LockMeta
  • News
    • Bitcoin
    • Ethereum
    • Altcoins
    • NFTs
    • Metaverse
    • Business
    • Policy
  • Market Cap
  • Buy Crypto
Facebook Twitter Telegram
Trending
  • The Alameda wallet address transferred about 30.68 million USDC to the FTX exchange
  • Grayscale Bitcoin Trust’s negative premium reached 29.26%, a record low
  • PeckShield: XCarnival attackers suspected of returning 1467 ETH
  • Celsius CEO tried to flee US but was stopped by authorities
  • Horizon cross-chain bridge attacker address just transferred 18,036 ETH
  • ULTRADX has reached a deep strategic cooperation with MastersDAO and MoreMeta metaverse platform
  • The total locked volume of DeFi protocols reached $76.82 billion, down 0.61% within 24 hours
  • Analyst: El Salvador’s Bitcoin holdings have fallen 53% in value
Monday, June 27
LockMeta
  • News
    • Bitcoin
    • Ethereum
    • Altcoins
    • NFTs
    • Metaverse
    • Business
    • Policy
  • Market Cap
  • Buy Crypto
Facebook Twitter Telegram
LockMeta
Twitter Telegram
Home»Crypto News Flash»The contract for helping people to fry “TEDA coins” is invalid

The contract for helping people to fry “TEDA coins” is invalid

Crypto News Flash November 20, 2021
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email

On November 20th, the Huangyan Court of Taizhou, China concluded an entrusted contract dispute case recently. Huang Jiajing introduced the “Digital Currency Quantitative Entrustment Agreement” with Zhang Yi.

It was agreed to transfer 200,000 yuan to Zhang Yi in his personal name for the purchase of USDT. Operated by Zhang Yi Investment. After the agreement expires, the guarantee will return the equivalent amount of digital currency purchased when the Huangjia contract is signed.

However, market conditions are not as good as expected. Zhang Yi only returned RMB 95,760 to Huang Jia’s investment. The remaining money has not been returned for a long time. Huang Jia sued Zhang Yi to the court and asked him to return the investment money and compensate the corresponding interest loss.

The People’s Court of Huangyan District, Taizhou, China ruled. The subject matter involved in this case does not have legitimacy. Therefore, the entrusted custody of the transaction by the plaintiff and the defendant is not protected by law.

Therefore, the “Digital Currency Quantitative Entrustment Agreement” signed by the plaintiff and the defendant is an invalid contract. The property acquired by the defendant pursuant to the invalid contract shall be returned to the plaintiff, and the defendant shall return the remaining investment of RMB 104,240.

The plaintiff knew the investment of virtual currency. Not protected by national laws, but still entrusted the defendant to invest. There is a fault in itself. Therefore, his claim for compensation for losses such as interest is unfounded by law and is not supported.

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email

Related News

The Alameda wallet address transferred about 30.68 million USDC to the FTX exchange

June 27, 2022

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust’s negative premium reached 29.26%, a record low

June 27, 2022

PeckShield: XCarnival attackers suspected of returning 1467 ETH

June 27, 2022

The Latest

The Alameda wallet address transferred about 30.68 million USDC to the FTX exchange

June 27, 2022

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust’s negative premium reached 29.26%, a record low

June 27, 2022

PeckShield: XCarnival attackers suspected of returning 1467 ETH

June 27, 2022

Celsius CEO tried to flee US but was stopped by authorities

June 27, 2022

Horizon cross-chain bridge attacker address just transferred 18,036 ETH

June 27, 2022
Facebook Twitter Telegram
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
© 2022 LockMeta.

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.