Can the ruling of the Supreme Court close the bank accounts of the Cryptocurrency operators? The fight with the banks continues




Heavy switters suffer from Omanx, the Chilean platform, who had crippled cryptococcus, after the Supreme Court turned the decision of the Appeals Court and rejected the appeal of appeal filed in March. In this way, it supports that BankoStado has closed its accounts to avoid possible risks, among them, a possible cash laundering, considering that the activity is not regulated.

"We do not see with good eyes the verdict of the Supreme Court because the Court of Appeals, unanimously, gave me the reason, and we do not share the grounds he has taken into consideration to raise that rising, especially for the alleged effect that the The lack of regulation of this activity would have, "affirmed Pulso the lawyer Pablo Tromben, partner of the Trombone Abogados study, which represents the firm Orionx.

The lawyer also waited for the court of the highest court in the country to allow the banks with the ability to close accounts or cancel contracts, unilaterally, when they want.

In the first instance, Tromben assured that "this does not affect anything in the operation of Orionx because the accounts are open As a result of a precautionary mark issued by the Court for the Advancement of Free Competition (TDLC) In the framework of the cause we continue to attack against the banks. "

Together with this, he held that the Central Court chief did not affect the precautions, so Bancostado could not close the account.

A similar view is given by Mario Bravo, a partner in Estudio Bravo, who defends Buddha and Cryptomarket in their case against the banks before the TLDLC.

"The ruling is without prejudice to the other rights of the platforms that trade cripptocivisions. And, among them, it is the requirement that we have presented in the TLDL. Thus, the ruling has no effect on the precautions of the Tribes, which have opened the accounts of the Cryptocruz, "said Bravo.

Attention lies with the TDLC

In the scenario, both sages agreed, the focus of attention was focused on what happened in the TLDLC. In this site, the three firms dealing with the type of assets by their platforms accused 10 banks of undermining free competition and abusing their position of collective ownership, after they closed their respective accounts.

Now, the TDLC is defining what will be the means of proof, after the parties send their respective proposals and observations, so it is expected that the probationary period begins in the next weeks.

"When the problem occurs, we will ask that all economic authorities that ask the question, among them, the CMF, the Treasury, the UAF, the SBIF, among others so that they can express their views on" Mario said. Bravo

For his part, Pablo Tromben said that "we will deploy our strategy to represent the greatest amount of background to demonstrate our position, but we believe the most important thing is that the discussion focuses on the fact that this is a matter From free competition and not of money laundering, as banking has wanted to install it. "


Source link