DIFC Court Rejects Strict Liability Claim Over the Loss of 300 Bitcoin
Dubai’s DIFC Digital Economy Court issued judgment in litigation arising from a failed transaction involving 300 BTC. The court rejected the claim against Tabarak Investment Capital, resolving a retried dispute over contractual duties, intermediary responsibility, and the allocation of loss in a large Bitcoin transaction.
On June 17, 2026, the Dubai International Financial Centre’s Digital Economy Court issued judgment in Gate Mena DMCC and Huobi Mena FZE v Tabarak Investment Capital Limited, litigation arising from the loss of 300 bitcoin during an attempted over-the-counter transaction. The judgment followed a five-day retrial held in February 2026, making June a distinct procedural stage rather than a repeat of the earlier hearing.
The dispute concerned the legal relationships surrounding a large Bitcoin sale and the responsibilities assumed by an intermediary involved in the transaction. The claimants sought to hold Tabarak Investment Capital liable for the loss, while the court had to determine what contractual and legal duties actually existed rather than treating possession of or involvement with Bitcoin as creating automatic liability.
The court rejected the strict-liability theory advanced against Tabarak. That mattered because digital-asset disputes often tempt courts and litigants to frame losses as technologically novel problems. The DIFC court instead analyzed the transaction through ordinary principles of contract, agency, and responsibility, asking what obligations the parties had actually undertaken.
The case belongs in Bitcoin’s legal history because the property lost was specifically 300 BTC and because the judgment addressed how conventional private-law principles apply to a large Bitcoin transaction. The event is distinct from the February retrial: February records the renewed evidentiary proceeding; June records the court’s resulting judgment.