The auction for 4.2 million euros of an extremely rare African sculpted mask, initially purchased for 150 euros by a second-hand dealer from a couple in their octogenarians, was validated on Tuesday by the French justice system, which considered that it was not There had been no deception. The Gabonese state, which intervened at the hearing at the end of October to also demand the cancellation of sales of the mask, as well as the restitution of this cultural property, was also rejected by the court of Alès (Gard).
The latter in any case estimated that the initial owners of the mask, an 88-year-old retired clerk and his 81-year-old wife, who had called on a second-hand dealer to get rid of the old junk accumulated in their second home in Gard in September 2021, “did not demonstrate any diligence in assessing the fair historical and artistic value of the property”.
Among these apparently worthless objects was a carved wooden mask that belonged to an ancestor, a former colonial governor in Africa, which they were ultimately going to sell off for 150 euros, along with spears, a circumcising knife, a bellows and musical instruments.
Also read: The old couple, the second-hand dealer and the African mask worth 4.2 million euros: epilogue to an unusual legal battle
During an auction in Montpellier in March 2022, this “extremely rare mask from the 19th century, the prerogative of a secret society of the Fang people in Gabon”, of which there are only around ten examples left in the world, had was sold for 4.2 million euros, excluding fees (5.25 million euros with fees), to an anonymous buyer, practically a record for an object of this type.
The catalog of the Montpellier auction room specified that this rare object had been “collected around 1917, in unknown circumstances, by the French colonial governor René-Victor Edward Maurice Fournier (1873-1931), probably during a tour in Gabon.”
The octogenarian couple asked the courts to cancel the sale of this mask “because of the error made regarding the authenticity” of the latter, an error which would have “tainted their consent”. They also believed that the second-hand dealer had deceived them in that he “was not unaware of the real value of the mask or, at the very least, had doubts about it”. As proof, according to them, he quickly had expert assessments carried out after the purchase.
“Their negligence and carelessness characterize the inexcusable nature” of the plaintiffs’ request, responded the court, which therefore did not grant their request for cancellation of the sale or recovery of the amount paid by the final buyer .
“My clients fell out of their chair,” reacted Mr. Frédéric Mansat-Jaffré, lawyer for the couple, who does not rule out appealing: “By this decision, the court creates a new case law, (…), a obligation of information. You, me, all individuals will now have to ask a professional, before going to see another professional…”
In its decision, the court also found it unproven that the second-hand dealer, “prior to the sale, (…) was aware of the unique value of the mask sold”. He “had no specific knowledge of African art,” adds the court. After obtaining initial estimates valuing the mask between 100 and 600 euros, the second-hand dealer contacted the Montpellier auction house, during a sale of African art objects. In-depth analyzes then made it possible to date this Fang mask from the 19th century and value it between 300,000 and 400,000 euros.
“There was a fair application of the law,” reacted Me Patriciat Pijot, the second-hand dealer’s lawyer. The argument that I strongly emphasized during the hearing was heard. The people most aware of the value of the mask were the sellers, since they had this object in their home for a long time.
According to lawyers Diane Loyseau de Grandmaison and Tiphaine Aubry, who deciphered the case: “This is not the first time that buyers unhappy with having acquired a work at a high price, or that sellers deceived about the real value of the property sold, attempt to obtain the nullity of a sale before the Courts, on the basis of defects in consent (articles 1130 and 1132 of the Civil Code) (…) Whatever the outcome of this case, the millionaire auction will not be called into question nor the Fang mask returned to the first sellers (…) The subsequent sale of the work to a buyer in good faith prevents its restitution, outside specific regimes for looted cultural property. »
At the hearing, the merchant denied any intention of fraud. As proof of his honesty, he even offered to pay 300,000 euros to the couple, the amount of the initial price set by the auctioneers. A memorandum of understanding to this effect was to be signed at the end of April 2022. But the court recalled that it had failed in the face of opposition from the couple’s children.
