When the token refers to an unregistered right: what to do first
A token that refers to an unregistered right proves nothing about that right's existence by itself. It records a claim on a ledger, not a title recognised by any land, company, or securities register. The first task is to separate what the token asserts from what a register can confirm, then check whether registration is still open.
Why the gap exists
Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA), in force since 30 December 2024, governs the issuance and trading of crypto-assets: authorisation of issuers, disclosure duties, market conduct rules. It does not create, verify, or register the right a token claims to represent. A token can be lawfully issued under MiCA and still refer to a right that has no counterpart in the relevant off-chain register, because MiCA regulates the token, not the asset behind it. That gap is where most tokenised-rights disputes begin.
The gap does not close once the token changes hands. Under Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR), a transfer of the token between service providers already carries information duties on the originator and the beneficiary, independent of whether the underlying right is registered anywhere. A transfer can be fully compliant with these information duties and still move a token that refers to a right nobody outside the chain can confirm.
What to do first
| Step | Who does it | What it produces |
|---|---|---|
| Read the token's documentation and smart contract for the exact right claimed | You or your counsel | A precise description of the asserted right, not a paraphrase |
| Identify which off-chain register, if any, is meant to hold that right | Counsel, by asset type | A named register, or a documented absence of one |
| Check whether that register shows any entry matching the token, the issuer, or the counterparty | Counsel, via a register report | A confirmed match, mismatch, or absence |
| Preserve the on-chain record: transaction hash, timestamps, wallet addresses | You, before anything else | Evidence that survives a later dispute |
| Decide whether registration is still possible under the applicable procedure | Counsel, jurisdiction by jurisdiction | A registration path, or a documented reason it is closed |
Follow this order. Registering first and describing the right afterwards produces a filing that does not match what the token actually says, and that mismatch is expensive to correct once a register has accepted it.
Who decides, and on what evidence
No single body decides whether an unregistered right becomes enforceable. The register's administrator decides whether an entry can be made and on what documentation. Where the right is disputed, a court or arbitral tribunal decides on the merits, weighing the on-chain record alongside contracts, corporate resolutions, and any register extract. The token is admissible evidence of what was recorded and when. It is not, by itself, proof of the right's substance.
If your situation differs
If the issuer and the platform listing the token belong to the same group or sit under common control, the registration gap can be deliberate rather than accidental. See When the issuer and the platform are related in for what to check first in that configuration.
If the right in question is a claim against a person rather than a title to an asset, the register you need is not a title register but the counterparty's own filings and any insolvency record. That check differs enough from an asset check that it is worth running before you commit to a registration path.
What this page does not solve
This page does not tell you what a specific register in a specific country shows for your token, issuer, or counterparty. It does not tell you whether registration is still possible under a given national procedure, because that depends on the register and the deadline it applies, and neither is uniform across the European Union. It does not value the right or the token.
Sources and limit
Establishing what a specific register shows belongs to the report layer, not to this page. An asset report for the Netherlands can show what is recorded against a named asset in the relevant national register: Asset report netherlands.
Where the right is a claim against a person rather than a title to an asset, the equivalent check runs through a different register: Debtor in Netherlands: what can be established.
If you are not yet sure which check applies to your token and jurisdiction, start with the scoping step rather than ordering a report blind: Free check overview and what to prepare.
Verified
Checked on 3 June 2025. Primary sources: Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 (MiCA); Regulation (EU) 2023/1113 (TFR). Register-specific procedures are not covered by these two sources and are not stated on this page for that reason.
Related publications
A closely related situation covers what happens once the token has already moved: When a transfer on-chain is not recorded off-chain: what to do first sets out the evidentiary steps for that stage.
FAQ
What is the first step when the token refers to an unregistered right?
Read the token's own documentation and smart contract to fix the exact right claimed, before assuming any particular register applies. Everything else, including which register to check, follows from that description.
Which deadline is already running?
If a limitation or registration window applies to the underlying right, it runs under the law governing that register or claim, not under the token's timestamp. The token's creation date does not start or pause that clock. Identify which law applies before assuming you still have time.
Who decides, and on what evidence?
A register's administrator decides whether an entry can be made, based on the documentation that register requires. A court or tribunal decides a disputed right on the merits, using the on-chain record together with contracts and any register extract, not the token alone.
Confirm the exact right, the register that should hold it, and whether registration is still open before you move the token again or rely on it as security. Where those three points are unclear, resolve them first; the steps that follow depend on the answer.