Is a hole in the roof more than just a hole in your pocket? The risks of not maintaining historic houses and options for owners

Listed building

“No, you don’t love it. You see a million bricks that may crumble, a thousand gutters and pipes that may block and leak, and stone that will crack in the frost… I see my life’s work.” Lord Grantham’s words in the first series of Downton Abbey might paint a romantic picture of a view of owning a historic house but, they hit a nail on the head on a key concern for some historic house owners: how do we keep the roof on? Another question that people may have is: what do we do if we can’t keep the roof on?

What happens if we don’t maintain a listed building?

A common question that lawyers within our Historic Property and Planning Group are asked on acquisitions of listed buildings is: what exactly are my obligations to maintain it? There is actually no general duty on the owner of a listed building to keep a property in a good state of repair. This is in sharp contrast to the treatment of un-authorised works where even painting a small part of the exterior the wrong colour could, technically, be a criminal offence.  

However, under S.54 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 a Local Authority (or Historic England in London) (the “Authority”) can carry out works that are “urgently necessary for the preservation of a listed building” after giving notice to the owner. This is not a clever mechanism where you can get free repairs from the state though; the power only applies to an unoccupied building (or the unused part of a partly occupied building), it only extends to the minimum works required to secure the building’s preservation and the Authority is entitled to recover their costs from the owner. 

Under S.48 of the same Act, the Authority can serve a notice on an owner to carry out works which “must specify the works which the authority considers reasonably necessary for the proper preservation of the building”. Unlike with S.54, this does not only extend to urgent works to unoccupied buildings. So what happens if you do not comply?

If two months pass from you receiving your repairs notice and reasonable steps are not being taken, the Authority can begin compulsory purchase proceedings. This is usually be done with the aim of getting the building to another private owner who will acquire and repair the building in a back-to-back arrangement.  

This sounds threatening and, while it has been used, owners can rest assured that the use of this power is relatively rare. For example, 549 Lordship Lane, a Gothic Revival House in Dulwich that is an early example of concrete built domestic housing was compulsorily acquired. The state of repair was extremely poor. This means that historic house owners should not immediately get into a panic because of some peeling paint or a few loose tiles.

The issues surrounding neglected heritage buildings were put into focus on the 19th August when there was a fire following a suspected arson attacks at Woolton Hall (argued to be one of Robert Adam’s finest pieces of work in the North of England). It is Grade 1 listed, but it had stood empty since 2003. It was on English Heritage’s “At Risk” register and a plan to save it was being worked on. Empty buildings are a major target for arson attacks and so a neglected building may not just be at risk from compulsory purchase.

Can we get help maintaining our listed building?  

If you own a historic house, particularly one of some note, there are options available to you to get support in keeping the house in repair.

Historic England, using the Heritage at Risk Fund funded by the Government, has announced at the start of August that 37 listed buildings are receiving grants to support the repair on listed buildings. While none of the grants were given to privately owned historic houses in this round of funding, Historic England confirms that the grants are available for the “repair and conservation of listed buildings, scheduled monuments and registered parks and gardens” meaning that a house could be eligible. There is a key caveat that they “will normally expect you to provide public access to the property after the repair work is complete.” Cadw (a department of the Welsh Government) runs a similar scheme in Wales which similarly requires “public benefit” as a condition of giving funding.

Another option is to seek fundings from the National Lottery Heritage Fund. This was put into action at a country house earlier this year when the Chatsworth House Trust received £4,600,000 from the fund to “support the restoration of the historic Cascade and create a major new learning and audience development programme for the Chatsworth Garden” following a £422,000 granting to start the project in 2023. While this Chatsworth organisation is a charity, the Lottery Heritage Fund’s website confirms that the grants can be given to “a private owner of a heritage asset”. However, like with Historic England and Cadw’s grants, they confirm that one of the key principles is “inclusion, access and participation” meaning it is only likely to be suitable if you are enabling public access.

“You might get able to get assistance by way of tax relief. Currently, there is a tax exemption available for “national heritage assets” where some buildings can be conditionally exempted from inheritance tax and capital gains tax, subject to certain conditions being met. Advice should be sought if you are considering using the exemption as part of your succession planning as the application of the rules need to be considered on a case-by-case basis and it comes with significant ancillary undertakings. However, broadly, for a building it would need to be a “building… of outstanding historical or architectural interest” and the new owner receiving the asset must undertake to:

  1. look after the house;
  2. make it available for the general public to view; and
  3. keep it in the UK (this may not seem relevant to a building but let’s not forget that Henry Ford moved his Cotswold home from the UK to Michigan in 1930).

