Banksy committed criminal damage with his shredded artwork stunt – because the auctioneers hammer had come down, legal experts now claim.
Salomé Verrell, a solicitor and a senior lecturer at the University of Law, said the artist was breaking the law at the famous auction in Sothebys.
Just as the auctioneers hammer went down on the Girl With Balloon and the artwork was due to go to a new owner, it instead fed through a shredder hidden into the frame.
But now Salomé says that Banksy was breaking the law with the stunt and could expect to see police at his door – if they can figure out who he is.
She said: When Banksy shredded the painting, he was damaging someone elses property, and he did so intentionally and knowing that it belonged to someone else.
Forty migrants rescued from English Channel in five separate incidents
It seems Banksy is not content with alleged criminal damage of buildings but now has apparently criminally damaged someone elses painting.
Advertisement
Advertisement
The painting belonged to the highest bidder because the hammer had gone down and the sale had ended before the shredding began.
Therefore at the time of shredding, the painting belonged to someone other than Banksy and he knew that since he was selling it at auction.
He intended to destroy it knowing it belonged to someone else.
Salomé said that Banksy fell foul of the Sale of Goods Act 1979, and the Criminal Damage Act 1971.
She said that under the sale of goods act, the artwork transferred to the new owner as soon as the gavel fell.
Meghan and Kate in tender show of affection despite rumours of a royal rift
And under the Criminal Damage act, as the artwork no longer belonged to Banksy, shredding it amounted to an offence.
She continued: It could however be said that he actually improved (or increased the value) of the piece, and that (unknown to the buyer) it was a dynamic and evolving piece of art.
If I buy a house where the carpets are old and tatty, and then prior to moving in the original owner fits new carpets, does the same apply?
The lady who bought the painting was happy with the result. It would be interesting if she had decided she didnt want the piece in the end!
Damage is a matter of fact and degree in each case.
Advertisement
Advertisement
If the piece itself is damaged by shredding this does seem to fit the definition of damage within the Act, but the increase in value may throw this into doubt.
London's cheapest house is the size of a bouncy castle but will still cost you £100,000
However, just like his antics when spray painting someones exterior walls, without a loser, that is, someone to make a complaint to the authorities, it seems Banksy will continue to get away with breaking the law, in the name of art.
I liked the artistic value of what he did in shredding the painting but it is interesting that Banksy tends to use someone elses property to make his artistic statements.
It is also interesting that so far Banksy has got away with breaking the law.
I dont think most people who arent called Banksy would get away with such behaviour.
Advertisement
Advertisement
[contf]
[contfnew]
METRO
[contfnewc]
[contfnewc]
