The bankruptcy estate of Celsius Network has sued BitMEX for the return of 6,360.17 Bitcoin — worth roughly 495 million USD at the valuation used in the claim — over forced liquidations executed during the March 2020 COVID market crash, accusing the derivatives exchange of designing a system that profited from customer losses.
By Maria Rodriguez | September 17, 2026
The complaint, filed on September 12 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, was brought by the Blockchain Recovery Investment Consortium acting as litigation administrator under Celsius’ bankruptcy plan. For ordinary investors, the case is a rare window into how leveraged exchanges behave during a market meltdown — and whether collateral that should have been returned to customers instead ended up in the exchange’s own pockets.
The Hook: A Six-Year-Old Crash, a Half-Billion-Dollar Claim
March 2020 was one of the most violent stretches in Bitcoin’s history. As global markets panicked over the spreading pandemic, leveraged positions across derivatives exchanges were hit with margin calls and forced closures. According to the complaint, Celsius lost 1,325.84 BTC when BitMEX liquidated its position on March 12, 2020. A related investment fund, JST, lost another 5,034.33 BTC in a liquidation the following day and later assigned its claims to the Celsius estate — together totaling 6,360.17 BTC.
The claim values that haul at roughly 495 million USD, based on a valuation near 77,800 USD per Bitcoin. With Bitcoin trading near 76,100 USD today, the coins remain one of the largest single recovery targets still in play from the 2022 crypto bankruptcies. Notably, the administrator is demanding the Bitcoin itself rather than the dollar value the positions carried in 2020 — a distinction that could be worth hundreds of millions to creditors if the estate prevails.
On-Chain Evidence: What the Estate Says BitMEX Did
The core allegation is about control. The estate says BitMEX operated both the mechanism that decided when leveraged positions were closed and the insurance fund that received assets generated by some liquidations — meaning the exchange had a financial interest in how its own liquidation engine ran.
“BitMEX intentionally designed its platform and liquidation procedures to cause liquidations of collateral and defraud its own customers,” the complaint states. The estate argues that instead of selling only enough collateral to cover each account’s obligations, the exchange retained excess Bitcoin after closing positions. The legal claims include fraudulent transfer, conversion, breach of contract, breach of the implied duty of good faith and fair dealing, and unjust enrichment.
- Five BitMEX-linked companies are named as defendants: HDR Global Trading, ABS Global Trading, Shine Effort, 100x Holdings and HDR Global Services — entities linked to Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, England, Hong Kong, the Seychelles and the United States.
- A parallel case: a proposed class action filed in July by BKX Services and trader David Namdar alleges similar misconduct, claiming BitMEX retained 622.66 BTC that should have gone back to customers, and that the exchange’s internal trading desk could keep operating during outages that locked users out of managing their positions.
- The clock is ticking: the complaint was filed shortly before BitMEX ends trading on September 23, adding urgency to questions about where assets and entities will sit as the platform winds down.
The Core Conflict: Allegations vs. Proven Facts
An important caveat: nothing in the complaint has been proven. The defendants have not been found liable, and the allegations will be tested through the U.S. court process, which can take years. BitMEX has faced regulatory trouble before, but the specific claim that its liquidation system was engineered to harvest customer collateral remains an accusation, not a ruling.
The case also cuts both ways for Celsius. The Bitcoin position described in the complaint was built on pooled customer assets and carried leveraged exposure into a severe market decline — while Celsius publicly marketed strategies like arbitrage and carry trades as relatively low-risk. Court records later showed the company used what a 2022 filing called “several highly speculative derivative and asset deployment mechanisms,” and examiner Shoba Pillay’s report documented trading, risk-control and recordkeeping failures inside the lender. In other words: the estate is suing over a crash that its own management helped expose customers to.
Market Implications: Why This Matters Beyond Two Dead Platforms
Celsius froze withdrawals in June 2022 and filed for Chapter 11 the following month, becoming one of the defining collapses of that cycle. Recovery litigation like this is how creditors squeeze value out of the wreckage — and every Bitcoin recovered goes straight into the pool that gets distributed to the people who were locked out.
The broader lesson for investors today is about liquidation mechanics. When you trade on leverage, you are handing the exchange the keys: it decides when your position closes, at what price, and what happens to the leftover collateral. Exchanges insist insurance funds and automatic engines protect everyone. Lawsuits like this one argue those same systems can be turned into profit centers. With Ethereum near 2,409 USD and markets calmer, it is easy to forget how fast leverage turns hostile — March 2020 saw some of the deepest intraday wicks in Bitcoin’s history, and accounts were closed at prices that existed for seconds.
The Verdict
Watch two things: whether the bankruptcy court lets the case proceed toward discovery, and what happens to BitMEX’s assets and entities after its September 23 trading shutdown. A recovery of 6,360 BTC would be a material win for Celsius creditors; a dismissal would end one of the last big litigation hopes from that estate.
For everyone else, the practical takeaway is simple: if you use leverage, know exactly how your exchange’s liquidation engine works, assume it will act in its own interest under stress, and size positions so a wick — not a lawsuit — is what stands between you and your remaining capital.
The cryptocurrency market remains highly volatile. This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.
6,360 BTC liquidated in one march 2020 session and the lawsuit only lands now, six years later. bankruptcy estates move at glacial speed
they had to wait for the plan administrator to exist first, the recovery consortium literally just got standing to sue. blame the process not the estate
gridwulf is right on standing, six years is still absurd. the 1,325 BTC initial liquidation turning into a 6,360 BTC clawback claim is the aggressive part
The ~$495 million claim on 6,360 BTC works out to roughly $77,800 per coin. Priced well below where the market trades now, which makes the fixed BTC amount the real prize here.
funny point about the per coin math tho. if they win the 6,360 BTC the estate captures all the upside since 2020, creditors just get whatever the distribution schedule says
estate capturing the full 2020 to 2026 run on 6,360 btc while creditors wait out another distribution schedule is the most crypto bankruptcy thing imaginable
demanding the actual 6,360 BTC instead of the 2020 dollar value is the real chess move here. coins worth 5x what the positions carried back then
Dont forget Celsius built that position with customer money while marketing it as low risk arbitrage. The examiner report said as much. Two bad actors in one courtroom.
filed sept 12, bitmex trading ends sept 23. that timing is not an accident, they want the assets locked down before the lights go out
the sept 12 filing vs sept 23 trading halt timing is everything. if the estate secures those 6,360 BTC before shutdown, recovery odds change completely