The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently dismissed a long-running dispute against Russia concerning the library of the Lubavitcher Rebbe (the Library), a collection of books and papers once held by the then-Rebbe of the Chabad Lubavitch movement. Agudas Chasidei Chabad of United States v. Russian Fed’n, 110 F.4th 242 (D.C. Cir. 2024) (Chabad 2024). Brought under what is known as the expropriation exception, 28 U.S.C. § 1605(a)(3), of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the FSIA), the case has involved Russia’s withdrawal from the case and default, sanctions of $50,000 per day for non-compliance and a judgment of more than $175 million, a retaliatory embargo on cultural property exchange that continues to this day, and multiple appeals.
In the most recent decision, the court of appeals held that the second element of the expropriation exception (what is known as the commercial nexus requirement) was not met and therefore deprived the court of any jurisdiction. Specifically, the D.C. Circuit held that if the defendant is the foreign state, the expropriation exception may only be invoked if the property is physically present in the United States (which the Rebbe’s library is not). The Supreme Court has declined to review two relatively recent cases that reached the same conclusion, it will bear watching of the plaintiffs seek further review now given a circuit split with the 9th Circuit on the issue.
Read More
Topics:
de Csepel,
Immunity from Seizure,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Supreme Court,
Agudas Chasidei Chabad,
Russian Federation,
FSIA,
expropriation exception”,
sovereign immunity,
Russian State Library,
Chabad,
Federal Republic of Germany,
Welfenschatz,
D.C. Circuit,
Federal Republic of Germany v. Philipp,
Simon v. Republic of Hungary,
Lubavitcher Rebbe,
Schubarth,
Judge Randolph,
Brett Kavanaugh,
Judge Griffith
A recent story in The Art Newspaper spotlights a number of lingering issues related to stolen art, the power of U.S. courts to seize property to satisfy liability, and the role of the Immunity from Seizure Act, 22 U.S.C. § 2459 (IFSA). As we discussed recently, the prospect of a material change in U.S.-Cuba relations, which as a commercial matter haven’t existed for more than 50 years, has broad implications for the art market. Just as importantly, there are many, many unanswered questions about the fate of property in Cuba that changed hands or was nationalized as part of the Cuban Revolution in the late 1950s and onward. Simply put, there are thousands of claims worth billions of dollars for all sorts of property that exiles left behind or had taken from them. While it is still a long way off, one impact of potentially normalized relations is the prospect of sorting through those claims.
Read More
Topics:
Legislation,
Malevich,
Atlanta,
Boston College Law School,
The Art Newspaper,
Immunity from Seizure,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act,
Wifredo Lam: Imagining New Worlds,
22 U.S.C. § 2459,
City of Amsterdam,
High Museum,
McMullen Museum at Boston College,
IFSA,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Portrait of Wally,
Immunity from Seizure Act,
Museums,
Chabad,
Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity,
State Department,
Cuba
We launched the Art Law Report one year ago tomorrow. Several dozen posts, thousands of visitors and many more views later, a very special thank you to everyone who has read and followed the blog. The connections made literally all around the world are humbling and enlightening. We continue to strive to provide an interesting selection of legal updates and issues, while offering an opinion and perspective that tries to improve the understanding both of those familiar with legal concepts, and those less so. The continuing developments in copyright, FSIA, immunity from seizure, and other resitution issues in particular are certainly keeping us on our toes, and collections issues like the Barnes case are never too far away either. Your links and comments are appriated, and we will keep linking to all those viewpoints from which we are learning too. Here's to another year of substantive conversation.
Read More
Topics:
cultural property,
Immunity from Seizure,
Collections,
FSIA,
Restitution,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Copyright,
Immunity from Seizure Act,
Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity,
Art Law Report,
Barnes Foundation
Perhaps lost in the coverage about Senate Bill 2212 (the Art Law Report no less than anyone else) to amend the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act to preclude claims against defendants whose “commercial activity” is limited to the loan of artwork whose ownership is in dispute, is the case made by the sponsors of the bill themselves, Senators Dianne Feinstein (D, CA) and Orrin Hatch (R, UT).
Read More
Topics:
Nazi stolen art,
Malewicz v. City of Amsterdam,
Dianne Feinstein,
Immunity from Seizure,
28 U.S.C. 1605(a)(3),
FSIA,
Restitution,
Orrin Hatch,
Senate Bill 2212,
World War II,
IFSA,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
Immunity from Seizure Act,
Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity
The House of Representatives approved the Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity Clarification Act on March 19, 2012, to remove the display of a work of art in the United States as basis to sue a foreign sovereign here. The law touches on important distinctions between immunity from suit—when a party cannot be sued at all—from immunity from seizure—when a particular object or asset cannot be seized.
Read More
Topics:
Legislation,
Immunity from Seizure,
FSIA,
Restitution,
Senate Bill 2212,
World War II,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities,
House of Representatives,
Foreign Cultural Exchange Jurisdictional Immunity,
State Department
