Houghton urns case reaches Appeal Court

In a hearing that is expected to last about ten days, with a judgment announced at a later date, three Appeal Court judges started considering the evidence on Monday.

Christie’s are seeking to overturn a ruling that makes them liable to pay damages to Canadian heiress Taylor Lynne Thomson.

In what must rank as one of the most complex and confusing cases of its kind, Ms Thomson had complained that the £1.75m urns she had bought at Christie’s in 1994 were not the 18th century originals catalogued but 19th century copies.

Despite widespread media speculation to the contrary following the High Court ruling in May last year, the case as it stands has not made any dramatic change to traditional cataloguing practice.

It had been feared by the auction industry that the High Court judge, Mr Justice Jack, would throw out the convention that a catalogue description, however detailed, was in the end a matter of opinion. Such a decision would have had far-reaching consequences for auction houses across the country. In fact, he ruled that even where catalogue descriptions are given in absolute terms, such as in this case, “it remains nonetheless an expression of opinion, which may later be shown to be doubtful or wrong. That is the basis on which the market proceeds, and that is generally well understood.”

Although Mr Justice Jack concluded that the urns were probably originals and that Christie’s had not been negligent in cataloguing, he ruled in Ms Thomson’s favour on the basis of her special client status. This gave Christie’s an extra duty of care in dealing with her which they had not fulfilled, he said. If this point stands on appeal, it is likely to make auction houses tighten their rules with regard to client services.

Christie’s argued that the judge was wrong to rule on a point that was not the basis of the complaint. They also took issue with how the judge interpreted their duty on this basis.

An independent legal commentator, Pierre Valentin, head of the art and cultural assets group at Withers LLP, told ATG at the time that aspects of the ruling were puzzling. “It suggests a double standard,” he said. “The catalogue is good enough for buyers in general but if you are a VIP buyer, you are entitled to further information. Some people may take issue with that.”

Ms Thomson was originally refused leave to appeal against the judge’s decision that the urns were originals, but has since won that right. Her appeal will form part of the hearing here, increasing the possible number of outcomes.