The Art Newspaper

Dealer and collector respond to judge's decision

A "grateful" gallery aims to have the "frivolous" lawsuit dismissed, while Robins hopes the case "will lead to greater transparency and integrity" in the art world

By Helen Stoilas and Marisa Mazria Katz. Web only
Published online: 26 May 2010

Robins and Zwirner respond

Miami collector Craig Robins and a spokesperson for New York dealer David Zwirner have both responded to the judge’s decision last week to deny a preliminary injunction filed by Robins against Zwirner seeking to block the sale of three works by artist Marlene Dumas (see the link at left for our earlier story). Robins was suing Zwirner for breach of confidentiality after Zwirner told Dumas, whom he now represents, that he had sold her 1994 painting Reinhardt’s Daughter on Robins’ behalf. As well the alleged breach of confidentiality, Robins alleged that the disclosure landed him on a “blacklist” by Dumas, precluding him from buying her works on the primary market. He also claimed that, to avoid a lawsuit in 2005 when he first found out about the blacklist, Zwirner promised him “first choice, after museums, to purchase one or more [primary market] Marlene Dumas works”, and then reneged on this agreement.

The gallery released a statement to The Art Newspaper saying: “We are grateful for Judge William H. Pauley III’s just decision to deny the injunction…As we have stated all along, the lawsuit brought against the gallery by Craig Robins is entirely frivolous and without merit. It is based on wishful thinking and agreements that simply never existed. We will be requesting permission from Judge Pauley to file a motion to dismiss the case.”

“This is an especially important lawsuit. The job of a primary market gallerist is to promote the artistic career of his artists. This case confirms that in the course of doing that job, a gallerist has a right to sell the art to whomever he chooses…The extraordinary work of Marlene Dumas can now go to major collectors around the world. We are especially happy that some of these paintings will become part of important museum collections.”

“We think it is a particular shame that Craig Robins chose to pursue this case, and to drag Dumas’ name into an irresponsible lawsuit. Marlene Dumas is not only one of today’s most prominent artists, but also a generous and highly moral person. These aspects of her character inform every one of her works.”

Responding to The Art Newspaper by email, Robins said he sees the judge’s decision as a censure of the dealer's actions, although in his order Judge Paul refers only to the art world in general when painting his “unflattering portrait”. “The court saw fit to criticize David Zwirner’s behaviour, not mine,” said Robins. “If anyone wants the true picture of what happened, they should read the court's decision. Hopefully, this case will stimulate interest in reforms that will lead to greater transparency and integrity in a world mainly populated by impeccable dealers and practices which, unfortunately, can be tarnished by the ‘astonishing chicanery’ of a few, those that ‘desire a market that is neither open nor honest’.”