A long-running dispute in respect of the tenancy of London’s controversial Saatchi Gallery has returned to court after the parties failed to reach an agreement during mediation.
The Shirayama Shokusan corporation, which owns the South Bank-based County Hall where Charles Saatchi keeps his art collection, has reissued proceedings over the gallery’s occupancy almost two years after the dispute was first heard by the High Court.
Since the gallery opened in April 2003, the family-owned Japanese company and landlord Cadogan Entertainment Investments have issued several claims against Danovo Ltd, which operates the 40,000 sq ft gallery.
The pair are seeking to evict the gallery and to prevent it from using parts of the riverside building that they claim are not covered by the lease.
In September, Saatchi stated that, as a result of the dispute, he intended to move the art collection to larger premises at the Duke of York’s building in Chelsea.
However, Christopher Pymont QC, who represents Shirayama and Cadogan, said that despite the “scurrilous” statement from Saatchi that he was abandoning the building, he has recently “indicated an intention to remain in County Hall” and to open “either a low-cost museum of photography or a museum of new young artists”.
Pymont told the judge, Sir Donald Rattee, that within weeks of agreeing the terms of the lease, the gallery “began to exceed the rights that it had been granted” by occupying and siting works of art within communal areas of the building that did not fall within its leased area.
He added that Cadogan was also seeking possession of the premises on the basis of a breach of a lease obligation that required the gallery to charge a minimum price per ticket.
He said that the gallery’s “two for the price of one” ticket offer in Time Out magazine was an “important” breach, both because the gallery was paying rent based upon its turnover and because Cadogan had a right to terminate the lease if the gallery could not maintain visitor numbers over a certain level.
“Relations between the parties soon deteriorated,” Pymont said. He outlined a conversation between Saatchi and record producer Pete Waterman, a director of Cadogan, in which Saatchi allegedly made “highly defamatory” accusations of fraud, embezzlement and theft by Shirayama’s European representative Masakazu Okamoto and members of the Cadogan board.
In a statement, Shirayama and Cadogan said that their decision to issue proceedings against the gallery had been “reluctant”.
They said: “Cordial relations exist between all other tenants of County Hall and Cadogan. Shirayama and Cadogan, as responsible landlords, must bear in mind the needs of all current and future tenants of County Hall.”
The hearing is expected to last for 10 days.
Shirayama Shokusan Co Ltd and others v Danovo Ltd; Cadogan Entertainment Investments Ltd v Danovo Ltd Chancery Division (Sir Donald Rattee, sitting as a deputy judge of the division) 6 October 2005.
References: EGi Legal News 06/10/05