Importantly, if these undertakings are breached, then the deferred tax becomes due. This exemption is one reason why several stately homes are open to the public. There has been some chatter about the potential removal of this exemption as the current Government searches for ways to increase its tax revenue. While there are no formal proposals as yet, this is something many owners of notable historic homes, and those thinking of buying them, will be watching keenly.”

Managing Listed Buildings

Managing or acquiring listed buildings, particularly significant historic homes, is a different game to more “normal” home ownership. It comes with a number of quirks and complications that need to be navigated, potentially even opening up your house to the public.

From purchase to sale, legal advice is crucial throughout to navigate the complex web of regulations and ensure compliance with all legal requirements. Our Historic Property and Planning team combine specialist expertise from across the firm to provide holistic advice in respect of all aspects of historic property. To find out more about how we can support you, please get in touch below.

What’s IDV and why should you care?

Identity verification (IDV) requirements under ECCTA

Are you a company director, LLP member or a person with significant control (a PSC)? Or perhaps you’re responsible for making Companies House filings? If so, new laws will soon require you to verify your identity with Companies House. This note summarises the requirements.

Introduction

You may have already come across the Economic Crime and Corporate Transparency Act 2023 (ECCTA). It’s a far-reaching piece of legislation, which aims to deliver reforms on tackling economic crime and improving transparency over corporate entities. One of the ways it seeks to achieve this is to require certain individuals to verify their identity.

IDV requirement

ECCTA requires all new and existing company directors (and equivalents, such as LLP members), PSCs and those filing information with Companies House, to undergo IDV.

  • IDV will be compulsory for new appointments from 18 November 2025
  • There will be a grace period for verifying the identity of existing directors, LLP members and PSCs. Essentially, these individuals will need to have completed their IDV before filing the next confirmation statement due after 18 November 2025. So, if a company’s confirmation statement is due on 17 November, its directors must have had their identities verified by 17 November 2026. However, if a company’s confirmation statement is due on 20 November, its directors must have had their identities verified by 20 November 2025
  • Existing PSCs who are not also directors must have verified their identity within the first 14 days of their birth month falling after 18 November 2025
  • From spring 2026, IDV will be required for anyone filing a document at Companies House on behalf of a company
  • Despite the timings set out above, we recommend that you undergo the IDV process as soon as possible. You can voluntarily complete the process now.

Once IDV becomes mandatory, non-compliance will be an offence and the individual in question will not be able to be appointed until they have completed the IDV process.

How often will you need to undertake IDV?

IDV should be a one-off requirement. Once you have verified your identity, you will receive a unique code. This code will be used for all of your appointments, whether as a director, LLP member or PSC, and whether you are acting in a professional or private capacity.

How can you conduct IDV?

The simplest and cheapest way to conduct IDV is for the individual concerned to create a gov.uk One Login account, get the gov.uk ID Check app and use their biometric passport or photocard driving licence to verify their identity. A step by step guide to undertaking IDV using this method is included in the Schedule to this note.

Individuals can also verify their identity at certain Post Office branches, or they can instruct an authorised corporate service provider (ACSP) who is undertaking IDV work to complete this for them. These options incur a cost.

Once verified, you will receive your own unique identifier code, which you will need to store in a secure place and use for every role held, whether in a personal or professional capacity. These codes are not currently being sent to individuals, so it is important that you take a screenshot or photo of the code when it shows up on screen (if you are completing IDV yourself).

How can Forsters help?

Forsters will not be undertaking IDV work as an ACSP, but we can let you have details of third parties who are providing this service if you choose to use an ACSP to complete your IDV. Rest assured however, that once you have completed the IDV process, Forsters will still be able to make filings at Companies House on your behalf.

If you have any questions about the above, please speak to your usual Forsters contact or get in touch with a member of the Forsters Corporate team. We would be happy to help.

