In a pivotal development within the protracted legal feud involving Craig Wright, the self-proclaimed Bitcoin inventor, the UK Supreme Court has dismissed his appeal in the libel case against podcaster Peter McCormack. This latest ruling comes after Wright was previously granted a nominal compensation of £1 in July for his libel claim against McCormack, a decision that has now been upheld by the Supreme Court.
Rupert Cowper-Coles, a partner at law firm RPC representing McCormack, expressed satisfaction with the decision, noting that the judgment affirms the £1 nominal damages award, which Wright attempted to appeal twice without success.
This Supreme Court ruling marks the culmination of an extended legal battle, signaling that there are no remaining arguable legal questions. For McCormack and his legal team, the judgment serves as a clear rebuttal to Wright’s assertions regarding his alleged role in the development of Bitcoin. See link source (Link Source)
Simultaneously, Wright faces another legal challenge in a lawsuit related to his Bitcoin intellectual property rights. He extended a settlement proposal to defendants associated with the Cryptocurrency Open Patent Alliance (COPA), who rejected the offer promptly. The COPA members, including Coinbase and Kraken, accuse Wright of manipulating evidence and forging critical documents in his lawsuits against Bitcoin developers.
The ongoing legal saga has seen Wright pursuing libel cases against prominent figures in the crypto industry, such as Roger Ver and Vitalik Buterin. Concentrating much of his legal efforts in the UK, where libel standards are lower compared to the US, Wright has faced challenges in convincing the court of his claims.
The UK Supreme Court’s denial of Wright’s appeal marks a significant milestone in his legal battles, highlighting the resilience of McCormack and his allies against Wright’s assertions and legal maneuvers within the crypto community. This decision further solidifies the legal standing established earlier, emphasizing the court’s dismissal of Wright’s attempts to overturn the nominal damages ruling.
