How can a VASP prove it did "enough" to prevent a user from falling victim to a scam? This episode examines Xu v. NDAX Canada, a case in which expert evidence and internal risk metrics helped a VASP avoid an adverse judgment. We explore the "four-stage warning protocol" and discuss why a court described a plaintiff as the "author of her own misfortune." For litigation partners managing risk, and associates drafting defense motions, this case brief offers lessons in building a robust standard of care defense in the face of sophisticated crypto-asset fraud. About the Case Case Name: Xu v. NDAX Canada (2025 BCSC 2048) Jurisdiction: Canada Court: Supreme Court of British Columbia Date: April 2025 Read the Judgment https://www.bccourts.ca/jdb-txt/sc/25/20/2025BCSC2048.htm Topics Explored - Deconstructing the plaintiff's failed negligence argument in the BC Supreme Court. - The evidentiary weight given to "Know Your Transaction" (KYT) scoring. - Proactive warnings vs. automated pop-ups: How did they contribute to legal "immunity"? - The danger of ignoring a customer’s "insistence" to trade during a scam. - Procedural tips for discovering and presenting internal VASP risk logs. This Episode was Sponsored by Captura Cyber Captura Cyber brings clarity to cryptocurrency litigation by providing cryptocurrency expert reports and specialist cryptocurrency investigation for plaintiffs as well as expert rebuttal reports to challenge the methodology of opposing expert evidence for defendants. Their cryptocurrency expert witnesses - drawn from Law Enforcement, Academia, and Industry - ensure cryptocurrency expert reports are authoritative and admissible.. Schedule a consultation at www.capturacyber.com Legal Disclaimer The Cryptocurrency Case Law Review podcast is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Listening to this podcast or accessing our show notes does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please note that the discussions featured in these episodes use synthetic, AI-generated voices to review and analyse past legal judgments. Always consult with qualified legal counsel regarding your specific case or jurisdiction.