Will a Lawsuit Save the Smart Contract?

Judy Rubio

One of the most recent events has managed to attract millions of people’s attention. Helbiz investors decided that it would be absolutely necessary for them to try and urge the court to prevent the company from blocking the smart contract.

That’s a class-action lawsuit that investors arranged – their mission is to prevent the destruction of the smart contract that underpins its coin known as HBZ. Experts say that the electric scooter firm announced to have collected almost forty million USD for a crypto asset billed to ruin the ride-sharing economy three years ago.

Next, the plaintiffs supported their request by filing a memorandum last week. They asked for a temporary restrain and preliminary injunction against the mentioned company. According to recent data, the investors represent around twenty thousand individuals who are now witnessing the permanent destruction of the property belonging to them.

Investors Do Not Want to Face Destruction

HelbizCoin may face destruction yet its investors are doing all possible to prevent this. The plaintiffs claim that the firm’s executives want to destruct the token – this is how the company will close the books on the coin’s liability. Next, they plan to issue stock in an IPO.

With the group intending to destroy the smart contract, the new order aims to prevent the defendants from ruining the code that permits the token to exist. At the same time, participants understand that it may comprise a conversion as well as trespass of their personal property. Plaintiffs do not agree that the threatened termination of private property is a perfect basis for an injunction.

They explain the details and consequences of the action saying that once the executives terminate the contract, the company will never be able to restore it. Additionally, they mentioned the firm that controls the contracts, but they are sure that the information they received is false.

Participants found out about the firm’s plans for an IPO a year ago. Nevertheless, plaintiffs claim that this plan comes at their expense. Defendants were involved in the matter and accused of staying away from the coin since its value fell by more than ninety-nine percent.