James Stunt within the fallacious over £4m portray, courtroom hears
- James Stunt is showing earlier than the High Court in London over his chapter
- His collectors declare the playboy tried to cover a £4 million portray from them
James Stunt was a well known artwork collector who relied on his heiress spouse Petra Ecclestone to assist him pay for work, the artwork vendor who bought him the £4million masterpiece advised the High Court.
Dealer Fergus Hall mentioned he had undergone ‘protracted negotiations’ with Stunt over six months in relation to Van Dyck’s portray ‘The Cheek Sisters’ earlier than lastly promoting it to him for £600,000 in January 2013.
Lawyers appearing for Stunt, the previous son-in-law of ex-Formula One boss Bernie Ecclestone, insist the portray belongs to his father Geoffrey, who purchased it for himself.
But Geoffrey solely claimed he owned the seventeenth Century masterpiece in 2020 – a 12 months after his son was declared bankrupt with money owed totalling tens of millions of kilos.
On Tuesday, Stunt’s collectors, Ian Defty and Adrian Hyde – joint trustees of his property – launched a authorized battle at London’s High Court for Stunt and his father to show they’re the rightful homeowners of the portray.
Art vendor Mr Hall advised the courtroom: ‘James Stunt who wished so as to add it [The Cheek Sister painting] to his assortment.
‘I had bought James Stunt different work. This was probably the most worth portray that I bought him.
James Stunt, pictured with Petra Ecclestone, left, is in a authorized dispute along with his collectors of a £4million portray after he was declared bankrupt, a courtroom heard right now
Stunt, ex-husband of heiress Petra Ecclestone , purchased the precious Van Dyck piece ‘The Cheek Sisters’ in 2013, with a cheque for £600,000 from his father Geoffrey Stunt’s checking account
Stunt, ex-husband of heiress Petra Ecclestone, purchased the precious Van Dyck piece ‘The Cheek Sisters’ in 2013, with a cheque for £600,000 from his father Geoffrey Stunt’s checking account
‘What I believed then and I feel now, is that it was for James Stunt’s assortment and his father was paying for it.
‘It was not unusual for the bankrupt James Stunt to pay in instalments – by Amex credit score automotive or his spouse Petra Ecclestone to contribute to the steadiness.
‘The information are incontrovertible. The information haven’t modified, till James Stunt was declared bankrupt.’
Joseph Curl, KC, for the trustees advised the Insolvency and Companies Court: ‘This is a trial underneath the Trustees Insolvency Act over the possession of a portray ‘The Cheek Sisters’ by Anthony Van Dyck.
‘It was painted in contemplations in regards to the marriage of the youthful [Cheek] sister.
‘The portray was bought by an organization Fergus Hall Ltd in January 2013. The Trustees say it was bought to James Stunt. Geoffrey Stunt was the purchaser.
‘But the truth that the cheque was drawn on the daddy’s checking account isn’t express. What issues is who the contract was with in precept.
‘The contract with artwork vendor Fergus Hall Ltd was with James Stunt.
The courtroom heard Geoffrey Stunt, pictured, solely made declare to the portray ‘in the midst of 2020’ – a 12 months after his gold bullion vendor son was declared bankrupt and his belongings seized by his collectors
‘The bankrupt James Stunt at all times supposed to be and was the proprietor of the portray.’
Earlier, the courtroom heard that Stunt wrongly transferred possession of the £4million portray after he was declared bankrupt.
The barrister mentioned Geoffrey Stunt solely made declare to the portray ‘in the midst of 2020’ – a 12 months after his gold bullion vendor son was declared bankrupt and his belongings seized by his collectors.
The High Court ruling was extremely embarrassing for Stunt, who loved a lavish way of life whereas he was married to Formula One heiress Petra.
The playboy had embarked of months of authorized wrangling to keep away from insolvency by promoting off his artwork assortment – together with a £2.1million Claude Monet, a £1.6 million Mar Chagall and two items by Camille Pissarro valued at £400,00 every – pay his collectors.
But in a damning judgement, the insolvency courtroom discovered he couldn’t assure that he may elevate the cash and he was declared bankrupt.
Mr Curl, KC, advised the courtroom that James Stunt had an ‘unusually shut monetary association’ along with his father and ‘was within the apply of utilizing different individuals’s financial institution accounts to buy’ objects.
The High Court ruling was extremely embarrassing for Stunt (pictured), who loved a lavish way of life whereas he was married to Formula One heiress Petra
He added that Geoffrey Stunt didn’t have a replica of the bill of the sale of the portray.
He advised the courtroom: ‘James Stunt persistently represented that the portray as his property; when making use of for an export licence, when asking Christie’s [auction house] to promote it, when making an IVA assertion to his collectors.’
However, Geoffrey Stunt maintains he’s the true proprietor of the seventeenth century Van Dyck masterpiece.
His barrister, Lee Schama, the courtroom: ‘The Trustees contend that the portray was bought by or for James Stunt.
‘Geoffrey Stunt states the portray was bought by and for himself.
‘The Trustees state that James Stunt was the actual supply of the cash and James Stunt was the particular person [art dealer] Fergus Hall Ltd was contracted to.
‘But there isn’t any proof that James Stunt was the actual supply of funds. Bank proof is the opposite manner. James Stunt was not the client. The portray was bought by Geoffrey Stunt along with his personal funds.
James Stunt has a troublesome relationship with sure substances. He made a mistake.’
James Stunt and Petra Ecclestone at a Formula One social gathering in assist of Great Ormond Street Hospital Children’s Charity in 2011
Mr Schama advised the courtroom that James Stunt owned over 200 work ‘and greater than 20 by Van Dyck.
‘If I had been in a position to purchase a £600,000 portray by Van Dyck I might bear in mind it. But if I owned 20 Van Dyck work then I may very well be mistaken.’
Stunt relied on his heiress spouse Petra Ecclestone to assist him pay for work, the artwork vendor who bought him the £4million masterpiece advised the High Court.
Geoffrey Stunt maintains that he paid for the portray and that he’s the proprietor.
James Stunt collectors – Ian Defty and Adrian Hyde – joint trustees of his property, declare they’re the rightful homeowners of the £4 million portray and have introduced the case to the High Court to resolve.
The trial continues.
