Paul is a highly experienced, creative and tenacious litigator
paul.russell@russell.nl +31 20 301 55 55How can you prevent, as an art seller, that you will be held liable when a person who acts on your behalf gives incorrect information on a work of art?
In a case the Arnhem Court of Appeal has recently decided on, an art dealer had commissioned an auction house to auction 71 works of art, including a sculpture by the French artist Edgar Degas. The sculpture by Degas was not sold during the auction but after the auction, when a private art collector – a great fan of the Degas oeuvre, as he said himself – bought the sculpture. The buyer requested the auction house whether “provenance” was available with regard to the sculpture by Degas, the answer of the auction house was positive and the buyer was told that he would receive it later. However, the buyer never received the provenance and the sculpture turned out to be a fake.
The court decided that the vendor, the selling art dealer, had to pay back the total purchase price to the buyer. The buyer was to assume, according to the Court, that he had purchased a genuine Degas. The notification by the auction house that sufficient provenance was available was to be considered as a notification by the selling art dealer, as, in this situation, the auction house acted as a representative of this art dealer. The fact that the selling art dealer had informed the auction house that no (sufficient) provenance was available does not make a difference. The art dealer is thus held accountable for the information the auction house provided to the buyer, even if this information is unjustified and opposed to the information the selling art dealer provided to the auction house.
The same decision of the Court of Appeal shows that, apart from the selling art dealer, the buyer of art also bears responsibility for his or her purchase. The very same private art collector had purchased another sculpture from the same auction house, which, according to the auction catalogue, was attributed to the Swedish artist Anders Zorn. This sculpture turned out to be a fake as well. However, the art collector had not inquired about the provenance regarding the Zorn when buying the sculpture. Therefore, the court decided that the art dealer could not necessarily expect that this sculpture was an authentic object by the artist in question. The art dealer does not have to repay the purchase price of this false sculpture to the buyer.
Would you like to know more about buying and selling art or do you have any questions on art and law regarding, for instance, incorrect attribution, buying at auction or consignment purchase? Please contact:
A maioria das relações comerciais transcorre sem problemas. As mercadorias são entregues, os serviços são prestados e as faturas são pagas em dia. Ocasionalmente, porém, um cliente ou parceiro comercial deixa de pagar. O que um credor pode fazer nessa situação?
Quando um devedor se recusa a pagar, apesar de lembretes e cartas de cobrança, medidas mais enérgicas serão necessárias para garantir o crédito. Um dos instrumentos mais eficazes na cobrança de dívidas na Holanda é a penhora. Como um credor pode obter tal penhora?
Quando um credor estrangeiro tem uma dívida a receber de um devedor holandês, o processo de cobrança de dívidas envolve considerações jurídicas adicionais, que vão desde questões de jurisdição até a executabilidade de sentenças estrangeiras e a disponibilidade de instrumentos de execução transfronteiriça. Quais são as opções de um credor em um contexto internacional?
Quando um devedor se recusa a pagar faturas pendentes, apesar de repetidos avisos, cartas de cobrança e até mesmo propostas de acordo, os credores podem começar a buscar medidas mais contundentes. Uma opção prevista na legislação holandesa é a apresentação de um pedido de falência contra o devedor. Quando pode um credor recorrer a essa opção, e quais são os riscos envolvidos?
This newsletter highlights the key developments in EU law and their practical implications for the aviation sector.
When a debtor refuses to pay outstanding invoices, despite repeated reminders, demand letters and even settlement proposals, creditors may start looking for stronger measures. One option under Dutch law is filing a bankruptcy petition against the debtor. When can a creditor use this option, and what are the risks involved?
