Smithers & Anor v Persons Unknown Category 1 & Ors [2026] EWHC 207 (Comm) (23 January 2026)

Smithers & Anor v Persons Unknown Category 1 & Ors [2026] EWHC 207 (Comm) (23 January 2026)

The freezing injunction is continued as the non-disclosure was innocent, no prejudice to false positives is established, and objections raised by Binance do not warrant discharge; disclosure of identities to law enforcement is permitted to assist enforcement.

Citation
[2026] EWHC 207 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Nancy Carol Smithers; Claimant: Angelina Kostyantynivna Usanova; Defendant: Persons Unknown Category 1; Defendant: Persons Unknown Category 2; Defendant: Persons Unknown Category 3; Defendant: Phoenixfin Pte Ltd; Defendant: Bybit Technology Limited; Defendant: Bybit Fintech FZE; Defendant: Kyrrex Limited; Defendant: Kyrrex UK Ltd; Defendant: Nest Services Limited; Defendant: HTX (formerly Huobi Global SA)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 January 2026
Procedural Posture
Freezing Injunction Application / Return Hearing
Outcome
Freezing injunction continued; permission granted to disclose identities to law enforcement.
Legal Topics
Freezing Injunctions, Tracing of Cryptoassets, Non Disclosure, Jurisdiction, Disclosure to Law Enforcement
Civil Procedure Cryptocurrency Law Freezing Injunctions Tracing of Cryptoassets Non Disclosure Jurisdiction Disclosure to Law Enforcement

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Nancy Carol Smithers

Claimant

Angelina Kostyantynivna Usanova

Claimant

Persons Unknown Category 1

Defendant

Persons Unknown Category 2

Defendant

Persons Unknown Category 3

Defendant

Phoenixfin Pte Ltd

Defendant

Bybit Technology Limited

Defendant

Bybit Fintech FZE

Defendant

Kyrrex Limited

Defendant

Kyrrex UK Ltd

Defendant

Nest Services Limited

Defendant

HTX (formerly Huobi Global SA)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Freezing Injunction Application / Return Hearing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether material non-disclosure warrants discharge of freezing injunction
  2. 2 Whether the tracing methodology used was reliable
  3. 3 Whether the order should be continued against Binance

Ratio Decidendi

The freezing injunction is continued as the non-disclosure was innocent, no prejudice to false positives is established, and objections raised by Binance do not warrant discharge; disclosure of identities to law enforcement is permitted to assist enforcement.

Court Disposition

Freezing injunction continued; permission granted to disclose identities to law enforcement.

Orders

  • Freezing injunction continued against all defendants.
  • Claimants permitted to disclose identities of cryptoasset holders to relevant law enforcement agencies.