Read more
You’re out of time, says court – but liquidators reissue claims against investors.
It’s beginning to look like the liquidators are engaging in high-risk, expensive litigation where the prospects of success appear slim. Picture: Adobe Stock
Following the article’s publication, Farrer & Co sent a letter to Moneyweb, citing errors and demanding a correction. Their response has been included in the article and below the article. Moneyweb sent questions to the liquidators nearly a week earlier, but they did not respond.
UK-based investors in the collapsed bitcoin scam Mirror Trading International (MTI) briefly celebrated a victory when a UK court struck out the liquidators’ claims application against some investors, with costs, in their attempt to recover funds.
Investors say the liquidators and their UK solicitors, Farrer & Co, were responsible for making the error that resulted in the strike out. Interestingly, Farrer & Co, is the same firm that represents the British royal family. The law firm denies having made any errors.
During proceedings, the liquidators clarified that the UK application was issued to ensure that the claims were not “time-barred” under SA prescription law – meaning they still had time to press their claims against the UK investors. That appears to have backfired.
Under SA prescription law, a claim of this nature expires after three years unless “interrupted” in that period, such as by the serving of summons on the debtor.
The lawyers representing the liquidators identified 9 April 2024 as the potential date for time-barring under the SA Insolvency Act. This is three years after the date they claim to have obtained the ‘back office’ database from Maxtra Technologies, the Indian software company that developed and hosted the MTI database.
Farrer & Co responded that the “English Court only struck out a single application against a minority of respondents based purely on a procedural rule regarding service of the proceedings. The English Court has not yet considered or ruled on the merits of the liquidators’ claims in England. The relevant application was immediately reinstated by a replacement application in identical terms, and the liquidators’ wider claims continue against all of the relevant respondents.”
Farrer & Co also disagreed that the claims are “highly likely to be time-barred.
“While that contention may be advanced by certain parties, that is not a fair and balanced presentation of the position. The liquidators’ position is that their claims are very unlikely indeed to be time-barred and they expect to overcome any prescription defences at trial.”
ALSO READ: MTI kingpin Johann Steynberg reportedly died in Brazil
Series of errors
The UK application was issued on 9 April 2024. However, Farrer & Co only served the application on the respondents on 5 August 2024. During court proceedings, it transpired that the delay in serving the application resulted in a breach of the rules governing the service of claims in insolvency proceedings.
In the UK court, investors argued that the application was served out of time. The court agreed and struck out the claims against some investors, with costs.
The UK court also rejected the liquidators’ request for an extension of time to serve the application, as such an extension would be prejudicial to the respondents due to prescription. It also dismissed the liquidators’ request to admit the evidence of their South African counsel on the basis that he was not an independent expert.
The respondents argue that a series of basic errors appears to have been made by the liquidators and their legal team, resulting in significant costs incurred and awarded against the liquidators.
ALSO READ: Mirror Trading International liquidators claim R4,6 billion from 18 masterminds
Denial
Farrer & Co denied having that they or the liquidators made any “series of basic errors”.
“We accept that this was not a fair representation of the position.”
Prior to these proceedings being launched in the UK, one investor attempted to settle the matter with an offer more than six times his investment. The offer was made to Farrer & Co in March 2024.
In correspondence filed with a South African court in April 2024, the offer was reported to have been accepted by the liquidators.
However, Farrer & Co only communicated acceptance of the offer to the investor in August 2024 – by which time the likely prescription deadline had passed, and the offer was no longer on the table.
Despite this, Moneyweb understands the liquidators continue to instruct Farrer & Co.
Proceedings on identical terms (to those that were already booted by the UK court) were reissued on 8 November 2024 and served on the respondents on 19 December 2024.
A legal expert contacted by Moneyweb believes the re-issued proceedings in the UK are now highly likely to be “time-barred” by the SA Prescription Act.
Slim chance of success
If the UK respondents registered with MTI in their own names, the liquidators’ claims should be time-barred three years after they received the back-office database from Maxtra Technologies. In the UK court papers, the liquidators clearly indicated receiving the back office database on 9 April 2021.
Consequently, the UK investors argue that any proceedings issued after 10 April 2024 are highly likely to be out of time.
ALSO READ: Made some money off Time for Mirror Trading International? It’s time to pay up
“At this point, it is beginning to look like the liquidators are engaging in high-risk, expensive litigation where the prospects of success appear to be very small. Are they acting in the best interest of creditors?” asks one investor.
An ‘MTI Creditors Group’ is in the process of being established for concerned investors at mtiactiongroup@proton.me.
Moneyweb sent questions to the liquidators six days before the article’s publication, but received no response.
However, within hours of the article’s publication, Farrer & Co sent a letter to Moneyweb citing several alleged “errors” and requesting that the following be published:
Farrer & Co’s comments/response
“On 18 June 2025 Moneyweb published an article with the title MTI liquidators hit a snag in the UK courts”.
The article contained factual inaccuracies, which we correct below:
- The article reported that the English Court has struck out the liquidators’ claims. This is misleading and does not set out the full picture. In fact, the English Court only struck out a single application against a minority of respondents based purely on a procedural rule regarding service of the proceedings. The English Court has not yet considered or ruled on the merits of the liquidators’ claims in England. The relevant application was
immediately reinstated by a replacement application in identical terms and the liquidators’ wider claims continue against all of the relevant respondents. - The article reported that the liquidators’ claims in England are “highly likely to be time-barred”. While that contention may be advanced by certain parties, that is not a fair and balanced presentation of the position. The liquidators’ position is that their claims are very unlikely indeed to be time-barred, and they expect to overcome any prescription defences at trial.
- The article reported that a series of basic errors had been made by the liquidators and their UK legal team. We accept that this was not a fair representation of the position.
This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