Schedule

Step by step guide to undertaking IDV using the gov.uk One LogIn service and gov.uk ID Check app

Individuals will need:

  • Their biometric passport or photocard driving licence
  • Their current address and the year they moved in
  • A phone with a camera
Steps
  1. Click here to get started, scroll down and click on the green “Verify your identity” button.
  2. You’ll be directed to a screen about the GOV.UK One LogIn service. Click on the green “Go to GOV.UK One LogIn”.
  3. You will need to either create a GOV.UK One LogIn account or, if you already have a GOV.UK One LogIn account, sign in.
  4. Once you have created a gov.uk One LogIn account or signed in, you may not be able to continue with the IDV process from the same website; instead, click the link here to continue with your IDV. You will need to be signed in to your gov.uk One LogIn account to do this.
  5. When asked if your identity has been verified for Companies House, click “No”.
  6. Click “Continue” on the page headed “We’re taking you to verify your identity with GOV.UK One Login”.
  7. Answer the various questions which follow.
  8. Follow the instructions to download the app and verify your identity. Once you have completed the verification process, your unique identifier code will show on the screen. Please take a screenshot, a photo or save this number; it will not be emailed to you.

If you have an existing Companies House account, you can link it to your gov.uk One LogIn account. Make sure that you use the same email address for both accounts. You will only need to do this once.

Magnifying glass

What’s IDV and why should you care?

Are you a company director, LLP member or a person with significant control (a PSC)? Or perhaps you’re responsible for making Companies House filings? If so, new laws will soon require you to verify your identity with Companies House.

Download our PDF factsheet
Lianne Baker
Author

Lianne Baker

View profile

Forsters continues to support Space Industrial with further acquisitions across the UK

Crompton Fields Industrial

Forsters’ Commercial Real Estate team has continued its work with the Space Industrial platform, the joint venture between Invesco Real Estate and Marchmont Investment Management, advising on the acquisition and financing of a further three industrial and logistics assets across key regional markets in the UK.

The latest sites comprise:

  • Crompton Fields, Crawley  – the estate is located near Gatwick Airport and comprises 6 units of in total approximately 100,000 sq ft, let to five tenants, with one unit currently vacant.
  • Malago Trade Park, Bristol– 7-unit trade counter estate in Bristol.
  • Thwaites Farm Industrial Estate, Leeds – a prime urban logistics estate strategically located in Leeds, just 3 miles from the city centre and in close proximity to M1 Junction 44 and M621 Junction 7.

These acquisitions build on the platform’s strategy to acquire and reposition multi-let industrial assets with strong ESG potential and value-add opportunities. The continued expansion reflects the platform’s confidence in the UK’s multi-let industrial market and its commitment to delivering long-term, sustainable returns.

Forsters’ role has encompassed all commercial real estate aspects of the transactions, including title and tenancy due diligence, negotiation of contractual documentation, and coordination with tax, planning, and construction specialists. The banking team have advised on all aspects of their portfolio financing of these properties and the teams continue to work closely with Jersey trust advisors to support the platform’s growth.

Cam Fraser CIO of Marchmont commented as follows: 

“Space Industrial has maintained strong momentum in the UK MLI market, securing seven deals in the past seven months. With ongoing support from Forsters, we remain focused on expanding the platform and are optimistic about a successful second half of 2025.” 

Andrew Crabbie continues to lead the project team with support from Alexandra Townsend Wheeler and Alexandra Ringrose, with banking advice provided by Rowena Marshall with support from Mark Berry.

Andrew Crabbie
Author

Andrew Crabbie

View profile

Capital Gains Tax: Time to act before autumn?

Stair case in building

The National Institute for Economic and Social Research (Niesr) forecast last week that Rachel Reeves faces a £51 billion black hole in the UK’s public finances. The forecast said that she will have to raise taxes in the 2025 Autumn Budget if she is to meet her spending pledges and stick to her fiscal rules. Although the Niesr report is gloomier than some other forecasts,  many recent reports have warned that the government’s situation means that it will have to raise taxes.

One consequence of this is that if you are thinking about selling the shares in your personal company, you should consider accelerating the sale in case rates of capital gains tax increase when the Autumn Statement is announced. The date for this has not yet been made known but normally this event occurs in late October/early November each year.

