A table of the Singapore authorities
| Decision | Court and date | Asset | Nature of ruling | Holding on property |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| B2C2 v Quoine [2019] SGHC(I) 03 | SICC, 14 March 2019 | BTC, ETH | Trial | Cryptocurrency treated as property capable of being held on trust |
| Quoine v B2C2 [2020] SGCA(I) 02 | Court of Appeal, 24 February 2020 | BTC, ETH | Appeal after trial | Question expressly left open at [144]; no trust for want of certainty of intention |
| CLM v CLN [2022] SGHC 46 | High Court, 4 March 2022 | BTC, ETH | Ex parte interim | Serious question to be tried that cryptocurrency is property (Ainsworth criteria) |
| Janesh v Unknown Person [2022] SGHC 264 | High Court, 21 October 2022 | NFT (BAYC #2162) | Interim, unopposed | Prima facie property; chose-in-action point left open |
| ByBit v Ho Kai Xin [2023] SGHC 199 | High Court, 25 July 2023 | USDT | Summary judgment, defendant absent | USDT is property and a thing in action; constructive trust declared |
| Cheong Jun Yoong v Three Arrows [2024] SGHC 21 | High Court, 26 January 2024 | Mixed crypto | Service out application | Crypto assets are property; situs is the residence of the key-holder |
| Loh Cheng Lee Aaron v Hodlnaut [2023] SGHC 323 | High Court, 10 November 2023 | Customer crypto deposits | Winding up | Obligations to deliver crypto are "debts" for the cash-flow insolvency test |
The table shows the shape of the law: not one of the property holdings was reached after contested argument between represented parties on the specific point, and the Court of Appeal has still not decided it. Counsel opposing a proprietary claim in a Singapore court in 2026 could in theory argue that ByBit was decided without the benefit of adversarial submissions. In my judgement such an argument would fail. The reasoning in ByBit is careful and has been applied by other High Court judges. It is consistent with the legislative recognition in the Rules of Court and with the MAS trust requirements for licensed custodians. It accords with every other common-law jurisdiction that has considered the question. A client should plan on the basis that crypto assets are property in Singapore and that the remaining uncertainty concerns details of classification.
For general information only. This article does not constitute legal or tax advice, does not replace advice on an individual case and creates no lawyer-client relationship. It reflects the legal position as of October 2026.