The National Gallery is trumpetting this decision, but it seems more down to legal technicalities than any judgement of innocence or otherwise

Legal action in restitution cases take many forms. One case that has interested me in the past is that of Agudas Chasidei Chabad v. Russian Federation, et al. As I mentioned at the time, it had commonalities with a potential case I had heard presented relating to the same US court and the Parthenon Marbles.

When trying a case in a foreign court, there are many pitfalls to be aware of, not least the potential difficulties of enforcing any judgement. Another important aspect however in the US courts is that of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA). I have heard reasons why both the above cases met (or would meet) the conditions set by the Act – but it is worth bearing in mind that other cases have not been so lucky.

This news story relates to the heirs of a painting by Matisse, which was given by the owners (in Berlin) to someone (in Switzerland) for safekeeping in the chaotic aftermath of World War Two. This presents an interesting case (from a British point of view), in that it neatly avoids the (necessarily specific, but thus rather blunt) definitions of the Nazi Era used the in UK’s Holocaust (Stolen Art) Restitution Bill. Of course, as this case was tried in a foreign jurisdiction, the aforementioned act would not apply in this case anyway.

The person in Switzerland entrusted with looking after the artwork then sold it and kept the proceeds. The painting eventually ended up in the UK’s National Gallery.

In this case, the Federal Appeals court in New York has rejected the claim, due to the fact that it does not meet the conditions of the FSIA, because the painting was taken by an individual rather than a state.

That said, this is a technical argument that means that the case can not proceed. It in no way endorses (or not) the due diligence by the National Gallery in checking the origins of a work by a well known artist (which has echoes of the Feldmann paintings about it). Possibly another case brought under a different jurisdiction might find differently. With the Feldmann Paintings, while the British Museum claimed that they were acquired in good faith, it now argued that it felt there was an overwhelming moral case for their return. Perhaps the National Gallery should follow suit?

Matisse’s Portrait of Greta Moll (1908)

From:
The Art Newspaper

Court rejects claim to Matisse owned by National Gallery
Rebuffing heirs, an appeals panel in New York says the court lacks jurisdiction
Nancy Kenney
11th September 2018 18:26 GMT

A federal appeals court in New York has rejected a claim to a 1908 Matisse painting owned by the National Gallery in London by three grandchildren of the muse portrayed in the work.

In demanding the work’s return, the heirs had argued that the painting, Portrait of Greta Moll, was illegally sold by a former art student to whom the painting had been entrusted for safekeeping in the aftermath of the Second World War. The portrait changed hands several times before it was acquired by the National Gallery in 1979.
Read the rest of this entry »

I don’t quite know what to make of this article. On the one hand he’s saying that the Parthenon Marbles could return to Greece, which is great. On the other hand though, he is saying that they must not become pawns of political exploitation & that the issue over where they belong must not become an obsession. Its hard to see how these can be separated out though – its almost saying that they would only be returned if Greece wasn’t really interested in them.

He then talks about how they would not be displayed on the monument – but this is not something that anyone has sensibly proposed for a long time now. The New Acropolis Museum was designed & constructed especially for this purpose & the way in which it relates to the original building has already been discussed many times on this site.

National Gallery director Nicholas Penny

From:
Greek Reporter

Great Britain Challenges Greece on Elgin Marbles
by Iro-Anna Mamakouka – Feb 24, 2014

The director of London’s National Gallery, Nicholas Penny, is challenging Greece once more on the issue of the Parthenon’s Marbles, suggesting that Greece and Britain share them.

According to him, the British Museum has recognized to some extent, the profound importance that the Marbles have for Greece and that lending the Marbles to the Greek state is under discussion as long as they do not become pawns of political exploitation.
Read the rest of this entry »

In the face of UK public spending cutbacks, more & more people are questioning the free museum admission policy. Certainly, it is nice for everyone to be able to use them for free, but does this sometimes occur to the detriment of the visitor experience?

From:
Guardian

We need to start charging for museums and galleries again
Reintroducing entrance fees for the great collections should be a plank of government arts planning
Tristram Hunt
The Observer, Sunday 6 March 2011

The Potteries Museum and Art Gallery in Stoke-on-Trent is, according to author AN Wilson, “the greatest museum in the world”. Its ceramics collection is rivalled only by the V&A, its Arnold Bennett archive is bettered only by the British Library and its Staffordshire Hoard of Anglo-Saxon treasures is second only to the British Museum.

But while it is free to visit the V&A, the British Library and Museum, an entrance fee is set to be charged in Stoke. Across the country, eye-watering cuts to local authority budgets mean that councils are either closing museums or ratcheting up charges. Last week, artist Anish Kapoor accused the Tories of having a “castration complex” about the arts. Yet, in the midst of this, the teeming London museums continue to enjoy a state subsidy to retain free admission.
Read the rest of this entry »

Further coverage of the new law passed to allow the return of artefacts looted during the Nazi era held in UK museums. If this law had been in place previously, it would have avoided such (unsuccessful) court cases as Attorney General v Trustees of the British Museum AKA the Feldmann Case.

It will be interesting to see how many cases now come to light following the passing of this new law (to take a cynical point of view, it could be argued that the law was only passed because certain interested parties knew that there were only a very small number of items in their collections that were likely to be affected by it).

From:
BBC News

Page last updated at 14:06 GMT, Friday, 13 November 2009
UK museums can return looted art

Artefacts in national museums found to have been looted by the Nazis can now be returned to their rightful owners, thanks to newly-passed legislation.

The Holocaust (Stolen Art) Restitution Act gives national institutions in England and Scotland the power to return art stolen during the Nazi era.
Read the rest of this entry »