The Paris court on Friday confirmed the artist Maurizio Cattelan as the author of his works, and rejected the requests of another, Daniel Druet, who had made sculptures for him and considered himself the true author.
The dispute concerns eight works by the 61-year-old Italian, who calls himself a "
conceptual artist
", including sculptures shaped by Daniel Druet.
An emblematic work is
Him
(2001), an installation where the spectator advances towards a boy placed of back and with knees, before discovering that it was about Adolf Hitler.
With his know-how to execute extremely realistic sculptures, among others for the Grévin museum in Paris, Daniel Druet, 80 years old Frenchman,
Read alsoDruet against Cattelan: the trial that panics the world of contemporary art
The court did not follow him.
The plaintiff "
does not claim the status of co-author of a collaborative work or a composite work but rather the status of sole author of the works in question
", he recalled.
He reproached him for not having brought the procedure originally against the controversial Italian artist, but against his representative, the Perrotin gallery, and an institution which mounted an exhibition of these works, the Monnaie de Paris.
"
Failing to have summoned in person Maurizio Cattelan, alleged author, (...) Daniel Druet must be declared inadmissible in all his claims for infringement of copyright
", considered the court.
The defense considered that this judgment would set an example.
“
For the first time, the magistrates consecrate conceptual art by a decision of principle
”, estimates Pierre-Olivier Sure, lawyer for the Perrotin gallery.
We won on the two essential points.
By having the opposing party declared inadmissible.
And by having the judge say what conceptual art is in law and what are the qualifications that result from it for their copyrights.
"
It is with immense satisfaction that I learn of this decision which consecrates the work of Maurizio Cattelan as a conceptual artist...I am delighted that this decision puts an end to this controversy which more broadly threatened a large part of contemporary artists
commented Emmanuel Perrotin.
The plaintiff's lawyer, Jean-Baptiste Bourgeois, contested this interpretation.
"
It's an absurd, incomprehensible and unjustified decision,
" he explains
.
There is no writing on the bottom of the file.
The only thing retained is that the procedure is not valid because we did not assign the artist who argued that the disputed works were all disclosed under his name alone.
This argument had already been advanced and judged before this same court but not before the same magistrates
”.
Daniel Druet, trained at the Beaux-Arts and Prix de Rome, embarked on this procedure long after the collaboration with Maurizio Cattelan, which had lasted from 1999 to 2006. He regrets that his contribution to the works of this international star of the contemporary art was not sufficiently recognized thereafter.
The court ordered him to reimburse 10,000 euros to the Perrotin gallery, and the same sum to the Monnaie de Paris.
Represented at the hearing which took place on May 13, Maurizio Cattelan never spoke on this case.
Besides Him
's exposure
at the site of the former Warsaw Ghetto in 2013, he's used to hits, which have boosted his rating in the market over the years.
For another work concerned by the procedure,
La Nona Ora
(1999), Daniel Druet had sculpted a Pope John Paul II.
The Italian had crashed a stone on it, to represent the sovereign pontiff killed by a meteorite.