Soleymani (appellant) v Nifty Gateway LLC (respondent)

From Wednesday 27 to Thursday 28 July 2022

By Notice of the Appellant filed on April 12, 2022, the Claimant appeals the order of Clare Ambrose QC dated March 24, 2022 in which it dismissed the Claimant’s claim under Term 17 for lack of jurisdiction; stayed the proceedings under section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996 and ordered costs.

Background: The claimant, Mr Soleymani, is an individual residing in Liverpool. He describes himself as an entrepreneur, activist and philanthropist. He also collects art and has been collecting non-fungible tokens (NFTs) for some time. He created a private gallery to display his art collection. Defendant is a limited liability company registered in the State of Delaware with business premises in New York. It operates an online platform through which digital assets can be bought and sold. Assets can be sold at auction. Platform users can also purchase assets directly from other users. Plaintiff participated in an auction held on Defendant’s online platform between April 30, 2021 and May 2, 2021 and placed a bid for a blockchain-based NFT associated with a work by the artist known as Beeple’s name titled “Abundance”. Its claim in these proceedings seeks a declaratory judgment relating to the contractual basis of this participation.
The question before the Court was whether the English court should decline jurisdiction on the plaintiff’s request or stay the proceedings. The Defendant has challenged jurisdiction for: (a) an order under Part 11 of the CPR declaring that the Court does not have or will not exercise jurisdiction; or (b) an order staying proceedings under Part 3.1(2)(f) of the CPR and/or section 9 of the Arbitration Act 1996.

View audience:

Day 1

Part 1

Part 2

Day 2

Part 1

Part 2

Comments are closed.