If The Market Were More Transparent, These Things Wouldn’t Happen
(Like Artemundi Being Ripped of Thousands of Dollars)
During the last few days, the ongoing controversy between Russian art collector Dmitry Rybolovlev and Swiss freeport businessman Yves Bouvier has escalated considerably, particularly in light of Rybolovlev’s return of Ms. Hutin-Blay’s Picassos, which were allegedly stolen by Bouvier in the past and then sold (unknowingly) to Rybolovlev in 2013. This high-profile feud underscores yet again how the art market, otherwise reputed as highly sophisticated and intellectually refined (at least by outsiders) may sometimes be, in fact, uncouth and unwilling to follow basic legal (and moral) principles. This article poses, if not answers, some of the questions that may lead to understanding why these situations seem to arise so often in the art world and how a possible solution might begin to be proposed.[1]
[1] Please refer to Edid, Giovana, and Federico León de la Vega. “Fiduciary Duty.” Artemundi Global Fund. Artemundi Group. Web. 25 Sept. 2015