ePaper
Subscribe
Newsletters
Search
Profile
Visitor Figures
Art market
Museums & heritage
Exhibitions
Books
Podcasts
Columns
Vermeer
Adventures with Van Gogh
Russia-Ukraine war
Subscribe
ePaper
Newsletters
Visitor Figures
Art market
Museums & heritage
Exhibitions
Books
Podcasts
Columns
Vermeer
Adventures with Van Gogh
Russia-Ukraine war
Lawsuits
news

Artist resale rights organisations launch UK High Court action against multi-millionaire art dealer and collector Ivor Braka

The Artists’ Collecting Society and the Design and Artists Copyright Society say Braka has refused to disclose information on secondary market sales since royalties legislation was introduced in 2006

Anny Shaw
18 March 2022
Share
Art dealer, collector and pub owner Ivor Braka. Photo: © Hufton + Crow

Art dealer, collector and pub owner Ivor Braka. Photo: © Hufton + Crow

UPDATE 21 March: Ivor Braka made the following statement: "DACS/ACS brought out a statement last week which sets out to damage my reputation and 'make an example' of me. They say that, by failing to pay their levy on resale. I am failing artists and being immoral. This is not the truth." Braka listed the following reasons as to why he disagrees with ARR: 1. I have always fundamentally disagreed with the introduction of the Artists’ Resale Right. It was a European law forced on us. 2. I disagree with it because it favours artists with an active market and ignores those that are really in need. There are extraordinary artists that need support but don’t produce work that is acknowledged by the market. Why is there no discussion about this and why wasn’t this debated at the beginning? 3. I may stand alone, but I have always been very vocal about my objections to the Artists’ Resale levy. It applies just to those in the art business ("art market professionals"), and yet many so called collectors these days are the biggest traders. 4. It is often compared to copyright law in the music world, but it is not the same. Although I believe the artist should hold copyright over the use of mechanical reproductions of their work, the work itself becomes the property of someone else once it is sold. The ARR goes counter to the spirit of English property law. 5. The ARR is a deeply flawed levy in that it raises money almost exclusively for very wealthy artists or estates. 6. ARR also fails to recognise that when you buy for £5,000 and sell for £3,000, you are still liable to pay the levy. This makes no sense at all. Braka further points out that Ivor Braka Limited has been a donor to arts institutions including: The Seattle Art Museum, The Studio Museum, Harlem, The Dallas Museum of Art, The Museum of Modern Art Fort Worth, The Yale Center for British Art, The Whitworth, University of Manchester, The Serpentine Gallery, The Tate Gallery, The National Gallery, London, and others.

Two British organisations that represent artists and their estates have launched a legal action in the High Court against the multi-millionaire art dealer and collector Ivor Braka and his company, Ivor Braka Ltd, in a bid to uncover whether he owes unpaid royalties dating back to 2006 when the Artist Resale Right was first introduced in the UK.

The Artists’ Collecting Society (ACS) and the Design and Artists Copyright Society (DACS)—the two non-profit bodies responsible for collecting Artist’s Resale Right royalties—say they have repeatedly asked Braka to disclose information on sales on which royalties are due. According to those organisations, Braka has refused to respond, potentially breaching his legal obligation to provide details of secondary market transactions. The value of allegedly unpaid royalties is unknown at this stage.

Braka tells The Art Newspaper the claims made in the High Court are “about me in my personal capacity as a collector—I don’t deal in my personal capacity”. He adds: “As an individual, I have never been asked for secondary market dealings post 2006. And I’ve never responded. There’s no case to answer.” As for his company, Braka says he has “no comment”.

Meanwhile, in legal papers filed to both Braka and his company in a lower court during the earlier stages of the dispute, Braka stated he intended to contest the claim. According to those papers, Braka says that DACS and ACS’s claim “involves substantial disputes of fact” including “whether all of the claimants’ requests for information were sent and validly made to each of the defendants under reg.15 of the Artist’s Resale Rights Regulations”. Regulation 15 states that requests for information to support resale rights must be made within three years of the sale in question.

It is the first time such proceedings have been brought in the UK, where artists are entitled to a small payment on the secondary sale of their works through galleries, dealers and auction houses. Royalties are payable on a sliding scale and capped at €12,500 for works valued at more than €500,000.

In a statement, Gilane Tawadros, the chief executive of DACS, says “the majority of the art market” complies with resale regulations, but “a few do not”. This gives them “an unfair advantage against their fellow art dealers and denies artists and creatives income that is desperately needed, especially after the Covid-19 pandemic”.

She adds: “We hope that the proceedings will encourage compliance with the regulations, supporting artists and helping to balance the inequality of wealth in the art market.”

Tim Maxwell, a partner at Charles Russell Speechlys, says: “The concept of a royalty is accepted practice in other intellectual property fields such as film, music and literature so it is disappointing that some take the view that this royalty should not be paid, preventing the grass roots of the industry being supported in this way. We are hopeful that this claim will act as a catalyst to allow artists to receive increased revenue during and after this most challenging of times.”

LawsuitsArtist's resale rightsArt market
Share
Subscribe to The Art Newspaper’s digital newsletter for your daily digest of essential news, views and analysis from the international art world delivered directly to your inbox.
Newsletter sign-up
Information
About
Contact
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Terms and conditions
Advertise
Sister Papers
Sponsorship policy
Follow us
Facebook
Instagram
Twitter
YouTube
LinkedIn
© The Art Newspaper