Ruling defends attribution conventions
Series: Antiques Trade Gazette ; (1530) 16 March 2002, 1-2(1)Publication details: 2002Subject(s): Summary: A High Court ruling has defended the conventions of attribution for paintings in a case between a disgruntled customer and Mayfair art dealers Agnew's. While the judge agreed that the painting sold to Mr Drake was not by Van Dyck, he dismissed Mr Drake's claim for a £1.5m refund because Agnew's had only expressed an opinion that it was, and Mr Drake had instead been misled by art agent Steven Callam.| Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| News article | London News article | WB3810-01 (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 117132-1001 |
Browsing London shelves, Shelving location: News article Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
A High Court ruling has defended the conventions of attribution for paintings in a case between a disgruntled customer and Mayfair art dealers Agnew's. While the judge agreed that the painting sold to Mr Drake was not by Van Dyck, he dismissed Mr Drake's claim for a £1.5m refund because Agnew's had only expressed an opinion that it was, and Mr Drake had instead been misled by art agent Steven Callam.