In the 2024 Autumn Statement, Rachel Reeves increased the main rate of capital gains tax from 20% to 24% and made changes to increase the rate of tax where Business Asset Disposal Relef (BADR) applies from 10% to 14% (increasing to 18% from 6 April 2026). Importantly, the new rates applied immediately from the date of the Autumn Statement, with anti-forestalling arrangements potentially applying unless contracts for sale had already become unconditional and completed.

At this stage it is, of course, not possible to know whether rates of capital gains tax will increase again in the Autumn Statement or whether Rachel Reeves will leave this tax alone and increase other taxes instead or freeze income tax thresholds for a longer period.

However, If you own shares in your personal company and would like to discuss your position further, please contact Heather Corben or Elizabeth Small.

Inheritance tax reforms confirmed for farms and businesses  

Rolling green hills are adorned with scattered trees and stone walls, creating a peaceful rural landscape. In the distance, soft hills rise under a clear, bright sky.

What you need to know:

Earlier this year, the government ran a consultation on the implication of the changes to inheritance tax announced in the Autumn 2024 Budget, so far as they applied to certain types of trust.  Its outcome was published on 21 July along with the much-anticipated draft legislation on the changes to inheritance tax overall.

This now provides greater certainty and technical detail about the reforms and how they will work. The key takeaway is that there has been no major government U-turn, despite extensive lobbying from interested groups. This means that the position going forward remains broadly as expected.

A reminder of the changes:

From 6 April 2026 only £1m of a person’s assets will be eligible for 100% agricultural property relief (“APR”) and business property relief (“BPR”). Beyond that £1m allowance, APR and BPR will be available at only 50%. This brings a huge number of farms and businesses into the IHT net.

Key details now confirmed:

  1. The allowance (like the familiar £325,000 nil rate band) will ‘refresh’ every seven years, meaning that an individual can settle £1m of relievable property into trust every seven years.
  2. Unlike the £325,000 nil rate band, however, any unused portion of the £1m allowance cannot be transferred between spouses. This point was widely criticised in the consultation, but the government have not conceded. This means individuals should review their wills to ensure that, where possible, everyone makes full use of their £1m allowance. The fact that the £1m allowance is not transferable may lead families to divide their businesses or farms between themselves in order to use as many allowances as possible. It should be noted that the consultation response confirms a relaxation in the original anti-fragmentation rules that had been proposed.
  3. Helpfully, any pre-Budget succession planning (i.e. gifts of APR or BPR assets) will be subject to the rules at the time. So if someone dies after next April, but within seven years of having made a pre-Budget gift, the current rules (i.e. full BPR and APR) will apply.
  4. There will be a relaxation in the usual ownership/occupation rules for transfers of APR/BPR qualifying assets before April 2026 to enable planning that would otherwise not be possible.
  5. IHT on agricultural and business property can be paid over ten years in interest-free instalments. As the interest rate on unpaid IHT is currently extremely high, this is helpful.
  6. On an individual’s death, the £1m allowance will be shared with any trusts in which they have a ‘qualifying interest in possession’.
  7. Trustees of ‘relevant property trusts’ (i.e. those that are subject to IHT charges every ten years) will have a £1m allowance, which will refresh every ten years.
  8. Trusts created before 30 October 2024 that held relievable property will each have their own £1m allowance. For any trusts created subsequently, the settlor’s £1m allowance will be split between them.
  9. For trusts created before 30 October 2024, no IHT exit charges will arise on distributions of APR or BPR qualifying assets until those trusts have passed their first tenth anniversary. After the first tenth anniversary, the new regime will apply.

What next?

Now that the government has confirmed the technical detail for these reforms, there is a valuable opportunity to plan ahead before these changes are implemented on 6 April 2026. Please get in touch with our Private Client team to discuss how these changes may impact you and what steps you can take to put effective plans in place. We are here to guide you through the options available and make the most of any planning opportunities.

Inheritance tax reforms confirmed for farms and businesses

Download this briefing as a PDF Contact us

Fountain pen

Lifecycle of a business – Understanding warranties and indemnities

Modern exterior abstract building

Setting up and running your own business is an amazing achievement. It requires vision, creativity, motivation and stamina. On occasion, it can even bring you fame, riches and fortune. But it can also result in reams of paperwork and cause sleepless nights. And as someone once said to me about children “It doesn’t get easier, it just changes”, so the same can be said for your business throughout its lifecycle. From setting up to exit, it will force you to consider issues that you might not previously have known anything about and it will need you to make many decisions, sometimes very quickly. What it certainly is not is mundane.

With this in mind, the corporate team at Forsters, together with some of our specialist colleagues, has written a series of articles about the various issues and some of the key points that it may help you to know about at each stage of a business’s life. Not all of these will be relevant to you or your business endeavours, but we hope that you will find at least some of these guides interesting and useful, whether you just have the glimmer of an idea, are a start-up, a well-established enterprise or are considering your exit options. Do feel free to drop us a line or pick up the phone if you would like to discuss any of the issues raised further.

We’ve considered the main aspects of the lifecycle of a business from the beginning and you now want to sell…

Understanding warranties and indemnities

When buying or selling a company, warranties and indemnities are essential to manage risk. They help mitigate against the let the buyer beware principle (caveat emptor) and enable the buyer to find out more about the company it’s acquiring.

But what’s the difference between a warranty and an indemnity and how do they work?

What’s a warranty?

A warranty is a contractual statement of fact usually made by the seller(s) to the buyer regarding the condition of the target company or business, for example, the seller(s) might warrant that the target company isn’t involved in any litigation as at the date of the purchase agreement. If a warranty turns out to be untrue, the buyer can bring a breach of contract claim against the seller(s). If the claim is successful, the seller(s) will have to pay damages to the buyer. The amount of damages awarded will typically be the difference between the value of the shares had the warranty been true and their actual value (subject to rules on mitigation and remoteness).

The scope of the warranties will depend on several factors, including the bargaining position of the parties, the terms of the deal, and the nature of the business. Common areas for warranties to cover include ownership (of the shares), legal compliance, accounts, litigation, employment, and intellectual property.

What’s an indemnity?

An indemnity is a promise (usually given by the seller(s)) to reimburse the buyer for a specific loss, often on a pound-for-pound basis. So, taking our litigation example again, if a third party has brought a litigation claim against the target company which the target company is likely to lose, the buyer might insist that an indemnity in respect of that specific litigation claim be included in the purchase agreement. The seller(s) will then have to reimburse the buyer for any loss suffered by the target company in relation to the claim once the sale of the target company has completed. 

Who gives warranties and indemnities?

Warranties and indemnities are usually given by the seller(s). In group structures, the parent company may also provide the warranties and indemnities (or a guarantee to stand behind the warranties and indemnities that are given).

Exceptions where the seller(s) may be unwilling to give warranties and indemnities include:

  • passive shareholders who have nothing to do with the business and have a small shareholding (e.g. family members who have been given shares but have no day-to-day running of the company)
  • private equity firms (it’s common practice on an exit for private equity firms not to give any warranties)
  • employee shareholders (i.e. non-managers) who have limited knowledge of the business.

Why include warranties and indemnities?

Warranties

Warranties are crucial to a buyer because there are no statutory or common law protections regarding the nature or extent of the assets or liabilities being acquired; the principle of caveat emptor (let the buyer beware) applies. Having the seller(s) give promises about the target company and its business gives comfort to the buyer as to what exactly it’s buying.

In addition, where a warranty would be untrue, the seller(s) can disclose against that warranty. So, in our litigation warranty example above, if the target company is actually involved in litigation, the warranty will be included in the purchase agreement, but the seller(s) will disclose the details of any litigation in which the target company is involved to the buyer. This enables the buyer to find out information about the target company and business which may be additional to anything discovered during the due diligence exercise. From the seller(s) point of view, it means that the buyer will be unable to bring a successful claim for breach of the warranty, as it had knowledge of the true state of affairs. Any matters to be disclosed are usually included in a separate document, the disclosure letter.

Indemnities

Indemnities protect the buyer financially in the event that specific losses or losses which are of particular concern to the buyer arise post-sale. (Other options may also be available to the buyer if it becomes aware of any specific issues before completion of the sale, for example, it may try to negotiate a lower purchase price, change the transaction to an asset deal or even walk away.)

How can a seller protect itself against a warranty or indemnity claim?

To manage the liability risk of the seller(s) when giving warranties, the parties will usually include caps on liability in the purchase agreement (e.g. they might agree that the seller(s) will only be liable up to a maximum amount equal to the purchase price). Minimum thresholds may also be included (e.g. a claim can’t be brought by the buyer unless it has a value of more than £x) to prevent the buyer bringing “nuisance” claims. Other seller protections may also be included but these are outside the scope of this article. Whether the caps and thresholds will apply to indemnities will be a matter for negotiation between the parties.

Where there is more than one seller, they will need to decide how any liability will be shared between them.

Insurance can also be taken out to cover off warranty and indemnity risks. This is outside the scope of this article but if you would like to discuss further, please get in touch with your usual Forsters’ contact or a member of the Forsters’ Corporate team.

Conclusion

In summary, warranties and indemnities are fundamental mechanisms for allocating risk in corporate transactions.

While warranties encourage transparency and enable the buyer to sue the seller(s) for breach of contract if they turn out to be untrue, indemnities offer targeted financial protection for known risks.

The strategic use of both tools (alongside robust disclosure processes and carefully negotiated contractual limitations) enables parties to strike a fair balance between protection and commercial pragmatism. For sellers, thoughtful drafting and liability management are key to limiting exposure, while buyers must ensure that the warranties are wide enough to be of actual use and that the contractual framework provides sufficient remedies for potential losses.

Disclaimer

This note reflects the law as at 6 August 2025. The circumstances of each case vary and this note should not be relied upon in place of specific legal advice.

How has biodiversity net gain progressed in the last year?

A row of modern townhouses features large glass doors and brick façades. The buildings have balconies above the ground floor, and the symmetrical design is set in a suburban environment.

Following our two-part series that dived into biodiversity net gain from the lens of both developers and landowners, our team of experts are back to reflect on the year just gone. From open mosaic habitats, to onsite vs offsite development, to the relationship between BNG and the incoming Planning and Infrastructure Bill, our team share their views on the latest developments and speculate about what they expect to see moving forward.

Who features in this episode?  

If you missed it, check out our previous two-part special on BNG:

Protecting your privacy when employing household staff – Joe Beeston featured in Spear’s

Grey, cushioned chairs surround a glass coffee table in a modern office lounge. Wooden blocks serve as side tables. Large windows offer a view of greenery, adding natural light.

As high net worth families increasingly build out their private teams – employing nannies, housekeepers, chauffeurs, chefs, personal assistants, and security personnel, their homes are becoming more complex workplaces. While these staff play a vital role in supporting family life, their close proximity to personal, financial, and even medical information introduces significant risks to privacy, security, and reputation.

In a recent Spear’s article, “Through the keyhole: how HNWs can protect privacy and reputation when employing household staff,” Joe Beeston, Employment Partner at Forsters, shares his insights on how families can protect themselves through clear contractual terms and communication.

Make sure it’s in the contract

Joe highlights the importance of robust employment contracts:

“It’s vitally important to have clear confidentiality terms in your contracts of employment making it clear that all personal information (like that relating to finances, relationships, health and family) should be considered confidential and that staff must not share this information, including on social media sites.”

 He also stresses that the consequences for breaching these clauses, including dismissal or legal action, must be clearly spelt out.

Have the conversation

Beyond the legal framework, Joe encourages families to take proactive, everyday steps to reinforce expectations:

“Explaining to staff why you are adopting the approach you are is best – for example, you could explain that taking what might seem like an innocent photo: could inadvertently capture details from a bank statement left on a table; or pose a security risk if viewed by someone looking to burgle a home.”

He also recommends providing clarity by marking sensitive documents as “private and confidential” and limiting access to personal information.

How we can help

If you employ household staff and want to ensure your privacy and reputation are protected, Joe Beeston and the Employment team at Forsters are here to help. With extensive experience advising HNW families, Joe offers tailored and discreet, employment advice.

Contact Joe Beeston to discuss how we can support your household employment needs.

Joe Beeston
Author

Joe Beeston

View profile

The Art of Valuation: the complexities of valuing artwork in financial remedy proceedings

A hand mixes paint using a palette knife, hovering over a colourful artist's palette with various paint blobs, in a warm, softly lit workspace.

The case of GO v YA [2024] EWFC 411 illustrates just how hard it is to value artwork and businesses built on a stock of artwork. In financial proceedings on divorce, the judge directed multiple valuations of the artwork in question, influenced by factors such as the current state of the art market, and whether there would be an immediate sale or a staged sale. 

A large proportion of the assets comprised the husband’s business, which sold works of art, and his personal art collection. He was a leading expert in a particular area of art, having worked in the industry for over 50 years, and he intended to continue the business. He asserted that his personal collection was worth around £153,000, and estimated his 95% stake in the business to be worth just over £6 million on a net asset basis. The wife (who held the remaining 5% stake in the business) argued that the business was worth much more, and made an early application for an expert to value the underlying stock. 

During the proceedings, there were multiple directions for inventories to be made illustrating the value of the stock. At the First Appointment, the husband was directed to provide a ‘detailed inventory’ of all the art held by him personally and in the business, on the basis that it would then be valued by a single joint expert (SJE). When this proved too cumbersome and costly, with the parties “baulking” at the £150,000 plus VAT the expert sought to charge, a different form of valuation was considered. The wife was permitted to choose up to 375 pieces of artwork (around 10% of the total inventory) with the SJE valuing these selected items. That value would be used to estimate a value for the entire collection, though the precise mechanism for this was left to be determined at a later date. The costs of this exercise were capped at £70,000 plus VAT. 

The discrepancy with the husband’s valuation was large; the SJE valued one particular painting at £550,000, which the husband had valued at £50,000. The SJE valued the husband’s personal art collection at £1,180,850 (a dramatic increase from the £153,000 estimated by the husband). The wife used this fact to suggest the husband was deliberately undervaluing his assets. In response, the husband offered the wife the specific painting with the huge valuation discrepancy (on the basis that if she thought it was worth £550,000, she could sell it at that price). The wife refused that offer, claiming to dislike the painting! Presumably, she had little confidence that she could sell the painting at the SJE’s estimated value. The judge noted that was “a good illustration of the rather soft, and sometimes unreal, attempt at a valuation exercise.”

A further inventory “caused more confusion than clarity”, so a joint report was directed – which, again, proved unhelpful.

In addition to inventory discrepancies, the matter of discounts was discussed. The SJE was asked to opine on whether a discount should be attributed to the valuation figures on the basis that there was either an immediate sale of the items, or the sale was staggered over 7.5 years. The SJE stated that there should be a 70-75% discount for an immediate sale, and a 20-25% discount for a sale staggered over 7.5 years. 

At the Final Hearing, though maintaining that the SJE valuation was wrong, the husband did not formally challenge the expert’s evidence in cross-examination. This meant that the rule in Browne v Dunn [1893] 6 R 67 applied, and the court was obliged to accept the SJE’s valuation.

The judge accepted the SJE’s valuation figures and observations on the discounts applicable for the immediate sale and staggered sale options. However, while the SJE’s valuations on the valued items were around 50% above the husband’s valuations, the judge refused to apply the same uplift to the c.90% of items that had not been valued.

The judge valued the business at £13 million on a 7-year staggered sale assumption. He expressed reservations about this figure, and cited Lewison LJ in Versteegh v Versteegh [2018] EWCA Civ 1050: “The valuation of private companies is a matter of no little difficulty” and Moylan J in H v H [2008] EWHC 935 (Fam):valuations of shares in private companies are among the most fragile valuations which can be obtained”.

The judge ordered two lump sums to be paid to the wife, directing that if the second lump sum was not paid, the husband would have to sell all his shares in the business. He lamented that the business had “rather bedevilled the proceedings throughout.”

This case serves as a stark reminder of how complex, time-consuming and costly it is to value artwork, and how many factors can influence a valuation. Art is deeply personal, and emotions can run high where one party has built up a personal collection that has meaning and significance for them. These factors can result in financial remedy proceedings being dragged out and prevent the parties from reaching early agreement. Art may inspire but it can also be divisive.

Forsters’ Art Group is an expert team of lawyers drawn from across the firm. They have a wealth of experience advising in the UK and international art markets acting for collectors, artists, galleries, auction houses and owners of historic houses. The Art Group works closely with a wide range of industry specialists including valuers, curators, collection management and logistics experts, fine art agents and institutions. We are uniquely placed to advise on the practical and tax implications of creating, buying, selling and holding works of art as well as resolving any disputes that arise.