James Stunt ‘conspired’ to rob £4m portray, court docket hears

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 informed the High Court.

Dealer Fergus Hall stated 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.

However, his father Geoffrey Stunt claims he’s the proprietor of the portray and that it’s not a part of his son’s property which is now within the arms of his collectors.

Mr Hall informed the court docket: ‘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 essentially the most worth portray that I bought him.

‘What I assumed 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 details are incontrovertible. The details haven’t modified, till James Stunt was declared bankrupt.’

Earlier, the court docket heard that Stunt conspired along with his father to rob his collectors of the £4million portray after he was declared bankrupt.  

Stunt stated he purchased the piece with a a cheque for £600,000 from his father Geoffrey’s checking account. 

But Geoffrey claimed he owned the seventeenth Century masterpiece in 2020 – a 12 months after his son was declared bankrupt with money owed totalling hundreds of thousands of kilos.

Today Stunt’s collectors, Ian Defty and Adrian Hyde – joint trustees of his property – launched a authorized battle on the  High Court for Stunt and his father to show they the rightful house owners of the portray.

Joseph Curl, KC, for the trustees informed 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 just isn’t specific. What issues is who the contract was with in precept.

‘The contract with artwork vendor Fergus Hall Ltd was with James Stunt.

‘The bankrupt James Stunt all the time meant to be and was the proprietor of the portray.’

The barrister stated 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, daughter of billionaire Bernie Ecclestone.

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 court docket discovered he couldn’t assure that he may increase the cash and he was declared bankrupt.

Mr Curl, KC, informed the court docket 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’ gadgets.

He added that Geoffrey Stunt didn’t have a replica of the bill of the sale of the portray.

He informed the court docket: ‘James Stunt constantly 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 court docket: ‘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 individual [art dealer] Fergus Hall Ltd was contracted to.

‘But there is no such thing as a proof that James Stunt was the actual supply of funds. Bank proof is the opposite means. James Stunt was not the client. The portray was bought by Geoffrey Stunt along with his personal funds.

James Stunt has a tough relationship with sure substances. He made a mistake.’

Mr Schama informed the court docket that James Stunt owned over 200 work ‘and greater than 20 by Van Dyck.

‘If I have been capable of 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 informed 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 house owners of the £4 million portray and have introduced the case to the High Court to determine.

The trial continues.