With a settlement hearing days away, one party’s solicitors needed to know quickly whether the other side’s crypto disclosure stood up. WRS was instructed for a focused, time-limited review of the disclosure, the answers given to the solicitors’ questions, and the on-chain position. The findings informed the settlement discussions directly.
Key Takeaways
1. A scoped review can be enough
A short, focused assessment can tell a legal team where disclosure holds and where further answers are needed, without the cost of a full investigation.
2. Verify balances on-chain
Disclosed balances can be checked directly against the blockchain. Where the figures match, that point can be resolved; where they do not, the legal team has a clear issue to follow up.
3. Tax-software exports are not a full record
Tax reporting tools can be useful, but they are not a substitute for complete exchange records when reviewing money in, money out and trading activity.
4. Unanswered questions are findings too
Questions left open and figures that do not reconcile give the legal team specific, evidenced points to raise ahead of a hearing.
At a glance
Matter type
Financial remedy proceedings
Our role
Adviser to one party’s solicitors
Scope
Focused review of disclosure, questionnaire replies and on-chain data
Timing
Days, ahead of a settlement hearing
Outcome
Verified balances and a list of specific outstanding gaps
The challenge
The legal team had little time and a specific question: did the position being asserted stand up to scrutiny? The disclosure covered a retail trading account, hardware wallets holding assets across several blockchains, and a tax-software export. Some questions put to the other side had gone unanswered.
Our strategy
We worked through the legal team’s own list of questions in order. We checked each disclosed balance against on-chain data, reviewed the trading history for any movement outside the platform, compared disclosed holdings with current ones, and identified where the answers given were incomplete or did not match the record.
Need a focused review of crypto disclosure?
Our digital assets team can carry out focused crypto disclosure reviews to help legal teams verify balances, identify gaps and prioritise the issues that need further explanation.
Checking the balances
Hardware-wallet balances were checked against the blockchain and found broadly consistent with the disclosure, including holdings spread across several blockchains and token types on the same devices.
Following the trading
We reviewed the retail trading account’s full history. The activity was straightforward: funds went in, were traded between tokens within the platform, and stayed there. The reported losses were consistent with the trading record, and nothing had been withdrawn to external wallets.
Where gaps remained
The review identified specific points that had not been addressed: figures that had changed since disclosure without explanation, questions that had been referred to supporting documents but not directly answered, and exchange records that had not been provided despite those platforms appearing in the disclosed data. Each gap was tied to a specific record or question that would resolve it.
Limits of the review
This was a scoped review. Tracing all activity through linked wallets and additional addresses identified on-chain would have been the next step, and we said so. The legal team was given a clear picture of what a further instruction would cover.
The outcome
The legal team went into the settlement discussions with checked balances, a clear separation of what was explained from what was not, and a list of specific points to raise.
