Laws regarding enforcement need to keep pace with crypto developments

The Business Times has published Counsel Danny Quah’s opinion article titled “Laws regarding enforcement need to keep pace with crypto developments”. Danny highlighted that at present, there are no express provisions under Singapore law that allow for a judgment creditor to seek disclosure of or enforcement against crypto assets, which are intangible property with an identifiable value. For example, a writ of seizure and sale can be only used to seize tangible personal property, immoveable property and securities. While the statutory language for Mareva injunctions and ancillary disclosure orders appear to be broad enough to compel the disclosure of a defendant’s crypto assets, there is no local jurisprudence that has positively affirmed this. It is suggested that this issue be taken into consideration for the impending civil justice reforms in the fourth quarter of this year. You may download a copy of the article here.