VIRGILIO TARRAGO DA SILVEIRA & Anor v HASHSTACS PTE. LTD. & Anor [2024] SGHC(I) 32 (16 December 2024)

VIRGILIO TARRAGO DA SILVEIRA & Anor v HASHSTACS PTE. LTD. & Anor [2024] SGHC(I) 32 (16 December 2024)

The court found that the claimants failed to establish that Hashstacs Pte Ltd or Mr Soh made actionable misrepresentations or were responsible for the statements in the whitepapers and online materials. The representations were made by other entities, and the claimants did not prove reliance on any actionable statement by the defendants. There was no evidence of fraud, negligence, unjust enrichment, or conspiracy attributable to the defendants. The claims were dismissed.

Citation
[2024] SGHC(I) 32
Parties
Claimant: Virgilio Tarrago Da Silveira; Claimant: Munchetty; Defendant: Hashstacs Pte Ltd; Defendant: Soh Kai Jun
Jurisdiction
Singapore
Judgment Date
16 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Originating Application / Judgment
Outcome
Claims dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Fraud and Deceit, Negligent Misrepresentation, Negligence, Unjust Enrichment, Conspiracy
Tort Restitution Misrepresentation Fraud and Deceit Negligent Misrepresentation Negligence Unjust Enrichment Conspiracy

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 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Virgilio Tarrago Da Silveira

Claimant

Munchetty

Claimant

Hashstacs Pte Ltd

Defendant

Soh Kai Jun

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Originating Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendants made actionable misrepresentations regarding the STACS Token and Protocol
  2. 2 Whether the claimants were induced to purchase STACS Tokens by false or misleading statements
  3. 3 Whether the defendants acted fraudulently or negligently

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the claimants failed to establish that Hashstacs Pte Ltd or Mr Soh made actionable misrepresentations or were responsible for the statements in the whitepapers and online materials. The representations were made by other entities, and the claimants did not prove reliance on any actionable statement by the defendants. There was no evidence of fraud, negligence, unjust enrichment, or conspiracy attributable to the defendants. The claims were dismissed.

Court Disposition

Claims dismissed

Orders

  • All claims by the claimants are dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the defendants.