Reason to trust
How Our News is Made
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Ad discliamer
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
The crypto finance world has witnessed numerous disputes, but few have been similar to that of the ongoing feud between DeFiance Capital and Three Arrows Capital Limited (3AC). Particularly, this dispute underscores the intricate interplay between traditional financial frameworks and the evolving dynamics of digital assets.
In a tweet posted earlier today, DeFiance Capital CEO shed new light on their ongoing legal tussle with 3AC, suggesting a turn in the tide.
Statement and Update on Dispute with Three Arrows Capital Limited (3AC)
We are very pleased to share a positive development on our end with the public.
It is well-known that for the past year, we have been locked in a dispute with the 3AC estate who are claiming that the assets…
— Arthur (@Arthur_0x) August 15, 2023
DeFiance Capital: A Year-long Struggle
Almost a year ago, the disagreement between DeFiance Capital and the 3AC estate took center stage when the estate contended that the assets held by DeFiance Capital should be used to square off the debts of 3AC.
Countering this claim, DeFiance maintained that they had complete authority and rightful ownership of their assets. This stance, they assert, aligns with common industry perceptions and is supported by available evidence.
The debate took a geographical turn when the liquidators insisted on settling the dispute in the British Virgin Islands (BVI). DeFiance Capital, which was managed from Singapore alongside 3AC, found this choice of jurisdiction puzzling.
They argued that the primary evidence and witnesses were based in Singapore, making it a more apt location for the hearing. Their persistence bore fruit last week when the High Court of Singapore agreed to their jurisdiction preference, subtly undermining the liquidators’ earlier narrative that DeFiance’s stance held no ground.
The Road Ahead: Seeking Effective Resolutions
Despite these disagreements, DeFiance has shown a willingness to collaborate. They have extended assistance to 3AC’s liquidators in understanding the position of DeFiance and even offered help in identifying 3AC’s assets.
The intention, as expressed by the CEO & CIO of DeFiance, was to minimize the resources spent on deciding the hearing location and instead concentrate on the core issues at hand.
However, the journey hasn’t been without its hitches. The liquidators faced setbacks in the US while trying to hold Three Arrows Capital Co-Founder Kyle Davies accountable in a US court. This effort was thwarted when it came to light that Davies was no longer a US citizen, an information oversight that resulted in unnecessary legal expenses.
Blossom Hing, representing DeFiance, highlighted the significance of the recent jurisdiction decision. Emphasizing that the Singapore International Commercial Court could address issues pertaining to BVI law, she expressed optimism about an efficient resolution that benefits all parties.
Hing noted:
We welcome the decision by the Singapore Court as it will ensure that important evidence located in Singapore would be available for the purposes of resolving the dispute in a just and efficient manner. Coupled with the fact that the Singapore International Commercial Court can hear arguments on and decide on BVI law issues, we believe that having the dispute heard in Singapore will result in considerable savings of costs and time for all parties.
Featured image from Unsplash, Chart from TradingView
