The Court of Appeal is hearing a claim that auction house Christie’s breached its duty of care in the potential sale of a valuable Jan Steen painting known as the Backgammon Players.
The painting, which is believed to date from the 1660s, was stolen from owner Philippe Marcq in 1979. He reported the theft to the Art Loss Register.
In May 1997, Christie’s received the painting from Carl Schunemann, who had purchased it in good faith three years previously in an Amsterdam art gallery. The painting was withdrawn from auction after it failed to reach its reserve price of around £150,000. In September 1997, it was returned to Schunemann, who subsequently sold it elsewhere.
In the High Court, Judge Jack allowed Marcq permission to sue Christie’s on the ground of bad faith, but dismissed allegations that Christie’s had breached its duty of care in its handling of the potential sale.
In the Court of Appeal today, Norman Palmer, counsel for Marcq, claimed that the judge had been wrong to hold that Christie’s did not owe a duty of care as a “finder of goods”. He argued that the judge had “failed to appreciate the special conditions affecting the fine art market, and their importance, as justifying a special duty of care on Christie’s as a principal fine art auction house”.
However, John McCaughran QC, counsel for Christie’s, maintained that it was “not possible to liken the position of Christie’s to that of a finder”.
He argued: “A finder of necessity knows that someone else is the true owner of the goods, even if he does not know the identity of that person.”
The hearing continues.
Marcq v Christie Manson & Woods Ltd (t/a Christie’s) Court of Appeal (Peter Gibson, Tuckey and Keene LJJ) 13 May 2003.
Norman Palmer and Angus Piper (instructed by Ralph Davis) appeared for the appellant; John McCaughran QC (instructed by Stephenson Harwood) appeared for the respondent.
References: PLS News 13/5/03
