Thwaytes v Sotheby's

Thwaytes v Sotheby's

Sotheby's was not negligent nor in breach of contract; its specialists were qualified, examined the Painting thoroughly, reasonably concluded it was a period copy, and there were no features or technical evidence requiring further investigation or external expert consultation.

Parties
Claimant: Mr Lancelot Thwaytes; Defendant: Sotheby's
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
16 January 2015
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Negligence, Breach of Contract, Professional Duty, Auction House Liability
Contract Tort Negligence Breach of Contract Professional Duty Auction House Liability

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Lancelot Thwaytes

Claimant

Sotheby's

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was Sotheby's negligent in its assessment and sale of the Painting?
  2. 2 Did Sotheby's breach its contractual duty to Mr Thwaytes?
  3. 3 Did Sotheby's fail to notice features indicating Caravaggio potential?

Ratio Decidendi

Sotheby's was not negligent nor in breach of contract; its specialists were qualified, examined the Painting thoroughly, reasonably concluded it was a period copy, and there were no features or technical evidence requiring further investigation or external expert consultation.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed