$410 million court case sparked over art insurance
A $410 million case between Ron Perelman, a businessman with an extensive art collection, and various insurance companies will head to trial.
Perelman initially filed a lawsuit against several companies, including AIG and Lloyd’s of London, claiming they failed to accurately comply with his requests for cover after a fire in 2018 occurred in the same rooms housing a collection iconic paintings he owns.
Although all of the artworks, which included Andy Warhol’s Campbell’s Soup Can and Untitled (1971) by Cy Twombly, were not destroyed, Perelman believes that (via ARTnews) “the pictures lost their luster, lost their depth, lost some of their definition and lost a lot of their character.”
The case revolves around whether the paintings are actually damaged, with each party having a different opinion. Perelman and his attorneys believe that, while damage isn’t visible, the heat from the fire caused the paintings to begin degrading more quickly. They hired an expert, Scientific Analysis of Fine Art’s president, Jennifer Mass, who explained that “the conditions of the fire would necessarily have shortened the lifetime trajectory.”
Meanwhile, the insurance companies don’t think the paintings have been damaged, stating that they have “not sustained any detectable damages.” They also believe that Perelman lied during the investigation because he actually tried to sell several of these paintings two years after the fire – before filing an insurance claim.
There is evidence to back these claims, as Ken Griffin, one of the world’s richest men, purchased Brice Marden’s Letter about Rocks #2 after the fire, which was hung by the Warhol and Twombly paintings that Perelman is trying to receive insurance for.
The insurance companies also questioned why it took Perelman two years to file the claim, although his lawyers believe that the initial investigation by the insurance companies was purposefully drawn out.
Perelman had an unusual deal with the insurance companies where he could give them a damaged painting in return for the full insurance cost, even if this were several times the price of the artwork. Thus, there are suspicions regarding the case due to the fact that Perelman has been facing some financial issues, selling over 70 paintings in the past few years.
This is a developing story.
