Binance and stablecoin payments card issuer RedotPay are trading competing narratives over whether a Singapore legal case tied to their wider dispute is set to end after a hearing on Aug. 7. RedotPay says it expects Binance to discontinue the proceedings, while Binance insists it is not withdrawing its claims.
The disagreement is the latest turn in a broader legal battle involving Binance-affiliated entities and RedotPay, which also includes a separate Hong Kong lawsuit seeking close to $473 million in damages.
Key takeaways
- RedotPay expects Binance to discontinue a Singapore case after an Aug. 7 hearing and plans to pursue legal costs.
- Binance says reports about it withdrawing Singapore claims are false and that it is continuing to press its case.
- The Singapore dispute sits within a larger conflict that includes a Hong Kong lawsuit alleging diversion of Binance Card users.
- The cases hinge on the terms of the Binance Pay–RedotPay relationship and whether card funding was used outside agreement scope.
Dispute over whether Singapore proceedings will be dropped
In comments to Cointelegraph on Tuesday, a spokesperson for RedotPay said the company expects Binance to discontinue the Singapore proceedings following the Aug. 7 hearing. RedotPay added that it would “be seeking legal costs arising from the discontinuance of the matter from the claimant,” while the parties would attempt to agree on costs.
Binance, however, rejected that characterization. A Binance spokesperson told Cointelegraph: “Reports that Binance will be withdrawing its Singapore claims are false.” The spokesperson added that Binance has not abandoned its claims and said it has informed both the court and RedotPay accordingly.
For market participants tracking crypto-related litigation, the immediate practical implication is uncertainty over process and timelines. Even if a party seeks to end one track of litigation, the question of who bears legal costs—and whether claims persist in the background—can affect strategy and leverage in the parallel Hong Kong matter.
How the legal fight expanded to multiple jurisdictions
According to earlier reporting by Bloomberg on Aug. 5, Binance-affiliated plaintiffs brought proceedings connected to the RedotPay business in Hong Kong. Bloomberg reported that Nest Trading, DistributedTechnologies and Chaintecs Consulting Singapore filed a petition in Hong Kong involving RedotPay co-founders.
Cointelegraph previously detailed the core allegations as well: the Hong Kong plaintiffs claim RedotPay diverted more than 470,000 Binance Card users by allowing Binance Pay funds to be used for stablecoin card top-ups outside the terms of a commercial agreement. They put their estimated damages at $472.8 million, based on a claimed lifetime customer value of $925 per user.
In parallel, Chaintecs brought related proceedings against RedotPay affiliates in Singapore, where a hearing was scheduled for Aug. 7. The existence of a Singapore hearing indicates the dispute has been actively litigated rather than merely threatened, which makes the latest exchange between the parties—over discontinuance versus continuation—material for observers.
What RedotPay says it was doing—and what Binance says it violates
RedotPay has denied what it described as “unfounded allegations” made against the company and its co-founders. In its communications to Cointelegraph, the company said it would defend the claims through the legal process.
The commercial relationship at the center of the litigation began in December 2023, when RedotPay announced its Binance Pay partnership. Under that arrangement, Binance Pay users could make direct deposits to RedotPay cards.
Binance later ended support for the integration as of April 3, 2026, citing a review of merchant partners. That withdrawal occurred months before the legal fight became widely public, suggesting the dispute has continued to develop independently of whether the integration was still active.
Crucially, the competing positions are not simply about whether RedotPay could provide card top-ups, but whether the use of Binance Pay funds fell within (or outside) what the parties agreed. The way courts interpret “terms of a commercial agreement” is often determinative in crypto platform and fintech disputes, particularly where multiple payment rails, intermediaries, or tokenized balances are involved.
What to watch after the Aug. 7 hearing
While RedotPay says it expects Binance to discontinue the Singapore proceedings, Binance’s spokesperson says the company is not abandoning its claims. The discrepancy means the next filings and court actions will matter more than either side’s statements in the short term.
If the Singapore case is indeed discontinued, RedotPay’s intention to pursue legal costs could become a focal point—especially if Binance contests costs or argues that discontinuance does not reflect wrongdoing. If Binance instead continues to litigate, it could signal that the company intends to maintain pressure on RedotPay in multiple venues simultaneously.
Either way, readers should pay close attention to how the Singapore track evolves alongside the Hong Kong case seeking nearly $473 million. With both proceedings tied to alleged user diversion connected to the Binance Pay–RedotPay setup, developments in one jurisdiction can influence negotiation posture in the other, even if legal standards and procedures differ.
For now, the main unknown is whether Binance’s position will translate into continued court steps in Singapore or whether RedotPay’s expected discontinuance plays out in formal filings—an outcome that will also shape the parties’ leverage and cost exposure across the wider $473 million dispute.
https://www.cryptobreaking.com/redotpay-and-binance-spar-over/?utm_source=blogger%20&utm_medium=social_auto&utm_campaign=RedotPay%20and%20Binance%20Spar%20Over%20Singapore%20Lawsuit%20in%20$473M%20Dispute%20
Comments
Post a Comment