A Dublin art gallery is claiming that it holds legally, and is entitled to sell, dozens of valuable works by an eccentric Irish artist, who was found dead in a terraced house in Belfast earlier this year.
At the High Court yesterday, Mr Justice Peter Kelly continued for another week an interim order restraining the Oriel Gallery, Clare Street, and its owner, Mr Oliver Nulty, of Pembroke Lane, Dublin, from selling or disposing of paintings by David Marcus Robinson, known as "Markey", which it does not legally own. The defendants say any paintings retained are legally held.
A native of Belfast, Markey lived and worked for several years in a room above the Oriel Gallery. He wandered around Dublin dressed like a tramp and searched skips and rubbish tips for boards and paper on which he would paint. The artist died in Belfast last January, aged 80.
On April 1st, his two daughters and only surviving next of kin - Ms Annie Robinson, of Vancouver, British Columbia, and Ms Bernadette Muldowney, Edinburgh - secured an order restraining sale or disposal of his paintings.
At that hearing, Mr Justice Kearns heard Markey was a brilliant but eccentric artist, who had sold some of his paintings allegedly for minuscule sums to Mr Nulty who, it was claimed, would sell them on for thousands of pounds.
The court was told Markey's pockets would be filled with large amounts of cash during his wanderings around Dublin and that solicitors Matheson Ormsby Prentice had since his death traced 11 bank accounts North and South containing £114,248 sterling and £63,684.
It was claimed Mr Nulty had failed to provide an inventory of Markey's works at the Oriel Gallery despite numerous requests, but that Ms Robinson had been allowed to video record, by way of memento, Markey's works held by Mr Nulty.
Ms Robinson believed those paintings were the property of her father's estate; furthermore, many of the sales which Markey appeared to have made to Mr Nulty were potentially capable of being challenged on the grounds of undue influence.
Mr David Barniville, for Markey's daughters, asked yesterday that the interlocutory hearing be adjourned for a further week and that the interim order continue until then. He needed time to contact his clients who were outside the jurisdiction.
Mr Louis McEntagart, for the defendants, applied for the interim order to be discharged. He said the order was not grounded on any factual evidence to the effect that the gallery was not in legal ownership of those Markey paintings which it held.
His clients denied the suggestion that any paintings of the artist which they had were not legally owned. The granting of the interim order had attracted publicity and was causing hardship to his clients, who were trying to discharge any obligation they had and would volunteer information regarding sales of the paintings.
Because of the order, his clients were suffering ongoing damage regarding the cancellation of sales, counsel said. He was prepared to meet the case at the full hearing and the interim order should be discharged.
Mr Barniville said his solicitors had written to the defendants on three occasions before the present proceedings were initiated and no reply was received until the day the interim order was made.
Mr Justice Kelly said that in the circumstances where replying evidence was received only last Friday, he would continue the interim order for another week.