Tino Sehgal: Complicating Art Law Issues

About a year ago I mentioned Tino Sehgal’s work and how it highlights and problematizes law. Last week’s NY Times Magazine contains a review of his work and mentions a bit more on the legal gymnastics.

Since there can be no written contract, the sale of a Sehgal piece must be conducted orally, with a lawyer or a notary public on hand to witness it. The work is described; the right to install it for an unspecified number of times under the supervision of Sehgal or one of his representatives is stipulated; and the price is stated. The buyer agrees to certain restrictions, perhaps the most important being the ban on future documentation, which extends to any subsequent transfers of ownership. “If the work gets resold, it has to be done in the same way it was acquired originally,” says Jan Mot, who is Sehgal’s dealer in Brussels. “If it is not done according to the conditions of the first sale, one could debate whether it was an authentic sale. It’s like making a false Tino Sehgal, if you start making documentation and a certificate.”

Tags: Art Law, art lawyer, institutional critique, legal issues in conceptual art