Full Breakdown
Ant and Dec Granted Court Order in Art Profit Dispute
3/4/2026, 8:39:30 PM
Allegations of Unauthorized Profits
Television presenters Anthony McPartlin and Declan Donnelly, known collectively as Ant and Dec, have been granted a High Court order to obtain information from art dealer Andrew Lilley and his company, Lilley Fine Art. This legal action is part of their claim that a consultant, whose identity remains undisclosed, made "secret and unauthorized profits" while acting on their behalf in various art transactions, including dealings involving notable works by Banksy, up to 2021.
During a recent court hearing, the presenters' legal team argued that Lilley and his company may possess crucial information regarding the consultant's alleged misconduct. Although Ant and Dec do not accuse Lilley or his firm of wrongdoing, they assert that the art dealer is "mixed up in the wrongdoing" and could help uncover the consultant's actions.
Court Ruling and Findings
Judge Iain Pester ruled that there is a "good arguable case" that a legally recognized wrong has been committed against Ant and Dec. He emphasized that this ruling does not imply any liability on the part of the consultant or Lilley Fine Art. The court heard that Ant and Dec had entered into "artwork ownership agreements" with the consultant, which allowed the consultant to act as their agent for various art-related activities, including buying, selling, and insuring artworks, with a commission of up to 10% on sales.
The relationship between the presenters and the consultant deteriorated, leading to the termination of their agreements in September 2021. The claim includes a specific Banksy piece titled "Kate As Marilyn," for which Ant and Dec reportedly paid £550,000, with £300,000 allocated to a third party. However, the consultant has not provided a bank statement accounting for the remaining £250,000.
Implications and Next Steps
The presenters' barrister, Harry Martin, indicated that there are unresolved questions regarding these transactions, suggesting the possibility of further undiscovered wrongdoing. The information sought from Lilley is expected to clarify how much the consultant actually received and whether any funds were misappropriated for Ant and Dec's benefit.
Criticism and Opposition
While the court proceedings have unfolded, there has been no public dissent regarding the legitimacy of Ant and Dec's claims. However, the lack of transparency surrounding the consultant's identity and actions has raised concerns among observers about the potential for broader implications in the art market.
Verbatim Quotes
- “good arguable case that a form of legally recognised wrong has been committed” — Judge Iain Pester
- “Questions remain in respect of these transactions, and there is reason to believe that there is other, as yet undiscovered, wrongdoing in respect of other transactions,” — Harry Martin, Barrister for Ant and Dec
As the case progresses, further developments are anticipated, particularly regarding the disclosure of information from Lilley Fine Art and the potential for additional findings related to the consultant's dealings.
