing report, proposed argument or existing dispute.
The focus is on disputes involving the law of England and Wales. Overseas parties, foreign proceedings or assets held in another jurisdiction may require separate advice there.
Each proposed instruction is checked for conflicts, regulatory scope and any approval needed for the working arrangements before it is accepted.
Disputes RWS can help you assess
Fraud and misappropriation
Cryptocurrency may have been transferred following deception, unauthorised access or misuse of authority. A displayed account balance or supposed investment profit may not reflect assets actually held.
An assessment needs to identify the payments, the recipient accounts or addresses, the representations made and the evidence of the client's rights.
RWS can examine the chronology, correspondence and transaction records, identify possible civil claims and consider what additional evidence is needed. The assessment will distinguish a supportable legal claim from assumptions that still need investigation.
Disputed tracing evidence
A transaction diagram needs to be examined against the underlying records. The blockchain, the relevant asset, the dates, the transaction identifiers and the basis for attributing an address to a person or exchange all matter.
RWS can assess the legal significance of a tracing report, compare it with the documents and identify assumptions, missing explanations or inconsistencies that require expert attention.
A report may establish that assets reached an exchange without establishing who beneficially owned the relevant assets, what happened inside the exchange or which legal claim follows.
Where technical blockchain analysis is needed, an appropriately qualified independent specialist should undertake it. RWS provides legal and evidential assessment; it does not advertise itself as a forensic tracing provider.
Exchange and custody disputes
Disagreements may concern withdrawals, account restrictions, deductions, custody arrangements, the terms of service or the handling of assets following a third-party claim.
The distinction between the blockchain address, the exchange's internal records and the customer's legal rights can be important. The account terms may also affect whether a customer has rights to particular assets or a contractual entitlement against the provider.
RWS can review the terms, account statements, notices and correspondence, assess the disputed decision and help prepare focused non-reserved correspondence. Restrictions arising from law or a court order require particular care.
Innocent third parties affected by a claim
An order or demand concerning alleged stolen cryptocurrency can affect people who had no involvement in the alleged fraud. Their account rights or assets may be restricted or used to satisfy someone else's claim.
RWS can examine the order, the account history and the evidence relied on, identify the legal interests affected and assess the issues for further advice.
The Kyrrex decision provides an important example of a non-party's ability to challenge an order under CPR 40.9. Whether that route is available in another case depends on its facts. Any court application must be undertaken by someone entitled to conduct that work.
Commercial agreements involving digital assets
A dispute may concern an agreement to hold, transfer, return or otherwise deal with digital assets, or the authority of a person making transactions for a business or another owner.
RWS can review the agreement, the relevant communications and the performance of the parties' obligations. The form of the asset, the wording of the agreement and the remedy being sought need to be considered together.
Where a matter involves regulated investments, financial-services complaints or another activity requiring separate authorisation, that issue will be identified before any instruction is accepted.
A second opinion on an existing dispute
You may want an independent assessment of a particular allegation, an expert report, the interpretation of an exchange agreement or the strategy currently being followed.
RWS can undertake a defined review within its non-reserved role. The purpose, documents to be considered, fees and limits of the opinion will be agreed before work starts.
Any proposed involvement with an existing legal team requires a separate assessment of the actual working relationship and any permission needed.
See also: Independent Second Opinion
Understanding whether further action is worthwhile
Identifying an apparent wrong is the beginning of the assessment. The practical questions include who can properly be pursued, whether the evidence supports the claim, whether assets remain available and which courts or other processes may be relevant.
Ryan will explain the strengths and difficulties in the position, the gaps in the evidence and the likely purpose of further expenditure.
That may support a request for information, focused correspondence, settlement discussions, independent expert work or instructions to an authorised practitioner. In some cases, the evidence or enforcement position may not justify the cost of proceeding.
Documents that may help
Depending on the dispute, useful material may include:
A short chronology and the dates of any relevant deadlines.
Exchange statements, withdrawal records and account restriction notices.
Public wallet addresses, transaction hashes and the blockchain involved.
The amount and type of cryptocurrency concerned.
Proof of purchases, payments and the client's interest in the assets.
Relevant terms of service, custody agreements or commercial contracts.
Communications with the counterparty, exchange or alleged fraudster.
Existing tracing reports and the records supporting them.
Any court orders, claims, decisions or correspondence already received.
Begin with a short outline. RWS will identify which documents are needed for an agreed review.
Do not send private keys, seed phrases, passwords or authentication codes. RWS does not need them to assess a dispute and does not hold or control clients' cryptocurrency through this service.
Direct advice and an agreed scope
You deal directly with Ryan. An instruction may cover an initial assessment, a particular report or document, correspondence in a non-reserved matter or continuing advice as a dispute develops.
The scope and charging basis are agreed before work begins. The cost of any independent tracing expert, counsel or authorised practitioner should be considered separately when planning the next stage.
Questions about cryptocurrency claims
The scope of RWS's work
RWS provides independent, non-reserved legal consultancy. It does not conduct litigation, exercise reserved rights of audience or undertake reserved instrument activities. It does not prepare, file or serve reserved court documents, manage court proceedings on a client's behalf or appear as the client's court advocate.
Any reserved work must be arranged separately with an appropriately authorised practitioner or, where permitted, undertaken by the client personally.
RWS does not provide investment recommendations, trading, custody or regulated claims-management services requiring FCA authorisation. Complaints seeking financial-services redress may require a separately authorised provider.
Discuss your cryptocurrency dispute
Send a brief outline of what happened, identify the cryptocurrency and amount involved, explain your relationship to the assets and state any urgent deadline. Mention whether an exchange, tracing expert or existing legal adviser is already involved.
RWS will consider whether the matter falls within its permitted scope and what an appropriate first piece of work would involve.
Related
Independent Second Opinion →