A Seychelles court judgment tied to delisted CHP tokens has placed KuCoin under renewed legal scrutiny.
Summary
- A Seychelles court ordered KuCoin to compensate a Swiss investor over 21 million delisted CHP tokens.
- The investor claims KuCoin has not paid the judgment or participated in related court proceedings.
- The ruling rejected KuCoin’s claim that unwithdrawn delisted tokens became abandoned property.
A Swiss investor claims the exchange has not paid a court-ordered award exceeding $2 million. The dispute centers on 21 million CHP tokens and a ruling issued by the Seychelles Supreme Court in December 2025.
Court ruling centers on delisted CHP tokens
According to reports, the Seychelles Supreme Court ruled against KuCoin in December 2025. The case involved 21 million CHP tokens that remained on the platform after delisting. The court rejected the view that unwithdrawn tokens automatically become abandoned property. Instead, the ruling treated the tokens as obligations owed to the investor. The decision ordered compensation exceeding $2 million.
The investor alleges that KuCoin has not complied with the judgment. Six months after the ruling, the award reportedly remains unpaid. The investor also claims the exchange has not participated in related proceedings. According to the allegations, KuCoin has not responded to requests concerning the case. Public records cited in reports have not shown payment of the judgment.
The dispute has drawn attention because KuCoin operates through Seychelles-based entities. The ruling came from the same jurisdiction where parts of the exchange maintain legal incorporation. The case now focuses on whether local court decisions can compel action from global crypto platforms. Legal enforcement remains a central issue in the ongoing dispute. The investor continues seeking recovery through available legal channels.
Investor challenges exchange treatment of delisted assets
The CHP dispute stems from how exchanges handle delisted digital assets. Many trading platforms remove tokens when activity declines or compliance concerns emerge. Users often receive a withdrawal period before support ends. The Seychelles ruling addressed what happens after those deadlines pass. The court determined that the CHP holdings retained legal value.
According to reports, KuCoin argued that unwithdrawn CHP tokens became abandoned after delisting. The court did not accept that position. Instead, it linked the assets to financial obligations owed by the exchange. The decision established a legal distinction between delisting and ownership rights. That interpretation formed the basis of the compensation order.
The case has also focused attention on exchange terms of service. Many platforms include provisions covering inactive or unsupported assets. However, legal treatment can vary across jurisdictions. The CHP ruling addressed one specific dispute under Seychelles law. Other courts may assess similar issues under different legal frameworks.
Enforcement questions remain unresolved
The investor now faces the challenge of enforcing the judgment. Reports indicate that Seychelles courts have limited reach over globally distributed assets. Recovery efforts may require identifying exchange-linked assets in other jurisdictions.
Enforcement procedures can depend on local recognition of foreign judgments. Those steps can take time and involve additional legal proceedings. The CFTC and other regulators have recently increased attention on cross-border crypto platforms.
At the same time, court disputes continue emerging in multiple jurisdictions. The KuCoin matter adds another legal challenge involving exchange accountability. The investor maintains that the judgment remains unpaid. KuCoin has not publicly addressed the allegations described in the reports.
