This is really interesting (and a very nuanced legal point). What the court DID NOT say: It did not rule that Bitcoin is not property. It is (and the legislation makes that clear. See the Property (Digital Assets) Act 2025 linked in the thread). A court cannot overrule legislation. But remember – English law sees Bitcoin as INTANGIBLE property. The specific cause of action in this case was called the tort of conversion. This is a technical civil ‘wrong’, that happens when one person intentionally interferes with another person’s property in a way that completely deprives the owner of its use or possession. What happened in this case was that the seed phrase for the claimant’s @Trezor was accessed by his estranged wife, and she then swept his wallet. The tort of conversion MIGHT have enabled him to bring a claim against her for the lost property. The kicker? The tort of conversion ONLY applies where a tangible, physical asset is involved. The law may over time evolve to change this, but at the moment, other causes of action must be used to bring his claim, such as unjust enrichment and proprietary restitution. TLDR? The court did not say that Bitcoin wasn’t property. They said, correctly, that it is not PHYSICAL property, and that therefore the specific legal claim, and the specific legal remedy, sought by the complainant were not applicable in this case.

My parents died suddenly in a car accident 25 years ago this year. I was 21, and became a guardian for my little brother and sister (10 and 12 at the time). I've spoken about the accident and its impact on a couple of podcasts, but it's fresh on my mind as my brother just shared with me a handwritten letter I sent to him at his school. He's kept it with him ever since. I've transcribed it below; he told me last night that it's helped him many times over the past two decades. Sharing it here in case what I said back then in an attempt to help a little lost boy is of assistance to anyone else. 23 July 2002 To Harry, From Freddie. 1. Don't panic. 2. You have many people watching your back. I am one of them and I am watching it very closely. 3. The accident was nobody's fault. Therefore we cannot legitimately blame anyone for it. We call it an accident for this reason. 4. We cannot bring Mummy and Daddy back – but this has important consequences: – We need to remember what they taught us. – We need to behave as they would have wanted us to. – Because they are not alive, but we are, we owe both ourselves and their memory a duty to live as well and as fully as we possibly can, not to give in, not to give up. Because of the accident we have been given a very special insight into what it means to be alive – to live as fully as we can, to consider others, to work at what we are good at, and work even harder at what is difficult. Something has been wasted, something has been lost. We must make sure that our lives are not. We shall always regret that Mummy and Daddy are not here – let us not regret anything we do, or know that we had a chance and threw it away. Whatever happens, I have got your back. Even if I do sometimes hit you with cricket balls. Run straight, look your foe in the eye, and never back down. Strength and honour! I love you very much.