Hopefully, this ruling opens the way to not only provide a useful reference but also provide future clarity around these issues.
The judge presiding over the SEC v. Ripple legal saga has famously issued a ruling that while Ripple’s $XRP is not classified as a security, selling XRP to institutional investors constitutes an unregistered security offering. Judge Analisa Torres judgment, perceived by some to be extremely ‘mixed’ given the simultaneous ‘perpetrator’ and ‘victim’ status ascribed within the court’s outcome, turns the spotlight on all XRP investments solemnised by institutional investors amounting to $728.9 million – inconceivable low in comparison to the tell-tale ‘$1.3 billion’ stipulated in the Plaintiff’s original complaint.
Her ruling favourably points towards the mutual beneficial agreement between Ripple and its trading partners so as to lock up XRP tokens for a pre-specified duration of time – suggesting the resources allocated thereto as being earmarked to serve a speculative aspiration rather than productive, non-investible cause. Furthermore the court inferred from ‘investment contracts’ dispositive of the fact that XRP acquisitions by these institutional purchasers was targeted for the purpose of capital gain, and Ripple had indeed has issue in this regard with their obligation under the protard Howey Test.
The CLO shared further that this decree is to merely embark on proceedings addressing aforementioned subject matter as per the Court’s diktat – nonetheless laying familiarity as to the eventual resolution should further resemblance emerge. Fear not, with such legal reference points in manual, surety of the unhinged resides nearer.
