From: Kelvin
F.K. Low <kelvin.low@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday
13 February 2025 11:31
To: Gerard
McMeel KC; Lucas Clover Alcolea
Cc: Wilde,
Mark; Steve Hedley; obligations@uwo.ca; Daniel Seng
Subject: Re:
Bitcoin and Restitution
Dear
Gerard,
First,
given that his lawyers did not raise the A1P1 issue at trial, would he be
allowed to raise it on appeal? Given that his claim was also dismissed because
of limitation? I would think not.
Secondly,
I'm not sure that the jurisprudence is wide enough to cover information on a
tangible, as opposed to the tangible itself. Surely A1P1 covers the hard drive
but to stretch it to cover information on a tangible simply because the owner
of the tangible had terrible data backup practices (the claimant claims to be a
computer engineer which makes it even more inexcusable) seems like a terrible
idea. Consider a scenario where he had a backup which is only subsequently
lost, and his partner had taken the hard drive to the tip to spite him after a
lovers' tiff. Surely he would not be able to prevail against the council to the
value of the bitcoin even if A1P1 meant the legislation was void? I would
think therefore that even if he prevailed on A1P1 in respect of the hard drive,
the losses in relation to the bitcoins would be too remote.
Thirdly,
and I think most neutral observers think this: even if this somehow went to
trial, I find it hard to believe that he would actually be able to prove the
facts necessary to sustain his claim. In addition to being a lousy computer
engineer (no backup of important data), he's a lousy partner (too lazy to take
out his own trash), and at the very least gave lousy instructions (leading his
partner to take out the supposedly wrong hard drive).
In
earlier reports (eg https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/nov/27/hard-drive-bitcoin-landfill-site)), he
admits:
""You
know when you put something in the bin, and in your head, say to yourself
'that's a bad idea'? I really did have that," Howells, who works in IT,
told the Guardian. "I don't have an exact date, the only time period I can
give – and I've been racking my own brains – is between 20 June and 10 August.
Probably mid-July". At the time he obliviously threw them away, the 7,500
Bitcoins on the hard-drive were worth around £500,000."
More
likely than not, his "memory" suddenly improved to fit the facts of
his claim. I mean, less than half a year after the hard disk was tossed, he
couldn't even be sure of the date it happened. Now, he's sure his ex partner
did it and it was unauthorised to boot. 🙄 Heck, do we even know (and
I'm simply asking on the civil standard of proof) that the hard disk is in the
tip?
Cheers,
Kelvin
Sent
from Outlook
for Android