The South African Reserve Bank (SARB) alleges that crypto-arbitrage fintech Kastelo contravened exchange-control rules involving at least R4 billion, and the Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg on 28 July 2026 dismissed Kastelo’s challenge to the Reserve Bank’s November 2025 order blocking its Access Bank account, BusinessTech reported. Kastelo disputes the allegations, says its model is lawful and says it has paused its arbitrage services.
The R4 billion is a suspicion, not a finding. SARB’s investigation identified what it called a “reasonable suspicion of exchange control contraventions in the amount of at least R4 billion”. The blocking order itself froze much less, about R13 million that was in the Kastelo account at Access Bank at the time, according to Moonstone. The allegations concern exchange control, which is the Reserve Bank’s area through its Financial Surveillance Department, rather than the registration rules for crypto-asset service providers.
According to SARB’s case, Kastelo used clients’ foreign exchange allowances, including the Single Discretionary Allowance and the Foreign Investment Allowance, to move funds offshore for crypto arbitrage, offered clients bonuses for doing so and in some cases lent them the money. Access Bank reportedly found that clients earning about R15,000 a month received loans of about R249,000. Arbitrage here means profiting from price differences between domestic and international crypto markets. Kastelo says its model lets clients benefit from those differences and that all transfers used individuals’ legitimate allowances.
The court timeline
SARB issued the blocking order on 24 November 2025. Kastelo’s urgent application was dismissed in January 2026 without the court considering the merits. On 28 July 2026 the High Court dismissed Kastelo’s substantive challenge and ordered it to pay SARB’s legal costs on an attorney-and-client scale. The court said SARB did not have to prove a contravention, only a reasonable suspicion. Kastelo has said it is leaning towards not seeking leave to appeal but has not made a final decision, and that any decision would be commercial rather than a reflection of weak merit. A blocking order is an interim measure and is not a finding of wrongdoing.
What businesses and traders should take from it
For businesses and individuals that use crypto platforms to move money across borders, the case is a reminder that offshore transfers by individuals count against annual allowances, and that a platform which pools or funds those transfers can attract scrutiny. Anyone using such a service should understand which allowance is being used, who is lending the money, and what happens if the platform’s accounts are frozen, since the blocking order here stopped withdrawals from its bank account.
Until the Reserve Bank completes its investigation, the allegations remain allegations. Market participants will be watching for any further enforcement action or court proceedings that determine the final consequences.
