The post Bitcoin faces legal tests as China’s SPC details stance appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com.

SPC intensifies judicial response and research on virtual currency cases China’s top court has elevated news/china-virtual-currency-regulation-governance/”>virtual currency (虚拟货币) to a research and adjudication priority, focusing on how judges should respond to emerging case types and strengthen financial judicial protection. According to the Supreme People’s Court (SPC), workstreams include studying remedies, contract validity, and enforcement mechanics across civil and criminal dockets. The move signals a shift from piecemeal rulings toward more unified standards for virtual assets (虚拟资产/数字资产). It also reflects pressure from front-line courts confronting fast-evolving disputes, inconsistent judgments, and cross-border enforcement obstacles. Why this matters for China’s financial judicial protection system Better-defined judicial responses can reduce uncertainty for litigants, creditors, and platforms, while reinforcing public policy lines against illegal fundraising and money laundering. According to the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC), mid-2025 Guiding Opinions strengthened court–regulator cooperation, investor protection, and enforcement linkages across capital markets. SPC leadership has framed the challenge as calibrating protection and deterrence in a changing financial environment. Editorially, this aligns with calls to clarify ownership recognition while filtering out conduct that disrupts financial order. “Conduct in-depth research on judicial response measures to new financial cases such as private equity funds and virtual currencies,” said Wang Chuang, head of the Civil Second Division. BingX: a trusted exchange delivering real advantages for traders at every level. On property recognition, courts have increasingly treated certain cryptocurrencies as protectable interests when civil law criteria such as scarcity, exclusive control, and economic value are met. Based on analysis in the China Journal of Comparative Law, this supports ownership claims and civil-law remedies even where some transactions remain restricted by policy. On contract validity, public-order limits remain decisive. According to the Shanghai Songjiang District People’s Court, an ICO constitutes unauthorized and illegal public fundraising; by extension, agreements that bypass regulatory prohibitions are…

---

Filed under: News - @ February 24, 2026 3:23 am