In a significant ruling on July 25, Judge Philip Jeyaretnam of the High Court of Singapore declared that cryptocurrency is capable of being held in trust and should be recognized as property.
No fundamental difference
In his ruling, Judge Jeyaretnam emphasized that there is no fundamental difference between cryptocurrencies, fiat money, or even physical objects like shells when it comes to their status as property. He argued that as long as these objects hold value and are based on mutual faith, they can be considered property. The judge’s verdict is seen as a crucial step in establishing the legal status of digital assets within the Singaporean jurisdiction.
Addressing the argument that cryptocurrencies lack physical presence and therefore cannot be considered property, Judge Jeyaretnam drew an analogy, stating: “We identify what is going on as a particular digital token, somewhat like how we give a name to a river even though the water contained within its banks is constantly changing.” By equating cryptocurrencies to named entities, the judge made it clear that physical tangibility is not a prerequisite for something to be classified as property.
Cryptocurrencies have value
Furthermore, the ruling challenges the perception that cryptocurrencies have no “real” value. Judge Jeyaretnam firmly refuted this notion, highlighting that the value of any asset, whether physical or digital, is ultimately determined by collective human belief and judgment.
One critical classification made by the judge is grouping cryptocurrencies under the category of “things in action” within British common law. This categorization means that cryptocurrencies are considered a form of property, over which personal rights can be claimed and enforced through legal actions, rather than requiring physical possession.
The judge’s decision also referenced the Monetary Authority of Singapore’s (MAS) consultation paper, which proposes implementing segregation and custody requirements for digital payment tokens. By taking cues from the MAS’s stance on digital assets, the court emphasized the legality of holding cryptocurrencies on trust, as long as practical methods for identification and segregation are in place.
Cues taken from existing law
Singapore’s legal framework for property also played a crucial role in the ruling. Judge Jeyaretnam pointed to Order 22 of Singapore’s Rules of Court 2021, which defines “movable property” to include various assets, such as cash, debts, bonds, shares, and cryptocurrency or other digital currency. This inclusion reinforces the recognition of cryptocurrencies as a valid form of property within Singaporean law.
Overall, Judge Jeyaretnam’s ruling represents a significant milestone in the legal recognition of cryptocurrencies in Singapore. By acknowledging cryptocurrencies as property, the court provides greater clarity and certainty for crypto users and investors while affirming the importance of embracing digital assets within the nation’s legal framework.