From Monday's decision in Harborne v. Dow Jones & Co., by Judge Kathleen Miller (Del. Super. Ct.); the opinion is over 9000 words long, so here are just a few excerpts:
Christopher Harborne ("Harborne") is an international businessman, owning and investing in several successful businesses. He was an early investor in cryptocurrency, and became an active trader on the Bitfinex cryptocurrency exchange. While Harborne owned 12% of Bitfinex and its sister company Tether, he was not involved with either company, except as a minority stakeholder.
The Wall Street Journal ("Journal") published an article in 2023 about Bitfinex's and Tether's difficulties maintaining access to the global banking system in light of fraud and money laundering allegations. The article detailed how these companies used falsified documents, "shadowy intermediaries," and shell companies to open bank accounts around the world, including at Signature Bank. Signature Bank ultimately closed the accounts and later attempts by Tether and Bitfinex to open new accounts were rejected, due to the allegations against them.
The article then turned to Harborne, reporting that after Tether and Bitfinex were turned down by Signature Bank, the bank was "then introduced" to Harborne and his company AML Global. The article stated that Harborne opened an account for his company at Signature Bank, but the application did not say that he owned 12% of each of Bitfinex and Tether under the name Chakrit Sakunkrit. {[According to the Complaint, Harborne] holds dual citizenship in Great [Britain] and Thailand, where he has lived and worked for over 20 years. When he became a naturalized Thai citizen, Harborne was required to adopt a Thai name. He chose Chakrit Sakunkrit. He uses his Thai name for legal purposes in Thailand and uses his birth-name outside Thailand.}
The article also stated that the Sakunkrit name appeared on Signature Bank's list of those the bank felt "were trying to evade anti-money laundering controls." The article described Signature Bank executives questioning the source of funds into AML Global's account. The bank then "soon closed" the account.
Harborne and his companies sued for defamation, and the court concluded that Harborne had adequately alleged the article falsely accused him of financial improprieties:
