The coordination office in Magdeburg continues to post details about works of art seized from Cornelius Gurlitt in Schwabing, with a total of 327 works now available for viewing. There has been almost no discussion yet, however, of what process the government will employ to allow claimants to make their case. Those in the United States have options discussed further below.
327 Gurlitt Collection Works Now Known; Time for Claims in the United States?
Posted by
Nicholas O'Donnell on December 6, 2013 at 4:36 AM
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: veschollene Kunst, Schwabinger Kunstfund Cornelius Gurlitt, Strafprozessordnung, Hildebrand Gurlitt, EBS Dispute Resolution Center, Munich Hoard, IFKUR, Verjährungsfrist, Peter Bert, Germany, Matthias Weller, prescriptive ownership, Nazi-looted art, Gurlitt Collection, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, Baden-Württemberg, Entartete Kunst, Nazis, Ingeborg Berggreen-Merkel, Munich, Schwabing, Magdeburg, FSIA, Dispute Resolution in Germany, Bavaria, Looted Art, Foreign Sovereign Immunities, deutches Recht, degenerate art, Altmann v. Republic of Austria, www.lostart.de, stop, Raubkunst, German Civil Code § 221, Sec. 108 German Code of Criminal Procedure, Kunstfund München, Münchner Kunstfund
Gurlitt Vows to Fight for Art Collection, Possible Limitations Under German Law Still Unclear. Does Austria Have Say?
Posted by
Nicholas O'Donnell on November 18, 2013 at 4:41 AM
Der Spiegel conducted a face to face interview with Cornelius Gurlitt that was published over the weekend, addressing his intentions about the 1,400 artworks connected to Nazi looting. Most striking was Gurlitt’s declaration with regard to the artworks seized by Bavarian tax authorities “I will give nothing back willingly.” The highlights of the interview, available in both German and English (the fuller version only in print, in German), ranges from discussing Gurlitt’s reclusive existence, to his perceived victimhood, to some standard-fare denialism (like that Hildebrand engaged in the commerce of “degenerate art” nearly always sold under duress or worse only in order to “save” the art).
0 Comments Click here to read/write comments
Topics: veschollene Kunst, Cornelius Gurlitt, Schwabinger Kunstfund. Kunstfund München, Verjährungsfrist, Legal Times, prescriptive ownership, Gurlitt Collection, österreiches Recht, Bundesgerichtshof, Hildebrand Gurlit, Entartete Kunst, Nazis, Munich, Salzburg, Gurlitt, Restitution, City of Gotha et al. v. Sotheby’s et al., Statute of Limitations, Looted Art, World War II, deutches Recht, degenerate art, Austria, München, Raubkunst, German Civil Code § 221, Österreich
