When Financial Fraud Meets Cryptocurrency

Narita Bahra KC & Dr Marius Frunza

Cryptocurrency is no longer an outlier in financial fraud litigation. Courts and tribunals are now routinely asked to assess cases involving extensive on-chain transaction histories, multiple wallets and exchanges, and assets whose value can shift materially over short periods of time. In such cases, the decisive issue is often not the volume of data available, but how well it is understood, tested and explained.

Crypto Literacy as a Practical Necessity

Established financial crime and civil experience remains essential. Yet cases involving digital assets raise questions that do not arise in conventional disputes. Issues of wallet control, exchange custody, valuation dates and cross-border market dynamics can be central to liability, loss and benefit. Courts increasingly expect these matters to be addressed directly and precisely, rather than by analogy to traditional banking or payment systems.

As a result, an informed understanding of how crypto assets function in practice has become a practical necessity rather than a specialist indulgence.

Methodology Under Scrutiny

Tribunals are alert to weaknesses in crypto evidence. Analysis that depends on opaque tools, unexplained assumptions or selective transaction sampling is readily challenged. By contrast, work grounded in clear, disciplined methodology, capable of being replicated and explained in straightforward terms, tends to carry greater weight.

This places particular importance on the interaction between Counsel and Expert. Advocacy is most effective where it is built on analysis that is robust, proportionate and capable of being communicated without exaggeration.

Explaining Complexity Without Drama

Judges and arbitrators do not require mastery of blockchain engineering. They do, however, expect complex material to be presented clearly and simply. Effective teams focus on explanation rather than assertion, addressing common misconceptions about cryptocurrency, including the assumption that its presence is inherently suspicious, by reference to evidence and economic logic.

In practice, the ability to translate technical detail into a coherent narrative often determines how confidently a tribunal approaches the issues that matter.

Experience in Demanding Crypto Litigation

Narita Bahra KC has acted in a number of serious financial crime cases involving digital assets, including representing one of the defendants in the billion-pound Cryptoqueen prosecution, a case emblematic of the scale and complexity now seen in major cryptocurrency fraud proceedings.

In related matters, expert evidence has been provided by Dr Marius Frunza, an internationally recognised specialist in blockchain technology and cryptocurrency markets, including Chinese crypto markets. His work is marked by a structured, methodical approach and a focus on ensuring that complex crypto evidence can be understood and tested by tribunals.

An Increasingly Informed Choice

For those facing cryptocurrency-related financial fraud proceedings, the selection of counsel and expert is ultimately a matter of judgment. As courts become more experienced in dealing with digital assets, teams that combine sound legal analysis with genuine technical understanding and a restrained, explanatory approach  are increasingly well placed to assist.

In cases where cryptocurrency is central, clarity and methodology tend to be decisive.