Attribution of cryptographic instruments held in custody; costs of segregation

(1) A cryptographic instrument held in custody for a customer in the course of a qualified crypto custody business is deemed to belong to the customer. This does not apply where the customer has given consent to disposals of the value held in custody for the account of the institution or of third parties.
(2) Subsection (1) applies correspondingly, in the course of a qualified crypto custody business, to the share of cryptographic instruments in omnibus custody to which the customer is entitled, and to private cryptographic keys held in custody in isolation.
(3) Where, in insolvency proceedings over the assets of the institution, the customer does not consent to a segregation by way of transfer of the total holding held in custody by the institution to another institution carrying on qualified crypto custody business, designated by the insolvency administrator, the customer bears the costs of the segregation. This does not apply where the conditions on which the other institution offers to continue the custodial relationship are unreasonable for the customer. The first and second sentences apply correspondingly to the transfer of material parts of the total holding held in custody.