Key progress in the Qian Zhiming 60,000 Bitcoin case: Lantian Ge Rui enters through the litigation administrator, and the dispute over the applicability of Chinese and British law is in direct confrontation

According to Caixin, the case involving 60,000 bitcoins belonging to Qian Zhimin held a three-day hearing from July 7 to 9, 2026. Blue Sky Ge Rui Company officially joined the battle for bitcoin rights through the litigation administrator. The bitcoin dispute has transformed from a "two-party confrontation" into a "three-party competition": 1. The UK prosecution (DPP) claims that the assets should be recovered by the state; 2. The Chinese victims assert that they have property rights to the bitcoins that can be traced and have significantly appreciated in value; 3. The litigation administrator representing Blue Sky Ge Rui Company argues that the bitcoins are substitute assets formed after Qian Zhimin misappropriated company funds.

It is reported that the estimated value of the bitcoins involved in the case is about 427,000 yuan each as of July this year, a 152-fold increase from the purchase price when Qian Zhimin acquired them in 2014 (2,815 yuan each). If the applicant can successfully assert their property rights to the relevant bitcoin assets, the amount they can recover will not be limited to the original investment loss but can also extend to the appreciation gains of the bitcoins. The litigation administrator representing Blue Sky Ge Rui Company believes that the bitcoins in question are essentially transformed from misappropriated company property, and the company has the right to trace them and assert property rights.

Meanwhile, the Director of the UK Crown Prosecution Service (DPP) continues to insist that Chinese law should apply, while the leading law firm representing individual victims has proposed four complementary legal arguments to avoid the victims' claims being entirely dismissed due to any single legal pathway: 1. Bitcoin in the UK should be governed by UK law; 2. The investment contract is a scam, and upon cancellation, the rights revert to the victims; 3. The tracing mechanisms under POCA Sections 305 and 306 should also apply to the victims; 4. A "mixed structure" should break the binary choice between Chinese and UK law.