Cryptocurrencies and other virtual assets have become a significant part of modern property relations, which means that questions concerning their division increasingly arise in disputes between spouses. At the same time, specific legislative regulation of the virtual asset market in Ukraine is still developing.
As of October 2026, the Law of Ukraine “On Virtual Assets” No. 2074-IX, adopted in 2022, has not yet entered into force. At the same time, Draft Law No. 10225-d concerning the circulation and taxation of virtual assets was adopted by the Verkhovna Rada at first reading on 3 September 2025 and is being prepared for its second reading. However, the absence of a completed special regulatory framework does not prevent disputes involving crypto assets from being resolved under existing civil, family and procedural law.
In the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets — MiCA — has applied in full since 30 December 2024 and establishes a comprehensive regulatory framework for crypto-asset markets and service providers. MiCA does not apply directly in Ukraine, but its provisions are one of the reference points for the further harmonisation of Ukrainian legislation with EU law.
The question of whether a virtual asset can constitute an object of property rights is now less uncertain than it once was. Article 179-1 of the Civil Code of Ukraine classifies virtual assets as digital things having property value. Accordingly, in a dispute between spouses, the principal issue is usually not whether a crypto asset is property at all, but when and with what funds it was acquired and whether it forms part of the spouses’ joint marital property.
The method of division depends on the characteristics of the particular asset. Bitcoin (BTC), Ether (ETH), USDT and other fungible crypto assets can technically be divided into smaller units and transferred between different addresses. For NFTs and other individually identifiable digital assets, the method of division will depend on the characteristics of the particular token and the rights associated with it. In certain circumstances, the asset may remain with one spouse while the issue of compensation for the other spouse’s share is resolved under the general rules governing division of marital property.
How to establish or prove that the other spouse owns cryptocurrency
To establish whether the other spouse owns crypto assets, it is necessary to take into account the technical features of how such assets are stored and transferred. Assets may be held on a centralised crypto exchange through a custodial account or controlled directly by the owner through a software or hardware wallet.
In court proceedings, technical control over an asset may be evidenced by access to the relevant account or wallet. However, the date and source of acquisition, transaction history and other evidence are also important when determining the legal ownership of the asset.
If the other spouse owns virtual assets but conceals them, proving their existence may be difficult. The presence of a hardware “cold” wallet may provide an evidential lead, although possession of the device alone does not prove the type or value of the assets held. Access to such a wallet may be restored using a seed phrase.
An asset declaration filed by a person performing public functions may also reveal and confirm the existence of virtual assets where the other spouse is subject to Ukrainian asset declaration requirements.
Specialists in blockchain analytics and OSINT may also be engaged to identify and analyse digital traces. Information obtained in this way should, however, be properly documented and assessed in terms of its admissibility as evidence in civil proceedings.
During court proceedings, the parties may request that the court obtain information from crypto exchanges concerning the existence of the spouse’s account, asset balances and transaction history.
If the crypto exchange or the legal entity servicing the relevant account is located abroad, the procedure for obtaining such information must be determined with regard to applicable international treaties, the law of the relevant jurisdiction and available mechanisms of international legal assistance.
Interim measures may also be necessary to preserve disputed property, including assets held on a crypto exchange. Screenshots of an exchange account, email correspondence, bank transfers to a crypto platform and other digital materials may be used to support an application for interim relief.
However, submission of such materials does not automatically guarantee that the court will grant the requested measure. In each case, the court assesses the sufficiency of the evidence, the connection between the proposed measure and the subject matter of the dispute, and whether the measure is proportionate.
How to determine the value of identified virtual assets
A further issue arises where the court has granted interim relief and the claimant has obtained an order concerning the freezing of assets in the other spouse’s crypto exchange account: how should the value of those assets be determined and proven, particularly given the high volatility of some cryptocurrencies?
Where cryptocurrency forms part of the spouses’ joint property, the court must establish its actual value for the purpose of resolving the dispute.
Ukraine does not have a single official state exchange rate for Bitcoin, Ether or other cryptocurrencies. The value of a crypto asset may be supported by market price data from trading platforms, historical quotations and, where necessary, an opinion from a specialist or expert.
