Token and DeFi disputes
Legal analysis of token promotions, project representations and decentralized finance arrangements.
Who this practice helps
When project promises and operations diverge
This practice considers disputes about token rights, project representations, governance, access and decentralized finance arrangements. The focus is on the actual rights and representations, the people or entities involved and the evidence of how the arrangement operated.
Understanding the legal issue
A token or DeFi dispute may raise questions about contractual promises, disclosures, control of a project, smart contract behavior and the identity of responsible parties. We assess the legal significance of the available records alongside relevant technical analysis. A falling token price alone does not establish an actionable wrong.
Records that help establish the facts
- Project documentation and preserved promotional claims
- Token identifiers, contract addresses and transaction records
- Governance or team representations
- Terms, agreements and correspondence
Keep originals and preserve dates and context. Initial enquiries should contain only a concise overview. We will explain how further records should be shared.
Assessing the available route
The review examines applicable law, identifiable parties, evidence reliability and viable forums. Any litigation, reporting or preservation strategy is tailored to the matter. Technical findings should be assessed for limits and uncertainty before a legal allegation is made.
Free review and the later engagement
We begin with a free initial case review and no firm retainer. If suitable, a recommended independent recovery company evaluates the technical position and reports to the firm. After report review, any paid legal engagement sets out the standard fee, applicable retainer terms and authorization and jurisdictional submission work. Relevant reviews and approvals precede the next steps that depend on them.
Related guidance
How we work · Preserving relevant records · Common questions
Read the arrangement, not only the token name
A project may combine a token, a platform interface, a lending arrangement, governance rights and promotional statements. The legal assessment should identify which part of the arrangement is disputed and the parties responsible for the relevant conduct. The word decentralized does not resolve that inquiry.
Preserve the materials available when the decision was made, including project documentation, representations about control, terms and relevant governance proposals. Later changes may be important, but they should not silently replace the earlier record.
Control, representations and technical operation
Questions can include who controlled administrative keys, what permissions a contract allowed, what was represented about liquidity or custody and whether the observed operation matched that account. Technical review should identify actual contract behavior without treating every unexpected result as deliberate misconduct.
Counsel then assesses the significance of the evidence for the proposed legal issue. A contractual promise, a disclosure question and a technical exploit may require different analysis. Identifying a plausible cause of loss is not the same as establishing an actionable claim against an identifiable defendant.
Classification and viable proceedings
Depending on the transaction and jurisdiction, securities, commodities, consumer, contract or other legal questions may arise. The regulatory overview explains the importance of transaction context and current official materials. A project should not be assigned a legal classification solely from a generic label.
Any proposed action should consider the appropriate forum, service, evidence, costs and practical enforcement. Public reporting and private legal proceedings serve different purposes. The engagement should state which work is authorized and how further decisions will be made.
What the engagement may produce
The work product depends on the agreed instructions. Possible deliverables include: a representation and document matrix, a review of the relevant terms and transaction history, a record of material changes and an options memorandum within the agreed scope.
The proposal should identify the actual deliverable, assumptions, exclusions and charges. Technical analysis, local counsel and proceedings are separately considered where needed. Understand scope and fees.
The decision at the end of a stage
A price decline is different from a breach of an obligation or alleged misconduct. The assessment should identify the precise proposition that needs proving and the records needed to evaluate it. Technical and legal questions should be assigned clearly.
A stage review should explain what has been established, which gaps remain and what authority is needed for any next instruction. It may support further work, a narrower route or a decision not to proceed.