From the journal

UK Jurisdiction Taskforce Publishes Non-Binding Report on Control of Digital Assets, 19 March 2026

The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT), chaired by the Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos, published its Report on Control of Digital Assets on 19 March 2026. The Report sets out non-binding guidance on how factual control of digital assets operates and how that control supports legal analysis of ownership and proprietary interests under English law. It follows the Law Commission's Final Report on Digital Assets and supports the developing common law of digital asset property.

3 min read

The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) published its Report on Control of Digital Assets on 19 March 2026. The Report is non-binding. The Master of the Rolls Sir Geoffrey Vos convened the UKJT under the LawtechUK initiative. A panel of judges, practitioners, and technical experts led by Sir Antony Zacaroli prepared the Report. David Quest KC and Judy Fu were among the contributors, with Judy Fu serving as lead drafter. The Report responds to the Law Commission's 2023 recommendation in its Final Report on Digital Assets for an expert panel on factual control.

The Report situates the analysis within the developing English common law of digital asset property and against the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill 2024-2025. The Report explains factual control across native blockchain tokens, intermediated custody, layer-2 systems, and account-based stablecoin issuers. It identifies operative concepts including unilateral exclusion, the exclusive ability to deal, knowledge of private keys, multisignature thresholds, smart contract-mediated control, and intermediated custody. The Report distinguishes legal control under property law from factual control under technical implementation. Sections cover key custody, smart contract delegation, validator-mediated systems, and tokenised securities.

The Report reaches custodians, exchanges, prime brokers, validators, smart contract operators, and tokenised asset issuers operating under English law. Custody arrangements may need re-mapping against the Report's control taxonomy to support proprietary claims and insolvency analysis. Insolvency practitioners should reassess client asset segregation under the Report's framing. Drafters of trust, custody, and intermediation agreements should align defined terms with the Report's vocabulary. English-law arbitral tribunals and courts will likely cite the Report when allocating beneficial ownership in disputed token holdings.

The Report is non-binding and does not displace statutory provisions or the developing case law. The Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill 2024-2025 separately establishes a third category of personal property and remains pending in Parliament without Royal Assent. The interaction between the Report's factual control concept and Article 8 of the Hague Convention on the Law Applicable to Certain Rights in Respect of Securities Held with an Intermediary is not yet settled. Cross-border conflict-of-laws questions remain open.

Licentium advises crypto custodians, tokenised asset issuers, and digital asset funds on English-law custody, control allocation, and insolvency planning through a partner network. Contact us to discuss custody arrangement reviews, trust documentation, or proprietary claim strategy. Work we undertake includes English-law custody opinions, tokenisation transaction structuring, client asset segregation reviews, insolvency planning, conflict-of-laws analysis, and dispute resolution support.

Source: UK Jurisdiction Taskforce, Report on Control of Digital Assets, 19 March 2026, https://lawtechuk.io/ukjt/

The information provided is not legal, tax, investment, or accounting advice and should not be used as such. It is for discussion purposes only. Seek guidance from your own legal counsel and advisors on any matters. The views presented are those of the author and not any other individual or organization. Some parts of the text may be automatically generated. The author of this material makes no guarantees or warranties about the accuracy or completeness of the information.

Crypto Regulatory

More from the journal

See all

Colorado Enacts SB 26-189 Replacing Prior AI Consumer Rules with Automated Decision-Making Technology Obligations, 2026

Colorado SB 26-189, the Automated Decision-Making Technology Act, repeals and replaces the consumer AI protections in SB 24-205, establishing new obligations for developers and deployers of covered automated decision-making technology in consequential decisions. Developer obligations take effect 1 January 2027. Violations constitute deceptive trade practices under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, enforceable by the Attorney General.

UK Designates 18 Cryptocurrency Exchanges Under Russia Sanctions Regulations, 26 May 2026

On 26 May 2026, the UK designated 18 cryptocurrency exchanges under The Russia (Sanctions) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019, including Huobi Global S.A., operator of HTX, and three Georgian Russia-focused exchanges. OFSI confirmed HTX is subject to UK financial sanctions by reason of Huobi's ownership. The action marks the first time the UK has directly sanctioned cryptocurrency exchanges in connection with Russian sanctions evasion.

European Commission Opens Consultation on Draft Guidelines for High-Risk AI System Classification Under Article 6, June 2026

The European Commission has published draft guidelines clarifying when an AI system qualifies as high-risk under Article 6 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). A targeted consultation is open until 23 June 2026. The guidelines are not legally binding but reflect the Commission's interpretation and will guide market surveillance authorities and AI providers in applying the high-risk classification rules.

Ready to launch without the regulatory guesswork?

Book a 30-minute consultation. We'll map your AI or licensing path and tell you exactly what's required, in plain language.