CoinsPaid Dispute Splits Between Vienna Arbitration and Tel Aviv Defamation Case

Overview

An Israeli court has restructured the long-running fight inside the CoinsPaid/Dream Finance ecosystem into two distinct tracks:

• Corporate control and shareholder issues will proceed in confidential arbitration before VIAC in Vienna.

• Defamation and privacy claims will remain in Tel Aviv, but only with precisely itemized allegations.

This framework moves the commercial heart of the conflict from Israel to Austria while demanding far greater specificity for any “smear campaign” claims heard in Israel.

Parties and Claims

Core civil action: Montik & Others v. Megrelashvili & Others (22978-01-22)

Common allegations (both directions):

• A coordinated online “smear campaign” comprising hundreds of videos, websites, and posts, framed as defamation and invasion of privacy.

• A bundle of corporate and shareholder disputes tied to historical business relationships in the Dream Finance/CoinsPaid sphere.

Key Rulings at a Glance

• March 2025 — Judge Yaakov Shaked:
  Criticized non-appearance by certain plaintiffs, emphasized personal attendance, and proposed a global solution: move both primary claims and counterclaims to Austrian arbitration in line with contractual arbitration clauses.

• 29 October 2025 — Judge Amir Weitzenblit:

• Stayed the corporate disputes between parties 1–3 on both sides and referred them to VIAC arbitration in Vienna.

• Retained the defamation/privacy track in Tel Aviv.

• Clarified that Defendant 4 (Roland Yakoblevich Ishaev) is not bound by the arbitration agreement and thus remains in Israeli proceedings where applicable.

• Condemned all pleadings as over-general, ordering granular, publication-by-publication pleading: verbatim quotes, dates, URLs/locations, identification of responsible defendants, and specific damage calculations.

• Counterclaim bifurcation:
  The counterclaim was split into (i) defamation/publications against all four counter-defendants and (ii) corporate issues against Roland alone, which include a multi-million-shekel “abuse of process” demand.

Procedural Timeline (Condensed)

1. Filing of civil case (22978-01-22): Competing Camps lodge mutual claims and counterclaims.

2. March 2025: Court signals preference for Austrian arbitration on corporate questions; rebukes non-attendance.

3. 29 Oct 2025: Court splits the matter—Vienna for corporate disputes; Tel Aviv for defamation/privacy; imposes strict pleading standards.

What This Means

1) Corporate control moves behind closed doors

Questions about ownership, governance, profit allocation, and contractual control within the Dream Finance/CoinsPaid structure will now be tested in confidential VIAC arbitration. Any documentary revelations about ultimate control and decision-making are unlikely to surface publicly unless through leaks, later court filings, or enforcement actions.

2) Defamation litigation becomes evidence-driven

Israeli judges have rejected sweeping narratives about “hundreds of videos” or “dozens of platforms” without precise citations. Each side must name the post, quote it, date it, link it, assign responsibility, and price the harm. The Tel Aviv docket is therefore poised to generate a clear, auditable record of who published what, when, and with what alleged impact.

3) A potential public ledger of claims

Given ongoing public scrutiny of CoinsPaid and Dream Finance—including questions raised about compliance posture and reported volumes—the Tel Aviv case could produce a rare public index of specific statements and their factual underpinnings, shifting the conflict from information warfare to proof-based litigation.

Open Questions to Watch

• Arbitration Outcomes: Will Vienna proceedings crystallize a definitive picture of beneficial ownership and operational control?

• Defamation Pleadings: Which publications make it into the Israeli record, and how will causation and damages be quantified?

• Enforcement Cross-Over: Could arbitration awards or Israeli judgments spill into other jurisdictions via recognition and enforcement?

Call for Information

Scam-Or Project has reviewed the Israeli court decisions and supporting materials supplied by whistleblowers. We are mapping both the Vienna arbitration and the Tel Aviv defamation tracks into the broader Dream Finance/CoinsPaid risk profile.

• If you are a current or former insider, counterparty, or legal adviser with knowledge of these disputes, the underlying shareholder agreements, or related arbitration filings, we invite you to contact us via scam-or.io.

• Relevant documents (contracts, pleadings, correspondence, technical logs, or publication archives) are especially valuable for establishing chronology, authorship, and control.

Appendix: Pleading Checklist for Defamation (Per Court Guidance)

• Exact publication text (verbatim quote)

• Date and time of publication

• Location/URL/platform (with working link or archival reference)

• Identified defendant(s) allegedly responsible

• Theory of liability (defamation, invasion of privacy, etc.)

• Causation (how the publication led to harm)

• Damages (itemized calculations and supporting evidence)