TLDR
- Ping Fai Yuen alleges his estranged spouse stole 2,323 Bitcoin in August 2023 after secretly recording his seed phrase through household surveillance equipment
- The cryptocurrency’s value has surged from approximately $60 million during the alleged theft to roughly $172 million today
- Blockchain analysis shows the assets were distributed across 71 different addresses, remaining dormant since December 21, 2023
- While dismissing the primary conversion claim, a UK High Court judge permitted the lawsuit to continue under alternative legal grounds
- Justice Cotter indicated the plaintiff has “a very high probability of success” and advocated for expedited court proceedings
Ping Fai Yuen has brought forward allegations that his estranged spouse, Fun Yung Li, covertly captured the 24-word seed phrase associated with his Trezor hardware wallet through home security cameras. According to his testimony, she subsequently utilized this sensitive information to execute an unauthorized transfer of 2,323 Bitcoin during August 2023.
The Bitcoin holdings carried an estimated value near $60 million during the time of the purported incident. Based on current market rates hovering around $74,000 per token, the cryptocurrency portfolio has appreciated to approximately $172 million.
Blockchain records indicate the misappropriated assets underwent multiple transfers before ultimately being dispersed among 71 distinct wallet addresses. Court filings reveal that every one of these addresses has remained inactive since December 21, 2023.
According to Yuen’s account, his daughter alerted him to his wife’s intentions regarding the Bitcoin. Following this warning, he deployed audio surveillance devices throughout their residence. The plaintiff contends these recordings document Li discussing the theft and strategizing methods to transfer substantial amounts of currency while evading detection by financial institutions and law enforcement.
Law enforcement officials took Li into custody and confiscated multiple cold storage wallets along with watches during a property search. She was subsequently released on bail conditions. Investigators later announced no additional action would be taken unless fresh evidence emerged.
Legal Battle Over Crypto Property Rights
This litigation presents a fundamental legal challenge: whether Bitcoin qualifies as property within the framework of English common law.
Legal representatives for Li petitioned for case dismissal. They contended that Yuen’s primary cause of action relied on conversion, an English legal doctrine historically restricted to tangible property that cannot extend to digital assets such as Bitcoin.
The presiding judge concurred that the conversion argument lacked merit. Nevertheless, Justice Cotter determined the proceedings could advance based on alternative legal theories that might enable Yuen to reclaim the Bitcoin should he substantiate his accusations.
A separate violent altercation between Ping and Li occurred in September 2024. Yuen subsequently entered guilty pleas to assault occasioning actual bodily harm alongside two counts of common assault.
Yuen has additionally informed the court of his suspicion that the 71 Bitcoin addresses have been subjected to a dusting attack. These operations involve transmitting minimal cryptocurrency amounts to wallets for tracking purposes, potentially identifying high-net-worth targets for phishing schemes and additional fraudulent activities.
Judge: Evidence Is “Damning”
During November 2024, Yuen filed for an asset preservation injunction requesting the court implement a freeze on the cryptocurrency, formally recognize his ownership rights, and mandate either Bitcoin restitution or equivalent monetary compensation.
Justice Cotter documented that Yuen possesses “a very high probability of success,” citing the audio evidence and physical items discovered during Li’s residence search.
“The transcripts are damning,” Cotter stated, observing that Li provided no justification for the Bitcoin transfers.
Justice Cotter further advocated for expedited trial proceedings, characterizing them as “necessary given the security threats to, and volatility of value of, the Bitcoin.”