To reduce the risk of a dispute over valuation, it is important to identify clearly the source of the quotation and the exact date and time for which the value is calculated.
Valuation may be somewhat simpler in the case of stablecoins, as their economic model is designed to maintain a peg to a particular asset or currency. For example, USDT is designed to maintain a value close to one US dollar, although its actual market price may deviate from that peg.
The value of other cryptocurrencies may be established by reference to their market quotation against the US dollar, USDT or another liquid asset on the relevant date.
Where the market value of a crypto asset has been determined in US dollars or another fiat currency, its hryvnia equivalent may be calculated using the official exchange rate of the National Bank of Ukraine for that fiat currency on the relevant date. The National Bank of Ukraine does not itself establish an official exchange rate for cryptocurrency.
How virtual assets are identified in criminal proceedings
Reports of cryptocurrency being traced and frozen in criminal cases increasingly appear in the media. This confirms that virtual assets have already become a practical object of tracing, documentation and seizure in legal proceedings.
Article 170 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine provides for the possibility of imposing an arrest on property, including virtual assets, where the statutory grounds are met.
This provision is applied in practice. The Unified State Register of Court Decisions contains court orders imposing restrictions on virtual assets in criminal proceedings.
The practical and technical methods used to identify and document such assets may also be useful in civil disputes. However, interim measures and the obtaining of evidence in marital property proceedings are governed by the Civil Procedure Code of Ukraine rather than by criminal procedure rules.
In 2020, the Asset Recovery and Management Agency of Ukraine, known as ARMA, developed recommendations concerning the identification, tracing and seizure of cryptocurrency assets. This area has continued to develop, and in 2026 ARMA has a dedicated unit whose activities include the identification and tracing of digital assets.
Experience gained in criminal proceedings may therefore be useful primarily from the perspective of the technical methods used to identify and document crypto assets.
Case law
Ukrainian case law concerning the division of crypto assets between spouses remains relatively limited. Nevertheless, there are already cases that illustrate how courts approach proof of the existence of cryptocurrency, the source of funds used to acquire it and whether it belongs to one spouse individually or to both spouses jointly.
For example, in civil case No. 953/4882/23, former spouses were involved in a dispute concerning the division of marital property, in which one party sought to include funds associated with cryptocurrency. The existence of the relevant crypto asset was supported, among other things, by its inclusion in an asset declaration.
By the time the case was considered, the cryptocurrency had already been disposed of, and one of the parties therefore sought to have the proceeds taken into account in the division of property.
The court concluded that the relevant crypto asset had been acquired using the respondent’s personal funds and that the presumption of joint marital ownership had therefore been rebutted. By its judgment of 12 March 2024, the Kharkiv Court of Appeal upheld the relevant conclusions.
Accordingly, the fact that a crypto asset was acquired during the marriage does not necessarily prevent a spouse from proving that it constituted separate property where the personal source of the funds used for the acquisition can be established.
The Supreme Court’s judgment of 20 January 2023 in case No. 337/4714/20 is also relevant. In that case, allegations that the spouses had acquired Bitcoin were not supported by sufficient evidence: no crypto wallet address or technical and financial confirmation of the relevant transactions was provided.
The case illustrates that, in disputes involving crypto assets, a statement that a wallet existed or that access credentials were transferred is not sufficient by itself. A technical and financial evidential basis is required.
Accordingly, there is not yet a large and settled body of Ukrainian case law concerning the division of cryptocurrency between spouses. However, Ukrainian courts are already developing approaches to establishing the existence of crypto assets, the time of their acquisition and the source of the funds used to acquire them.
Overall, the specialised legal framework governing the virtual asset market in Ukraine continues to develop. At the same time, existing civil, family and procedural legislation already allows courts to resolve disputes concerning ownership and division of crypto assets.
The main practical difficulties in such cases concern proving that the assets exist, establishing the source of funds used to acquire them, determining their value and preserving them during the court proceedings.
If a dispute over cryptocurrency or other virtual assets arises during the division of marital property, contact Grandliga. Our lawyers can assist with identifying and documenting crypto assets, analysing the source of funds used to acquire them, developing an evidential strategy, selecting appropriate interim measures and representing your interests in court. Learn more about our family law services.
