Antiques Trade Gazette

5

Dispute over ‘Friedrich’ highlights bias against dealers over sleepers in France

continued from front page

A painting with a similar description was mentioned in the inventory drawn up after David d’Angers’ death. It is not certain whether he was given it by Friedrich or purchased it during his visit or at a later date. The last trace of this work dates to 1878, when it was in the hands of d’Angers’ heirs.

Shortly after the Cannes auction the vendors, who remain anonymous, contacted auctioneer Julien Pichon and partner François Issaly, claiming the sale should be considered invalid by virtue of Article 1110 of the France’s Code Civil, which stipulates that “error is a reason to annul a transaction… if it concerns the substance of the item concerned”. Azur Enchères have since refused to

release the painting (or, indeed, cash the buyers’ cheque). The wording of Article 1110 is hardly a model of clarity and, in the present case, open to contrasting interpretation. Insofar as the painting offered in Cannes was correctly, if tersely, described, and accurately dated as 19th century, the auctioneers appear innocent of legal wrong-doing. Such is the personal opinion of Francine Mariani-Ducray, President of France’s auction watchdog, the Conseil des Ventes.

Madame Mariani-Ducray also told ATG that, despite the ambiguity it engenders, she felt there was no need for Article 1110 to be redrafted. However, the vendor’s claim here is based not so much on the letter of the law as on a previous, controversial and highly tendentious interpretation of it. The legal precedent in question

concerns the case of the Flight into Egypt offered for auction in Versailles in 1986 as a painting from the “studio of Nicolas Poussin”, with an estimate of Fr150,000. It sold for Fr1.6m to Paris dealers Richard and Robert Pardo, who believed it to be a

Left: the picture at the centre of dispute, this oil of an owl perched in a leafless tree sold at auction in Cannes for €350,000 (£295,000) on February 10. Speculation that the picture is by the German Romanticist Caspar David Friedrich has led to an attempt to annul the sale.

PEOPLE

WE regret to announce the sad and sudden death of Frank Horn of Books for Collectors Ltd, who died following a short illness on May 9.

Shirley Horn and family would like to thank everyone for their kind comments and cards at this difficult time.

bona fide Poussin painted around 1658. Their claim received heavyweight backing in 1994 when Louvre boss Pierre Rosenborg agreed with them in his catalogue entry to the major Poussin retrospective at the Grand Palais – prompting the vendor to demand the Versailles sale be annulled and the work returned to her.

In 1998, after a lengthy legal

procedure, the Paris Appeal Court overturned an initial judgment and ruled in her favour, claiming that the catalogue description and modest estimate excluded all possibility of the work being a Poussin. The Pardos were forced to return the work, which was eventually acquired by the State for a reported €15m, and now hangs in the Beaux-Arts Museum in Lyon. Although the sale description of the Friedrich was not factually inaccurate (as “studio of Poussin” was deemed to have been), Bertrand Gautier fears that the discrepancy between the estimate and the hammer price could prompt a French court to annul the sale.

Even though nearly four months have elapsed since the sale, and he has yet to see his acquisition, Gautier claims to be “serene” about the situation and hopes it can be amicably resolved. “We are talking to all the parties concerned” he told ATG. “It’s a complex situation. One could imagine there might be problems of this

sort, given the price.” French law appears to penalise dealers

from exercising their business to the best of their ability: i.e. by taking risks to back their judgment.

The vendors, despite their ignorance, and the auctioneers, who displayed casualness if not incompetence, are not just legally blameless but stand to benefit from the dealers’ knowledge. Gautier believes that the situation is unjust. “This is embarrassing for everyone, and not good for the market. Part of our role is to be discoverers. But, if you discover something, you can see your acquisition challenged… It’s not the auctioneers or the vendors who suffer, it’s the buyer.”

Just the sort of mess, you might think, which the Conseil des Ventes – that uniquely French body – was designed to avoid, or at least clear up. Yet the Conseil is powerless to intervene unless solicited by one of the interested parties, and there has been no sign yet of any such appeal. If confirmed as a Friedrich, the owl painting could be worth around ten times what Talabardon & Gautier bid in Cannes. Press speculation in France suggests it could, in due course, be classified as a ‘national treasure’ and, like the Poussin, acquired by the State – for either the Louvre or the Beaux-Arts museum in Angers.

WE regret to announce the death of Keith Finch, who died peacefully at home on April 12. Well known in the trade, he started his career in Portobello Road 40 years ago. He traded initially in Victoriana but later in period furniture and objets d'art.

Towcester to get a new fair

A WEEK before she launches her West

London Art & Antiques Fair,Caroline

Penman has announced another new summer event, The Towcester Antiques Fair which will take place at Towcester Racecourse in

Northamptonshire from June 25 to 27. The fair will house some 40 exhibitors over three floors of the newly-built Empress Stand building and will be similar in style and presentation to Mrs Penman’s long- running fair at Chester racecourse. The fair will not be datelined but will be vetted. This is the organiser’s 11th annual fair and fifth venue. She told ATGlast week: “No comparable event takes place in the region and I have chosen a time of year when many dealers are not already committed to other events. With our expertise at provincial fairs I feel we are tapping into a ready market.” Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80