COURT FILE NO.: CV-21-00671986
DATE: 20211222
SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE - ONTARIO
RE: CICADA 137 LLC, Plaintiff
-and-
ANDEAN MEDJEDOVIC, Defendant
BEFORE: FL Myers J
COUNSEL: Reuben Rothstein and Joseph Osborne, for the Plaintiff
Fredrick Schumann and Stephen Aylward, for the Plaintiffs in CV-21-673984
HEARD: December 21, 2021
ENDORSEMENT[^1]
Nature of Hearing: Motion
Format of Hearing: In Person at 361 University Avenue, Toronto
Relief Requested: An order for substitutional service of the defendant; extension of the November 28, 2021 order; and a contempt order;
Disposition made at hearing or conference (operative terms ordered):
Service of all materials on the defendant in this action, including for proceedings requiring personal service, is validly made if the materials are sent by email to [redacted].
The order dated November 28, 2021, as extended previously, is extended pending further order of the court or, if none, pending the outcome of the trial and without prejudice to the right of the defendant to move to set aside or vary the order if he chooses to do so.
The costs of all hearings to date including December 21, 2021, are reserved to the judge who hears the contempt motion or, failing that, to the trial judge.
Messrs. Day and Keller as plaintiffs in Court File No. CV-21-673984, are added as party intervenors in this proceeding without prejudice to and all rights and claims as may be brought between them and the plaintiff.
A Warrant for the Arrest of the defendant Andean Medjedovic is to issue under ule 60.11 (4) to bring him before the court to participate in this proceeding.
Costs: Reserved as discussed below.
Brief Reasons, if any:
[1] Andean Medjedovic appears to be unwilling to participate in this proceeding to establish the entitlement to the assets that he obtained from Index Finance that he asserts. Refusing to participate does not indicate a good faith belief in the justice of one’s cause. If Andean Medjedovic wants to assert that the code speaks or the code is law, he has to participate in the lawful process pending the outcome of the debate.
[2] The relationship between the pre-existing law and blockchain technology is a timely and important issue. It should be considered in a court of law among expert parties, with expert legal advice, in a fair and open process.
[3] This includes putting the disputed assets with a neutral Custodian while the case proceeds. This is part of the fair process to which all are entitled. There will be a fair hearing on admissible evidence with everyone involved having a full and fair opportunity to tell their stories and test the other side’s case. Everything about the process will be transparent once Mr. Medjedovic comes out of hiding and participates. That is how law-abiding people are expected to behave.
[4] Mr. Boswell advises that he is not retained by Andean Medjedovic. He agrees that he had instructions to accept service on behalf of the defendant of the motion to continue the November 28, 2021 order; but that is all. I accept that and thank him for attending court as was appropriate.
[5] This is a proper case for an order for substitutional service. It has been impractical to serve the defendant in person because he is in hiding. There is a reasonable likelihood that serving him by email will reach him as it has done so already in this proceeding as discussed in my Dec. 17, 2021 endorsement. Emails to the defendant led him to the move some of the assets from the Ethereum wallet that is the subject of the November 28, 2021 order. They also led to the retainer of Mr. Boswell (however briefly). Moreover, the defendant participated by videoconference in the hearing on December 17, 2021. He knew about the appearance scheduled for December 21, 2021. I told the defendant orally and in my endorsement of December 17, 2021, that if he had not complied with the order to put the disputed assets in the hands of a neutral Custodian before the return of the motion on December 21, 2021, he could be called upon to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court.
[6] The defendant decided not to attend the hearing on December 21, 2021 as directed in my December 17, 2021 endorsement.
[7] I grant the order for substitutional service of the motions returnable today (for substitutional service and an extension of the November 28, 2021 order). I also accept the substitutional service of the motion for contempt given that the defendant already knew that contempt proceedings would be available if he failed to put the disputed assets in the hands of a neutral Custodian as ordered. Service of all materials on the defendant in this proceeding is validly made if the materials are sent by email to [redacted]. This includes service of materials requiring personal service. The defendant is a very sophisticated user of technology. Email, rather than hard copy, is the manner of communication that he uses and understands.
[8] The motion to extend the November 28, 2021 order is therefore made on notice and it is unopposed. All of the grounds that supported the making of the order on November 28, 2021 continue to apply today. I extend the order pending further order of the court or, if none, pending the outcome of the trial. Nothing prejudices the right of the defendant to move to set aside or vary the order if he chooses to do so.
[9] In my view, it is necessary in the interests of justice for the defendant to attend and participate in the contempt of court hearing. He is a young man whom, I fear, is caught between the law and a set of rules that he asserts operates independently. The only way he can show that he is or ought to be held to be correct is by participating and making the case that he asserts. I am concerned that Mr. Medjedovic is possibly making poor choices out of fear given the doxxing and threats he has received. I am hopeful that he is not choosing at age 19 to live a fugitive’s life forsaking his family and a potentially brilliant career. I am not prepared to make a finding of contempt of court at this stage without first trying to engage the defendant in the court’s process and hearing from him. It is not too late to set this proceeding on a fair and proper path towards resolution of issues of great importance given the rise of the blockchain technology in society.
[10] I am therefore issuing a Warrant for the Arrest of the defendant Andean Medjedovic. He will be brought before the court for the contempt hearing to ensure that he understands what is involved and to provide him every opportunity to comply with the court’s order, explain his position, and participate fully in this proceeding.
[11] Mr. Medjedovic should not wait to be arrested. It is very much in his interest to retain counsel and participate voluntarily now. Doing so will go a long way to decreasing the seriousness of his failure to do so to date.
[12] The costs of all hearings to date are reserved to the judge who hears the contempt motion or, failing that, to the trial judge.
[13] Messrs. Day and Keller have commenced a class action against the defendant in Court File No. CV-21-673984. They ask to intervene as party intervenors in this action. The plaintiff consents. Messrs. Day and Keller have interests in the assets moved from Index Finance (and them) by the defendant. They are therefore added as party intervenors. The plaintiff reserves all rights to seek to defray costs of this proceeding by claiming against Messrs. Day and Keller. The plaintiff and the intervenors reserve all rights against each other.
[14] It may be that the class proceeding will be the more inclusive and comprehensive way to proceed once the initial skirmishes are completed. I direct counsel to consider the efficient combination of the cases, if possible, and to seek appropriate relief from a Civil Team or Class Proceedings judge as they deem appropriate. I am not seized.
[15] Finally, I urge Mr. Medjedovic to participate in this process voluntarily. Continuing to remain in hiding is no way to start one’s adult life. Moreover, the civil process in Ontario is very fair and balanced. Mr. Medjedovic will be heard if he participates.
FL Myers J
Date: December 22, 2021
[^1]: This is a transcription into publishable format of an endorsement released December 22, 2021. The only changes are to the presentation format and I have redacted the defendant’s email addresses for privacy reasons..