Publication date: 11 July 2016
Can you just install a work of art in a nature conservation area? Of course not, an integrated environmental permit is required for this. Who has to grant such a permit and what are the requirements such a permit has to comply with?
The project Into Nature art expedition was a great idea. A large number of artworks should be installed in the beautiful Drentsche Aa landscape. From 4 July to 18 September 2016, visitors will be able to discover together with artists “how man interacts with the environment”. One of the artworks to be exhibited was by Rainer Gross. “His monumental installations from wood enter into a dialogue with the environment”, says the website of the project. In this case the environment is Okkenveen, which is located in the middle of a protected Natura 2000 area. For the artwork, which consists of curved, blackened slats, two foundations needed to be placed in the river Drentsche Aa. The project management was well-prepared and applied for an environmental permit from the municipality of Tynaarlo for the installation of the artwork and the exemption from the land use plan. The municipality granted the required permit.
Was that it? No, because the conservation group Natuurplatform Drentsche Aa lodged an objection with the municipality and requested the North Netherlands District Court to suspend the permit so that the artwork could not be installed until the objection would be decided on. The request was granted by the District Court.
So what went wrong with the decision of the municipality?
(1) The municipality had not investigated the effects on the natural environment to be expected from the installation of the artwork. This concerned both the disturbance of the sensitive area caused by the installation and removal of the artwork, and the rising number of visitors to be expected.
(2) Before granting the permit, the municipality should have requested a statement of no objections from the Provincial Executive of Drenthe and the Ministry of Economic Affairs. This was required because it concerned a Natura 2000 area (authority of the Provincial Executive) with protected animals (authority of the Ministry), such as the bullhead, the loach and the crested newt.
Therefore, the Court decided on 7 July 2016 to suspend the decision until at least six weeks after the municipality will have re-decided on the permit. In practice, this means the artwork shall not be installed anymore as the Into Nature art expedition will end on 18 September.
Would you like to learn more about the legal aspects of art in public spaces? Or do you have any other questions about art and law? Please contact Russell Advocaten:
Russell Advocaten has for the 17th consecutive year in a row been included in The Legal 500. We are pleased with the recognition for the quality of our legal services by experts and clients. Please read what they say about us:read on
The Dutch restitution policy returns to its original principles and is rightly becoming more generous. Cases that have already been settled can also be resubmitted. What will change in the policy?read on
The sale of a drawing by Rubens, owned by Princess Christina, at an auction in New York caused great indignation and a discussion about the policy for cultural heritage in the Netherlands. This resulted in two advice committees, the Pechtold Committee and the Buma Committee. The latter has issued an interim opinion, that, if adopted, could have serious consequences for art collectors and art dealers in the Netherlands.read on
Russell Advocaten noticed in its proceedings before the Dutch Restitutions Committee that the committee increasingly attached importance to the interest of the current owners. This is contrary to the Washington Principles. The committee appointed to evaluate Dutch restitution policy agrees with us in its “Striving for Justice” report.read on
Even if the Restitutions Committee recommends to return looted art, it is not certain that the work of art will actually return to its rightful claimants. It could be that the work of art is irreplaceable and indispensable to Dutch cultural heritage and may not leave the Netherlands.read on
At the online symposium of the Vereniging Kunst Cultuur Recht on the Heritage Act and the protection of cultural goods, Paul W.L. Russell, LL.M. threw a few stones into the pond. How useful are protective measures to keep cultural heritage in the Netherlands without making underlying purchase funds directly available? Is the designation procedure necessary?read on
High punitive damages are one of the aspects of U.S. law that attracts a lot of attention. In the Netherlands punitive damages will not be awarded. What are the consequences for Dutch companies that are active in the U.S.? And for American companies that file a claim in the Netherlands? Priscilla de Leede of Russell Advocaten and Kathleen Hugo of U.S. law firm Mateer Harbert explain.read on