KuCoin Faces $2 Million Judgment After Seychelles Court Bars Abandoned Token Claim

KuCoin, the Singapore‑based cryptocurrency exchange, was ordered by a Seychelles court to pay a Swiss investor over $2 million after the court rejected the exchange’s attempt to classify unclaimed tokens as “abandoned.” The investor, who had been awarded the sum in a separate dispute over a delisted token, says KuCoin has failed to honor the judgment and is preparing to file another lawsuit.

The dispute stems from the 2022 delisting of a token that the investor claimed to still hold on KuCoin’s platform. When the token was removed, the exchange asserted that any remaining balances were forfeited, a position that the Seychellois court deemed unlawful. In its ruling, the court emphasized that users retain ownership of assets deposited on an exchange until they are formally withdrawn.

“The court’s decision reaffirms that exchanges cannot unilaterally treat customer holdings as abandoned,” said a legal analyst familiar with the case. “It sets a precedent for how offshore jurisdictions may handle similar token‑ownership disputes in the future.”

KuCoin has not publicly responded to the latest allegations, but its legal team previously argued that the token’s removal was necessary to comply with regulatory requirements. Sources close to the exchange indicate that internal discussions are ongoing about the best way to resolve the outstanding payment without further litigation.

The case highlights growing scrutiny of crypto platforms over how they manage delisted or inactive assets. Regulators in multiple jurisdictions have been urging exchanges to adopt clearer policies and to ensure that user funds are protected even when tokens are removed from trading lists.

If KuCoin does not fulfill the court‑ordered payment, the investor plans to pursue additional legal remedies, potentially involving enforcement actions in other jurisdictions where the exchange operates. The outcome could influence how other crypto firms handle token delistings and could spur more stringent oversight of user‑asset protections worldwide.