News

Amy Scollan and Anastassia Dimmek examine what happens to an art collection when couples divorce in Antiques Trade Gazette

  • June 13, 2022
  • By Amy Scollan, Partner and Anastassia Dimmek, Associate

This article was originally published in Antiques Trade Gazette and can be found here

What happens to art collections on divorce under English law?

The sale of Linda and Harry Macklowe’s renowned art collection for over $900m following their divorce hit headlines earlier this month. In their case, the judge in the State of New York ordered the sale of their art – but what happens to art collections on divorce under English law?

When spouses separate, the first step is to identify and value their assets, and to quantify their needs, e.g. for a home and an income stream (as assessed by the court in light of the assets available and the lifestyle during the marriage). If the parties’ assets are less than their needs, then the assets will be distributed so as to meet the parties’ needs to the extent possible, prioritising any children. The source of the assets will be of limited relevance.

Where assets exceed needs – as is likely to be the case for those with extensive art collections – the next stage is to characterise each asset as “matrimonial” or “non-matrimonial”. Matrimonial assets are those built up by the parties during their marriage, whereas non-matrimonial assets derive from a source external to the marriage, e.g. pre-owned or inherited assets. For example, a portrait of a family ancestor inherited during the marriage will be a non-matrimonial asset, whereas a sculpture purchased using income earned during the marriage will be matrimonial.

Following the categorisation of assets, the basic assumption is that matrimonial assets are shared equally, and non-matrimonial assets are retained by the owner. However, non-matrimonial assets can be transferred to the financially weaker party, if this is necessary to ensure both parties will be able to meet their financial needs, or to comply with a nuptial agreement. So if, for example, the portrait of an ancestor is worth £2m, and without it being sold there would be insufficient funds for both parties to purchase a suitable home, the court may order its sale and the distribution of the proceeds between the parties despite the fact it is a non-matrimonial asset.

Where an art collection is a matrimonial asset and is to be shared, difficulties may arise over implementation. The collection could be shared such that each party receives items with a broadly equal total value. However, if there is a dispute as to who should keep a particular item, this will need to be resolved by the judge, who may look at matters such as who chose it, or has the closest emotional connection to it. In practice, sharing items in specie in this way can be difficult if there are valuation disputes. The valuation given by experts in the Macklowe case differed by hundreds of millions of dollars.  In circumstances where there are significant discrepancies in expert valuations the only way to determine and share a collection’s value is for it to be sold and the proceeds distributed. This can lead to rather unfortunate outcomes for passionate art collectors/ artists to whom, very often, the integrity of a collection is paramount, or who are particularly attached to certain art works.

The distinction between non-matrimonial and matrimonial assets, in practice, can be less clear-cut than the parties assume; what happens to a collection a spouse began before marriage but which amassed most of its bulk (and value) over the following decades? Can an artist’s own works be ringfenced and should royalties, including profits from any re-sale rights, be included? Cases often turn on their own facts and require careful analysis.

Further challenges are added where a spouse holds intellectual property rights in art works or, in the case of crypto assets/NFTs, rights in an underlying, physical art work, which has considerable monetary value.

Carefully drafted pre-nuptial agreements can demonstrate the parties’ intention in anticipation of marriage and details about one’s collection, and help to avoid these kind of disputes in the event of divorce.


Related News

Jan 26, 2023
Hunters Law launches new ‘one couple, one lawyer’ service: Resolve
Jan 23, 2023
Amy Scollan discusses English assets after a foreign divorce
Jan 17, 2023
Jo Carr-West discusses the impact of the cost of living crisis for divorcing couples in EPrivateClient
Jan 16, 2023
Mark Stiebel and Anastassia Dimmek contribute to the third edition of The Art Law Review: United Kingdom chapter
Nov 29, 2022
Resolution’s Good Divorce Week 2022
Nov 24, 2022
Richard Kershaw participates in Today’s Family Lawyer Podcast
Nov 03, 2022
Hunters Law is recognised in The Times’ Best Law Firms 2023
Nov 01, 2022
Olivia Piercy discusses financial abuse in HNW divorces in the FTAdviser
Oct 21, 2022
Olivia Piercy participates in Today’s Family Lawyer Podcast
Oct 20, 2022
Richard Kershaw examines the recent multi-million pound divorce proceedings in the case of SA v FA in EPrivateClient

© Hunters Law LLP 2023 | Privacy NoticeLegal & Regulatory | Cookies Policy | Complaints Procedure.

Hunters Law LLP is authorised and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (number 657218)