-
The UK Court of Appeal has dismissed Craig Wright’s latest attempt to contest a previous ruling, affirming the skepticism surrounding his claims as Bitcoin’s creator.
-
This decisive ruling reinforces the notion that substantial evidence is required to support contentious claims in the cryptocurrency domain.
-
According to a statement from Lord Justice Arnold, “Dr. Wright’s evidence was deemed insufficient to support his assertion of being the Bitcoin whitepaper’s author.”
The UK Court of Appeal upholds its dismissal of Craig Wright’s claims as Bitcoin’s creator, coinciding with a potential contempt of court hearing.
Court Upholds Decision Against Wright’s Bitcoin Authorship Claim
On November 28, the court dismissed Wright’s application to appeal, reaffirming that his claims lacked any merit. Lord Justice Arnold declared there was “no reasonable prospect of success” and no justification for an additional hearing. Wright’s evidence was deemed insufficient to uphold his assertion of being the author of the October 2008 Bitcoin whitepaper.
The original ruling, delivered after a comprehensive 22-day trial earlier this year, concluded that Wright could not substantiate his claims of authorship. Expert testimony and factual evidence presented during the trial overwhelmingly contradicted his assertions. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Wright sought an appeal but ultimately failed to provide compelling grounds for reconsideration.
BitMEX Research reported that Wright’s appeal primarily focused on judicial bias and improper treatment of evidence. However, the court found these accusations to be unsubstantiated. Lord Justice Arnold noted that Wright’s claims expressed disagreements with the judge’s reasoning rather than actual bias.
The ruling also emphasized that the trial judge ensured a fair trial for Wright, dismissing claims of procedural unfairness. “Dr. Wright accuses the judge of bias, but this accusation is baseless. No credible allegation of either actual or apparent bias is made by Dr. Wright, apart from disagreements with the judge’s reasoning,” the ruling stated.
Further, the court put aside Wright’s criticisms pertaining to expert evidence treatment. The judgment highlighted that even Wright’s experts largely concurred with COPA’s witnesses on crucial points, significantly undermining his arguments. Wright had authorized decisions not to call certain witnesses or cross-examine others, a strategy that further weakened his position.
“Dr. Wright argues that the judge should have treated himself as an expert, but given that (i) Dr. Wright was the principal factual witness and (ii) he had appropriately qualified experts, the judge was plainly right not to treat him as a surrogate expert witness,” the ruling added.
Meanwhile, the timing of Wright’s legal action rejection coincides with a scheduled contempt of court hearing on December 18. A UK judge has mandated Wright to attend this hearing in person. This development stems from a counteraction to his £900 billion claim against Jack Dorsey’s Square and BTC Core. If found guilty of contempt, Wright faces the possibility of arrest or up to two years in prison.
Future Implications for Craig Wright
This ruling signifies a significant setback for Craig Wright and presents broader implications for claims surrounding Bitcoin’s origins. Legal experts suggest that the court’s emphatic dismissal of Wright’s claims may deter similar assertions by others in the future, underlining the need for substantial evidence in cryptocurrency-related legal disputes.
Conclusion
With the UK Court of Appeal’s reaffirmation of the previous ruling, Craig Wright’s claims of being the creator of Bitcoin remain unresolved against a backdrop of mounting legal challenges. The upcoming contempt hearing on December 18 could further complicate Wright’s legal landscape, inviting scrutiny into his ongoing assertions. Overall, the implications of this ruling serve as a reminder of the importance of verifiable evidence in the ever-evolving world of cryptocurrency.
