Ant and Dec’s art dealer made ‘secret and unauthorised profits’ while selling, buying and loaning artwork including a Banksy on their behalf, the High Court has heard.
Court documents filed in support of a claim issued by the TV presenters said they believe there is a ‘good arguable case’ that they are the victims of wrongdoing by the unidentified person in respect of their ‘personal and joint art collection’.
At a hearing on Tuesday, lawyers for Anthony McPartlin and Declan Donnelly asked a judge to order a separate art dealer, Andrew Lilley, and his company, Lilley Fine Art, to disclose information on their dealings with the unnamed person, who was referred to only as X during the hearing, and their company as X Limited.
The presenters do not allege that Mr Lilley and his company have committed wrongdoing but are instead ‘mixed up in the wrongdoing’, with the court told it was ‘likely’ Mr Lilley and his company ‘hold information that will help the applicants uncover wrongdoing’.
Harry Martin, for Ant and Dec, told the court that there were ‘at least 22 cases’ of Mr Lilley and his company being involved in purchasing artwork from the presenters, which totalled ‘a substantial sum’.
One example, a Banksy work titled Napalm, had a sale price of £13,000 – but remittance showed X Limited received £10,450, following the deduction of X’s £550 commission.
The barrister said this ‘gives the impression that the respondents paid £13,000, X told the applicants that they had in fact paid £11,000, and there is a discrepancy of £2,000 between the two’. He also claimed X had been receiving sums of money and ‘keeping some’ while telling Ant and Dec that the figure received was smaller.
Mr Martin told the court the order was ‘the only route that the applicants have to getting this information and getting the truth’.
Ant and Dec ’s art dealer made ‘secret and unauthorised profits’ while selling, buying and loaning artwork including a Banksy on their behalf, the High Court has heard
He said: ‘The wrongdoing that is suspected is that X and X Limited made secret and unauthorised profits.’
He said that Mr Lilley – who did not attend the hearing – and his company ‘do not oppose’ the bid but were ‘not willing to provide what they have without a court order’.
In court documents, Ant and Dec said they were ‘willing to compensate’ Mr Lilley and his company for complying with any order made.
Judge Iain Pester said he would rule on whether to order the disclosure and if X and X Limited can be identified at 10am today.
