The High Court has found in favour of a Folkestone charity in its claim to ownership of a section of wall that features a mural believed to have been spray-painted by Banksy which has been valued at almost £500,000. As a result, it will have to be shipped back from New York to be “delivered up” to the charity.
Arnold J granted the Creative Foundation summary judgment on its claim against Dreamland Leisure, tenant of the building at Rendezvous Street, Folkestone, on which the mural was painted.
The mural, “Art Buff” – which was painted in September 2014 and has been valued as high as £470,000 – has been removed from the building by Dreamland, which operates an amusement arcade there. It was shipped to the Keszler Gallery in New York, but has been placed in storage following an earlier court order.
Now the foundation, which was formed to contribute to the regeneration of Folkestone by promoting creativity and the arts, has succeeded in its claim to ownership of the mural. It claimed that it acquired title to the mural from the building’s landlord, Stonefield Estates, by an assignment in March.
In his ruling, the judge said that he was not concerned with the copyright in the artwork, which he said “prima facie belongs to Banksy”, and that when he referred to the mural, he meant the “physical object and the artistic work fixed upon it”.
Dreamland had argued that it was obliged or at least entitled to remove the mural from the building in order to meet its lessee covenants to keep the premises in good repair, and that once it was removed, it became the property of Dreamland.
However, the judge ruled that Dreamland had “no reasonable prospect” of establishing that it was entitled to remove the mural under the repairing obligation in its lease, as opposed to painting over it or chemically cleaning it.
He added that, in his view, if an item is removed from demised premises and becomes a chattel which has substantial value, the term to be implied into the lease is that it becomes the property of the lessor. As a result, he said that Dreamland’s defence was “unsustainable”.
The Creative Foundation v Dreamland Leisure Ltd and ors Chancery (Arnold J) 11 September 2015
John Machell QC and Adam Rosenthal (instructed by Boodle Hatfield LLP) for the claimant
Romie Tager QC and Simon McLoughlin (instructed by Brook Martin & Co) for the defendants
