Publication date: 25 October 2016
Paul W.L. Russell, LL.M., specialist in Art & Law, pursued in the programme “Spitsuur” by BNR News Radio the question where the Crimea art treasures should be returned to – Ukraine or Russia?
On 6 October 2016, there was an important hearing in the court case on the Crimea art treasures. After the exhibition “The Crimea: Gold and Secrets of the Black Sea” at the Allard Pierson Museum in Amsterdam a dispute arose on which State the artefacts should be returned to – Ukraine or Russia? Paul W.L. Russell, specialist in Art & Law, discussed in the programme “Spitsuur” by BNR News Radio the importance of loan agreements, guarantees by the Dutch State, and international conventions to answer this question.
Listen to the broadcast here: (in Dutch)
Russell Advocaten has been leader in the field of art and law for many years. The international aspects of art matters form an integral part of our practice.
Why is the District Court of the opinion that the artefacts held by the Allard Pierson museum must be handed over to Ukraine? Does this mean the Crimea museums will definitely not get the works of art?read on
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