The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in a precedent-setting case, which gave the former husband of an artist copyright to her work.
Marlborough-based artist Sirpa Alalaakkola is appealing a High Court decision in 2021, that ruled the copyright of her work is relationship property.
The ruling, which covers art made during her 20-year marriage, was the first time the Copyright Act and Property (Relationships) Act came face to face in the courts.
Lawyer Clive Elliott, who is representing the artist, told the court the issue was not just about his client, but the artistic community as a whole.
"Her art is both her identity and soul. Each piece she produces, she chooses to share for sale. It is a conscious choice from her part to let that work go," Elliott said.
Elliott said the High Court decision could allow her former husband, Paul Palmer, to reproduce her works and sell them.
He said that could also apply for works she never intended to sell, a move that could impact her mental health.
"All it is going to do is weaponise the art and turn it into a means for Mr Palmer to control his wife,” he said.
But Palmer's lawyer, Brian Fletcher, said the dispute is not about his former wife's artistic skills, but the works themselves, which are valued at thousands of dollars each.
"Once that talent is applied to painting, it isn't the talent that is the property, it is the painting itself," Fletcher said.
Intellectual Property Lawyer Charlotte Henley said the case could have wider implications for other artists.
"If it is upheld, it might mean artists want to consider entering into relationship property agreements regarding ownership of copyright over works created in the relationship," Henley said.
"I think the decision at the Court of Appeal will impact lots of creatives. They will be watching this with interest and potential concern."
SHARE ME