| 000 | 01429cab a2200193 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ABS44037 | ||
| 008 | 090401t1991 xxu||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d | ||
| 035 | _a(Sirsi) u44971 | ||
| 041 | _aeng | ||
| 245 | _aMay v Vincent | ||
| 260 | _c1991 | ||
| 350 | _a0 | ||
| 490 |
_aEstates Gazette _v(1991) 04 EG 144-152(3) |
||
| 520 | _aQBD 11 June 1990. On 21 April 1989 the trading standards officer (M) claimed the respondent (V) had wrongly described a water colour painting in an auction catalogue under Trades Description Act 1968 s1 . The case was held at the Petty Session and it was held that two customers (S) read the catalogue which described Lot 345 as "JMW Turner RA a watercolour of moorland, stream, bridge and people unframed" and contacted the auctioneers to authorise a bid of £700. The sale took place on 26 October 1986 and S was successful at £400. The picture was later found not to be by JMW Turner and V agreed the painting was therefore worthless however there was a comprehensive disclaimer at the front of the catalogue in the guise of a quote from Misrepresentation Act 1967 . The Crown Court held that the disclaimer doctrine did not apply to the art world and artistic products and V had only acted as an agent for the true seller. The case went to QBD where it was held that the doctrine of disclaimer h | ||
| 650 | _aCASE LAW | ||
| 690 |
_aAuctioneering _96218 |
||
| 942 | _n0 | ||
| 948 | _c04/03/1997 | ||
| 999 |
_c28585 _d28585 |
||