The concept of "cryptocurrency" in Russia is not legally fixed. The draft law “On Digital Assets” has been under development for two years, but it has not yet been considered by the State Duma in the second reading. In addition, in the latest edition, the word “cryptocurrency” disappeared from the text of the bill. Cryptocurrencies have been repeatedly spoken about in the Central Bank, and for the most part these statements are in a negative way. So, the head of the Central Bank recently , which opposes digital private money as it could destroy monetary policy and financial stability if it replaces public money.
Although transactions with cryptocurrency are not regulated by special regulations, there is already a certain jurisprudence in cases in which cryptocurrency appears. Often the texts of court decisions that deal with cryptocurrencies coincide in this part and in the motivation of the decision on cryptocurrencies. As a rule, cryptocurrency appears in court cases in several cases, which we will consider below. These are investments in cryptocurrency and its purchase, mining, blocking of sites with information about cryptocurrency and cases related to the sale of drugs, where settlements with buyers were made in cryptocurrency.
Cryptocurrency purchase
Court in the Rostov region , that there is no legal protection for cryptocurrency assets, and the owner of the specified type of virtual currency “has the risk of losing funds invested in an asset that is not subject to reimbursement.” In that case, the plaintiff was trying to recover the amount of unjust enrichment from his girlfriend, to whom he transferred a certain amount in bitcoins. He earned on the sale and purchase of cryptocurrencies on the stock exchange and withdrew almost 600 thousand rubles from bitcoins through his girlfriend's card. When she refused to return the money, he went to court, but the court denied the claims. The court pointed out that relations regarding cryptocurrencies in Russia have not been settled, bitcoin is not recognized as electronic money, and its release is generally prohibited in the territory of the Russian Federation. As a result, the court stated that “the exchange of digital financial assets (cryptocurrency) for rubles is not regulated by the current legislation of the Russian Federation. Accordingly, admissible evidence to their arguments in this part Skrynnik D.L. did not give it to the court."
Cryptocurrency can be bought not only online, but also through cryptomats. These are machines for buying cryptocurrency. The work of cryptomats is not regulated by law, but since last year, law enforcement officers began to physically seize them. Thus, the seizure of 22 cryptomats of the company BBFpro a year ago. Then the law enforcement officers did it even . Law enforcement officers themselves said that they were doing this on behalf of the Prosecutor General on the basis of a letter from the Central Bank, which takes a critical stance towards cryptocurrencies. Court decisions are still being made against the owner of cryptomats. For example, in June 2019, the Arbitration Court of the Irkutsk Region recognized the actions to seize BBFpro crypto ATMs as legal and rejected the appeal.
Contribution to cryptocurrency
The plaintiff invested in MMM Bitcoin to receive a 10% return every month. He lost his investment and went to court. However, the court to him in compensation, stating: “Activity in the circulation of cryptocurrency is risky, there is no legal protection for such assets, its legal status is not defined, and the owner of this type of virtual currency has the risk of losing funds invested in an asset that is not subject to reimbursement.”
In another case, the plaintiff appealed to the Consumer Rights Protection Law in order to return funds invested in cryptocurrency. the court that investing in a crypto exchange is not regulated by the Consumer Protection Law, and the plaintiff does not have the right to file this case with the court at his place of residence. The Law of the Russian Federation "On the Protection of Consumer Rights" is not applicable to transactions with cryptocurrencies, since the purpose of acquiring a digital product is to make a profit. In Russia, it is impossible to go to court with a claim to recover funds for the purchase of tokens when participating in an ICO, based on this law.
In general, banks are suspicious of operations with cryptocurrencies. They can block accounts if such transactions are carried out. This is what Sberbank did, and the court took its side. Sberbank's user agreement states that it can block the card if the bank suspects that the transaction is being carried out in order to legalize proceeds from crime or finance terrorism. In this case, the bank not only blocked the card, but also for unjust enrichment.
But the investment of cryptocurrency in the authorized capital of the organization becomes possible. In November 2019, the FTS the introduction of cryptocurrency in the authorized capital. The founders of the Artel company included an investor who contributed 0,1 bitcoin to the authorized capital in exchange for 5% in the project. To contribute cryptocurrency to the authorized capital, an assessment of the electronic wallet was carried out and an act of acceptance and transfer of the login and password from it was drawn up.
