This is a brief excerpt from the document you requested from IFAR’s Art Law & Cultural Property Database.
Case Summary
Fastov v. Christie's
Fastov v. Christie’s Int’l PLC, No. 97-cv-00578 (D.D.C. Feb. 22, 2006). See also: Fastov v. Christie’s Int’l PLC, 547 F. Supp. 2d 39 (D.D.C. 2007) (awarding Christie’s expenses and attorneys’ fees), aff’d, No. 08-07062 (D.C. Cir. Apr. 20, 2009), cert. denied, 130 S. Ct. 806 (2009).
Précis
This federal case addresses the liability, if any, of an auction house that declined to sell a work of art after an expert refused to render an opinion as to
authenticity
The genuineness or truth of something; in art, the determination or judgment that a work is by the artist to whom it has been attributed.
authenticity based solely on photographs of the work. After Christie’s, London, refused to sell the painting, the painting’s owner sued the auction house. The court granted
summary judgment
A judgment granted on a claim or defense about which there is no genuine issue of material fact and upon which the movant is entitled to prevail as a matter of law. The court considers the contents of the pleadings, the motions, and additional evidence adduced by the parties to determine whether there is a genuine issue of material fact rather than one of law. This procedural device allows the speedy disposition of a controversy without the need for trial (Black’s Law Dictionary (8th ed. 2004)).
summary judgment in favor
Associated Legal Decision(s)
Click here to subscribe to IFAR's Art Law & Cultural Property Database to access this and other documents about U.S. and international legislation and case law concerning the acquisition, authenticity, export, ownership, and copyright of art objects.
