In the legal fight of UniCredit bank vs Bitcoin Mining firm Bitminer Factory, the mining firm is on the verge of getting compensation for its loss because of unfair action by the Bank.
In the past, the crypto industry saw many legal cases, where the majority of the court decisions were in favour to the non-crypto party but here a case came from Italy where the crypto company found the court is taking the side of the crypto company instead of another party, which is showing that the crypto companies are now getting better legal rights more likely to other non-crypto companies.
Initially Italy’s second-biggest bank UniCredit suspended the Bank account of Bitcoin mining firm Bitminer Factory. In response to this action of the Bank, mining firm filed a case against the Bank.
On 28 March, La Repubblica covered this report and noted that Bosnian city Banja Luka court found that UniCredit bank did wrong for the mining firm and now the bank should pay $144 million as compensation to the Bitcoin mining firm.
According to the report, the Bitcoin mining firm filed a statement under the case that the Bank froze the bank account without any reason and the company faced a loss of €131 million (about $144 million).
Bitcoin mining firm stated in documents to the court filing:
“In response to these allegations, the Bank said that it was reasonable to freeze the bank account of Mining firm because the Bank is not able to deal with such companies’ bank accounts which deal with digital assets.”
On the other hand, the Bank claimed that the Bank was not able to process the Operations of banking services for such companies which deal with digital assets. But the court found that the policies of the Bank don’t allow the bank to ban Bank accounts of any company under such situations.
If the case will end here then surely the Bank will pay a total of €131 million to the Bitminer Factory. But it will be interesting to see the ending because here the case is still alive.
Bank applied for the same in the court to review the case and added:
“It is not final, nor binding, nor enforceable. Ucbl’s eventual liability will only be determined upon outcome come of all available procedural remedies and, in any event, not before the filing of a final and binding judgment by the court of appeal.”