Mining
Plaintiff to terminate his contract for the purchase of equipment for mining, as the price of bitcoin fell and he considered that mining would be too energy-intensive and not economically viable. The court considered that the change in the exchange rate of the cryptocurrency is not a significant change in circumstances, which may be the basis for terminating the contract of sale. The appeal was rejected.
Mining equipment is considered by the court to be a product intended for business activities, and not for personal and domestic use. Cryptocurrency the court called "peculiar money". The court ruled to return the money for the goods already purchased, but to refuse compensation for moral damage, since the defendant did not cause moral and physical harm to a particular citizen. The plaintiff purchased 17 pieces of goods, and the court indicated that even one unit of goods for mining is evidence of entrepreneurial activity.
In another case the case when Ershov ordered the purchase of mining equipment from Khromov and further mining, the bitcoins mined by which were sent to Ershov's account. 9 bitcoins were mined, after which Ershov said that he would not pay for equipment and mining costs, since the efficiency of mining cryptocurrencies had decreased. Mining equipment was purchased on behalf of Ershov. The court granted Khromov's claims for the recovery of funds under the loan agreement, interest and court costs.
the plaintiffs went to court because they did not receive the expected profit from mining. The court dismissed the claim on the grounds that bitcoin does not fall under the definition of electronic money, a payment system, is not a foreign currency, does not fall under the objects of civil rights, and “all operations involving the transfer of bitcoins are carried out by their owners at their own peril and risk.” According to the court, Baryshnikov A.The. and Batura V.N., having agreed with the terms of the mining services, assumed the risk of incurring any financial loss and / or damage (loss) that could be caused to them as a result of the delay or impossibility of making electronic transfers.” The court also pointed out that the losses could not be due to the provision of services of inadequate quality, but as a result of the fall of the bitcoin market.
Blocking sites with information about cryptocurrency
Last year we about cases related to the blocking of sites with information about cryptocurrency. Although these decisions were not sufficiently motivated and not justified by law, and we have already tried the practice of overturning such illegal decisions on appeal, Russian judges continue to issue decisions to block cryptocurrency information portals. So, already in April 2019, the Khabarovsk District Court blocked a website with information about bitcoins, ruling: which is prohibited in the Russian Federation”.
When making such decisions, the courts refer to the clarifications of the Bank of Russia dated January 27.01.2014, XNUMX, as, for example, the Khabarovsk District Court did in deed. The clarifications of the Central Bank state that operations with virtual currencies are speculative in nature and may involve the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime and the financing of terrorism. Also, judges in their decisions mention 115-FZ "On counteracting the legalization (laundering) of proceeds from crime and the financing of terrorism." At the same time, information about cryptocurrencies does not apply to the grounds for extrajudicial blocking of the site, which can be carried out by Roskomnadzor, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and other departments. Sites with such information are blocked only by a court decision after the statement of the prosecutor, who decided that information about cryptocurrencies threatens public principles.
Drugs
In 2019, the Penza District Court for the illegal sale of drugs. In the case file, the cryptocurrency is referred to as the currency of account. The court drew attention to the fact that the defendants used bitcoins to receive payments, since their electronic accounts are depersonalized. Separately, it was noted that “As a result of the analysis of the examined evidence, the court also established the presence in the actions of Vyatkina V.A., Samoilov D.G. and Stupnikova A.P. direct intent to make financial transactions with the bitcoin cryptocurrency, since the defendants were aware that this type of payment, like the bitcoin cryptocurrency itself, is not used in the official payment turnover on the territory of the Russian Federation. In addition, in this way, the defendants laundered the money they knowingly obtained by criminal means, and in a way that in itself makes it difficult for law enforcement agencies to reveal these facts.”
the court rejected the defendant's version that he believed that he was selling steroids, not drugs. Among the reasons that he was recognized as knowledgeable about the crime is mentioned “the intention to receive a reward for these actions in cryptocurrency”**". Interestingly, the name of the cryptocurrency in the published court decision is hidden.
Source: habr.com