Celsius Fights Back: Appeals Court Ruling Against $444M Claim on FTX Transfers

by

As a seasoned crypto investor with battle-hardened nerves and a portfolio that has weathered more storms than a Caribbean island, I can’t help but feel a mix of emotions as I follow this legal saga between Celsius and FTX. The ongoing court drama is reminiscent of an endless soap opera, with twists and turns that would make even the most seasoned scriptwriters green with envy.

The crux of the matter lies in the adequacy of the initial proofs of claim and the procedural correctness of amended filings – a legal dance as intricate as a tango, yet as unpredictable as a game of roulette. The stakes are high, with hundreds of millions of dollars at play, making it a battle worth watching for any crypto investor.

Celsius’ initial claim, seeking $2 billion in damages, was later revised to focus on preferential transfers totaling $444 million, only to be dismissed due to procedural impropriety. The company’s response – essentially arguing that the original filing should have been enough to signal its intentions – reminds me of a classic game of poker, where bluffing is an art form.

The next steps in this legal battle are crucial, with appeals focusing on the legitimacy of Celsius’ claims and the procedural adherence of their amendments. As an investor, I can’t help but wonder if this is a game of chess or a never-ending round of whack-a-mole.

In the end, it seems that in the world of crypto, the only certainty is uncertainty. But as they say in my hometown, “You can’t make an omelette without breaking some eggs.” Or in this case, you can’t have a thriving crypto market without a few legal battles here and there!

As an analyst, I find myself observing a new development in the legal saga unfolding between the defunct crypto lending platform Celsius and the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX. It seems this dispute has moved into another significant stage.

Recently, Celsius has lodged an appeal following Judge John T. Dorsey’s decision that dismissed their $444 million claim against FTX.

Reports indicate that the disagreement originates from accusations made by the failed crypto lending company towards FTX officials, claiming “favoritism in transfers” and “derogatory comments” which are believed to have hastened the demise of the lending platform.

The new sentence still conveys the same information but is rephrased for a more natural flow and easier readability.

Key Legal Arguments and Court Ruling

As a researcher delving into this matter, I’m focusing on two key aspects: the validity of Celsius’ original evidence presented in their claims, and the adherence to proper procedures in their subsequent filing modifications.

At first, the failed cryptocurrency lending company originally demanded compensation of $2 billion, asserting that officials from FTX made unwarranted and harmful remarks about the lending platform’s financial status without proper backing.

Celsius filed a Notice of Appeal against Judge Dorsey’s ruling for FTX debtor

Elected for Appeal to be heard in the District Court

Facts
1) Celsius Filed a $2bn claim for disparagement before the bar date

2) Celsius filed a $444m amended claim for a preference claim after bar…

— Sunil (FTX Creditor Champion) (@sunil_trades) January 1, 2025

Initially, Celsius Network mentioned exploring potential preference claims, but this was deemed “insufficient” by the court. In its later submissions, though, they concentrated on alleged preferential transfers worth $444 million instead.

When the crypto lending platform that had collapsed earlier submitted a revised claim emphasizing the $444 million they claimed were unfair transactions, Judge Dorsey deemed the revision “inappropriate according to procedural rules.

The court emphasized four main problems with Celsius’ revised claim submission: it was submitted past the deadline without prior approval, had an insufficient link to the initial claim, failed to explain the delay, and could unfairly impact FTX’s current restructuring efforts.

Collectively, these factors resulted in the rejection of the revised assertion made by the failed crypto lending platform. In counterargument, Celsius contends that their original submission was adequate enough to communicate their plans related to avoiding such claims.

Additionally, the company asserted that their submissions adhered to the regulations set by the Bankruptcy Law and were put in place as precautionary steps to maintain the legitimacy of their claims throughout the court process.

Next Steps in the Legal Battle

The appeal notification, submitted by Celsius litigation administrator Mohsin Meghji on December 31st, indicates that the company intends to persist in its efforts to uphold its legal claims against FTX.

The discussion will revolve around whether Celsius’ initial evidence supporting their claims adhered to the required legal guidelines, and if their subsequent adjustments in filing documents should be considered, given the delays in the process.

Represented by activist Sunil Kavuri, the FTX creditors have expressed doubts about the validity of Celsius’ assertions. They point out that the late submission of revised claims and the apparent deviation from proper procedural guidelines are matters of concern.

It’s important to recognize that the decision made on this appeal could carry substantial consequences for both bankrupt companies and their lenders, since a large sum of money – approximately hundreds of millions of dollars – is in question.

Featured image created with DALL-E, Chart from TradingView

Read More

2025-01-03 07:42