- World Liberty Financial has filed a defamation countersuit, accusing Justin Sun of orchestrating a coordinated campaign after his tokens were frozen.
- The dispute stems from competing claims, with Sun alleging unlawful restrictions while the firm says its actions were contractually disclosed.
- With roughly US$240 million (AU$336 million) at stake, both sides are pursuing damages as the legal battle unfolds.
The legal clash between World Liberty Financial and Justin Sun has escalated after the crypto firm filed a defamation countersuit in Florida. The move comes in response to Sun’s earlier lawsuit and reflects growing tensions between the project and one of its most prominent early backers.
World Liberty alleges that Sun launched a widespread social media offensive after his tokens were frozen, aiming to undermine confidence in the platform.
The company claims this campaign included efforts to spread negative claims and exert pressure on the protocol to release his holdings. It further accuses Sun of breaching contractual obligations through unauthorised token transfers and trading strategies designed to profit from a decline in value.
Related: Crypto’s Future Won’t Wait on Congress: Industry Pushes Ahead With or Without CLARITY Act
Accusations Follow Token Freeze
Sun’s initial lawsuit, filed in April, argued that the firm had improperly blocked his ability to sell tokens he had acquired. He contended that hidden controls were introduced to restrict his access once trading began. In response, World Liberty maintains that such controls were fully disclosed and agreed upon at the time of purchase.
The financial implications are considerable, with the frozen assets estimated to be worth about US$240 million (AU$336 million). Sun had previously invested heavily in the project, contributing significant capital that supported its early operations.
Despite the breakdown in relations, both parties continue to pursue legal remedies, with each seeking damages and a jury trial. The case is expected to take months or longer to resolve as competing allegations of misconduct are tested in court.
Related: US Court Freezes Arbitrum Hack Funds, Derails DAO Compensation Plan
Be the first to comment