TrueUSD’s $456M court case gives defendant days to reveal legal funding source – or face court sanctions

A Dubai court has given Matthew William Brittain until Sept. 7 to explain where money used for legal and advisory bills ultimately came from in a dispute over $456 million connected to TrueUSD reserves.

The Sept. 1 order adds a near-term disclosure deadline to proceedings in the Dubai International Financial Centre Courts. Techteryx, the claimant seeking the information, has obtained a proprietary injunction and worldwide freeze against Aria Commodities DMCC covering $456 million transferred from Legacy Trust and First Digital Trust, along with traceable proceeds.

Earlier DIFC court reasons for the freeze identify the money as part of the reserves backing TrueUSD, or TUSD. The injunction supports litigation in Hong Kong over what happened to the funds, but it does not decide who ultimately owns them.

Brittain must swear and serve an affidavit by 4 p.m. Gulf Standard Time on Sept. 7, acting “to the best of his ability.” For money paid to Quinn Emanuel, Horizons, Gall, Campbells and FTI Consulting, he must list amounts, payment dates and bank accounts. He must also identify the original sources and ultimate beneficial owners, explain how the accounts were funded and provide supporting documents.

The order separately requires an explanation of $1,083,912.49 paid by Aria Bio Industries FZE, another respondent in the case, on Oct. 31, 2025 toward Aria Commodities’ legal costs. The same funding details are required for that payment and for any further legal advice or representation costs incurred since a May 13 remedy application.

If Brittain does not comply, Techteryx may apply for sanctions. A penalty is not automatic: the court would still have to consider the further application.

Third adjournment sets October hearing

The court also moved the committal hearing to Oct. 26 for an estimated four days, marking its third adjournment. It is scheduled to take place in person at the DIFC Courts, with remote attendance allowed for Techteryx’s lead counsel.

In the reasons, Justice Michael Black said another adjournment would require “the most extreme circumstances” supported by strong evidence. The Sept. 7 disclosure deadline is distinct from the October committal hearing, which will address the pending committal application.

The Dubai proceeding is also separate from the underlying Hong Kong case. Techteryx alleges there that the transfers formed part of a fraud and that Aria holds the money or its proceeds on constructive trust. Those allegations remain disputed. At the interim stage, the DIFC court described key merits and ownership questions, including whether Techteryx had a proprietary interest in the reserves, as unresolved.