The short answer is yes. Cryptocurrency is treated as property under English law and must be disclosed alongside every other asset. What that means in practice is worth understanding in some detail.
TLDR | Key Takeaways
|
People sometimes assume that cryptocurrency sits outside the scope of a divorce settlement — that it is too technical for courts, too difficult to value, or somehow exempt because of how it is stored. None of those assumptions hold up.
Cryptocurrency is property. Since December 2025, that status is settled not only in case law but in statute. It is subject to the same disclosure obligations as a pension, a bank account, or a share portfolio, and the Family Court can make orders about it.
The Legal Position
The treatment of cryptocurrency as property in England and Wales developed through case law over several years before Parliament stepped in. The significant early decision was AA v Persons Unknown [2019] EWHC 3556 (Comm), decided in December 2019 by Bryan J in the Commercial Court. The case concerned a ransomware payment in Bitcoin: an insured company had paid US$950,000 in Bitcoin to extortionists, and the insurer sought a proprietary injunction to freeze those funds. In granting the injunction, Bryan J gave the first fully reasoned English judgment confirming that Bitcoin could be recognised as property under English law — a distinct third category, sitting outside the traditional categories of things in possession and things in action. That analysis was subsequently applied in family proceedings.
The Property (Digital Assets etc.) Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 2 December 2025, placed this on a statutory footing. The Act confirms that a thing — including a digital or electronic thing — is not prevented from being the object of personal property rights merely because it does not fit into either traditional category. In financial remedy proceedings, the consequence is direct: cryptocurrency forms part of the financial picture and courts have jurisdiction to deal with it.
Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, courts are required to consider all financial resources available to both parties. Cryptocurrency held by either spouse falls within that obligation regardless of where it is held, how it is stored, or whether the other spouse knew about it. Culligan v Culligan [2025] EWFC 1, decided by Mr Justice MacDonald in January 2025, is now the primary English authority on how crypto holdings are treated in financial remedy proceedings, and confirms that the court’s jurisdiction extends fully to digital assets of any scale.
Is All Crypto Treated as Matrimonial?
Not automatically. The same principles that apply to any asset govern cryptocurrency. Courts look at when it was acquired, where the funds came from, and how it has been treated during the marriage.
- Crypto purchased during the marriage from either party’s income is generally treated as a matrimonial asset
- Crypto acquired before the marriage from pre-marital savings may be treated as non-matrimonial, particularly in shorter marriages, though growth in value during the marriage is often partly shared
- Crypto received as a gift or inheritance is typically non-matrimonial initially, though courts retain wide discretion and longer marriages tend to blur these distinctions
The process by which pre-marital or separately acquired crypto becomes treated as part of the marital estate is sometimes called matrimonialisation. In Culligan, Bitcoin purchased before the marriage was used throughout a 40-year marriage to fund property acquisitions, business ventures, and both parties’ personal interests — by the time of proceedings it was treated as a shared matrimonial asset. Courts look at whether the asset was commingled with joint funds or used for family purposes over time. Forensic evidence of the acquisition history and subsequent use is often what determines this question.
How Valuation Works
Cryptocurrency prices can change substantially over a short period. Unlike property or pensions, which do not typically move by tens of percent in weeks, crypto valuations at one procedural stage may look quite different by the next.
Two approaches are seen in practice. Snapshot valuation fixes the asset at a specific date near the hearing. Percentage transfer avoids fixing a cash figure: the court orders a proportion of the actual holding, distributing the volatility risk between both parties. Some judges show a preference for percentage transfer because it treats both spouses as equally exposed to the same market. For offsetting calculations, an agreed and current valuation is essential.
An important point on NFTs: unlike fungible cryptocurrency, a non-fungible token cannot be split between parties. A court cannot award half an NFT to each party. Where an NFT forms part of the estate, the order will typically require a sale, a transfer of the whole asset, or an offset against other assets. Significant caution is warranted when offsetting an NFT against more stable holdings.
What Orders Are Available?
- Transfer order: a specified quantity of cryptocurrency is transferred to a wallet address specified by the receiving party
- Sale order: the holding is liquidated and the proceeds divided as directed
- Offset: the value of the crypto is treated as a credit against other assets
- Freezing injunction: under Section 37 of the Matrimonial Causes Act 1973, the court can freeze a holding to prevent dissipation during proceedings
| A Point on Timing
The most effective moment to instruct a forensic blockchain expert is before the First Directions Appointment, not after disclosure has been received and accepted. Early instruction means the questionnaire can be properly targeted, the valuation methodology is established for the litigation, and, where the evidence supports it, the foundation for a freezing application is in place before assets have an opportunity to move. |
What Happens If Someone Refuses to Transfer?
A self-custody wallet can only be accessed by the person holding its private key. No court order changes that technical fact. But refusing to comply with a transfer order does not make the obligation disappear.
Where a party declines to transfer cryptocurrency as directed, the court can sequester other assets of equivalent value, make a costs order, treat the refusal as contempt, or adjust the remainder of the settlement. Where a forensic expert has produced a clear and verified valuation, the court has a precise figure to work from. The obligation changes form; it does not dissolve.
Read more in our series of guides on cryptocurrency and divorce:
If you are going through a divorce and need expert support, get in touch with us at Wealth Recovery Solicitors for a free consultation. Our friendly and experienced team can evaluate your case, to craft a recovery plan for you and work to recover your funds.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is cryptocurrency part of a divorce settlement in England?
Yes. Cryptocurrency is recognised as personal property under the Property (Digital Assets etc.) Act 2025 and must be disclosed alongside every other asset in financial remedy proceedings.
Is crypto acquired before marriage treated as matrimonial?
Not automatically. Courts consider when it was acquired, its source, and whether it was used for family purposes during the marriage. Longer marriages tend to blur the distinction between matrimonial and non-matrimonial assets.
Can a court order the transfer of cryptocurrency?
Yes. Courts can order direct transfers to a specified wallet address, sales with proceeds divided, offsets against other assets, or freezing injunctions to prevent dissipation during proceedings.
When should a forensic crypto expert be instructed in divorce?
Ideally before the First Directions Appointment. Early instruction allows the questionnaire to be properly targeted, the valuation methodology to be established, and the foundation for any freezing application to be in place.
| Cryptocurrency in your financial proceedings?
Wealth Recovery Solicitors provides FPR Part 25 compliant forensic reports for Family Courts across England and Wales. Get in touch for a confidential discussion. |
| This article is for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. Every case is different and the law in this area continues to develop. If you are involved in proceedings where cryptocurrency may be relevant, seek independent legal advice from a qualified solicitor. |