The legal dispute involves billionaire Ronald Perelman and his insurers regarding five valuable paintings believed to be damaged in a fire. Perelman claims the artworks lost intrinsic value after exposure to fire and smoke, a condition he terms 'oomph.' Insurers challenge the damage assertions and argue against Perelman's claims of not seeking to sell the pieces. The case highlights the complexities of art valuation, where damage may not be visually apparent. It showcases the subjective nature of assessing loss of value in art and the lengthy legal battles associated with it.
Perelman argues that his paintings, exposed to a fire's sprinkler systems and smoke, have suffered an intangible loss of value, described as their 'oomph'.
Perelman's representatives contend that fire or damp damage may not be externally visible but can still significantly reduce a painting's lifespan over time.
The dispute involves complex art valuation questions where damage is often not outwardly perceptible, complicating the process of determining artworks' worth.
This case underscores the subjective nature of art valuation and how commercial perceptions of quality can be heavily litigated in court.
Collection
[
|
...
]