The Property (Digital Assets etc) Act 2025 received Royal Assent on 2 December 2025. The statute confirms that personal property rights can subsist in things that are neither tangible possessions nor rights in action, providing a clear statutory footing for courts to recognise certain digital assets as objects of property. The Ministry of Justice framed the change as legal certainty for users and businesses.
The operative provision is concise. It states that a thing, including something digital or electronic, is not prevented from being the object of personal property rights merely because it is neither a thing in possession nor a thing in action. In practice, this confirms at statute what recent case law had been moving towards, while removing residual uncertainty that an upper court had not yet finally resolved.
The Act extends to England, Wales and Northern Ireland and commenced on the day of Royal Assent. It does not extend to Scotland, where private law is distinct. For practitioners, the key point is that property status for eligible digital assets now rests on clear statutory language in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, with the courts continuing to shape the boundaries through decisions in individual cases.
The reform follows the Law Commission’s 2023 recommendations and its July 2024 supplemental report and draft Bill. The Commission concluded that some digital assets-such as crypto‑tokens and non‑fungible tokens-do not fit neatly into the traditional categories of personal property and advised Parliament to confirm a further category in which such assets can attract property rights. The new Act adopts that approach and leaves detailed development to the courts.
For civil recovery and enforcement, the change matters immediately. Recognising digital assets as capable of being objects of property strengthens the basis for proprietary injunctions, freezing orders and delivery‑up remedies in theft and fraud cases, and for tracing and constructive trust claims where assets have been misappropriated. Earlier High Court decisions had treated certain crypto‑assets as property; the Act now provides a statutory foundation across the relevant jurisdictions.
There are clear consequences for succession and insolvency. Assets capable of being objects of personal property rights can form part of a deceased’s estate and vest in a trustee in bankruptcy, subject to proof and control of access credentials. Executors, administrators and insolvency practitioners should ensure inventories, mandates and key‑management procedures are updated so that digital holdings are identified and realised in line with fiduciary duties.
For firms active in custody, exchange or payment services, the statutory clarification reduces scope for disputes over title and control. Terms of business and client asset frameworks may need revision to reflect ownership concepts, loss allocation, security interests and dispute resolution. Corporate treasurers and charities holding tokens should ensure registers, accounting policies and internal controls capture recognised digital assets on a consistent basis.
The new law is intentionally narrow in its drafting. It does not prescribe which digital things are property, regulate tokens or exchanges, or create new causes of action. Consumer and prudential supervision remains with HM Treasury and the Financial Conduct Authority. Whether a particular token or record is an object of property will continue to be determined case by case, guided by the statute and the emerging body of judgments.
Ministers have emphasised the policy intent of reducing uncertainty and supporting a legal services sector the Ministry of Justice values at £42.6 billion a year. Sarah Sackman KC MP, Minister for Courts and Legal Services, said the clarification will simplify disputes and reinforce the UK’s reputation for legal innovation. The department has also presented the Act as part of its wider economic plan for legal services growth.
Next steps will be judicial rather than legislative. The Law Commission has noted that recommendations on issues such as collateral arrangements for crypto‑tokens remain under consideration. Practitioners should monitor procedural guidance and new case law on identification, control and enforcement against digital assets, as well as developments around assets beyond crypto‑tokens-such as voluntary carbon credits-that may fall within the courts’ developing third category.