Hostname: page-component-68c7f8b79f-tw422 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-12-22T14:23:11.623Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

New Developments in the Restitution of Cultural Property: Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 April 2010

Marie Cornu  and
Marc-André Renold
Marie Cornu
Affiliation:
French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS)
Marc-André Renold
Affiliation:
University of Geneva, Art-Law Centre
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Alternative methods of dispute resolution are an important resource in matters of cultural heritage in addressing the return, restitution, and repatriation of cultural property. The purpose of this article is to analyze the situations in which such methods might be preferred to the classical judicial means and to examine the problems that might arise.

The article is in two parts. The first part describes the actors as well as the current methods used for the restitution and return of cultural property. The second part explores the types of property that lend themselves to alternative dispute resolution techniques and lists the—often original—substantive solutions that have been used in practice.

Alternative methods of dispute resolution enable consideration of nonlegal factors, which might be emotional considerations or a sense of “moral obligation,” and this can help the parties find a path to consensus.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 1 - 31
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Armbrüster, C. “La Revendication de Biens Culturels du Point de Vue du Droit International Privé.” Revue Critique de Droit International Privé, 93 (2004): 723ff.Google Scholar
Byrne-Sutton, Q., and Geisinger-Mariéthoz, F., eds. “Resolution Methods for Art-Related Disputes.” Studies in Art Law, 11. Geneva: Schulthess, 1999.Google Scholar
Cornu, M., ed. Centre for Studies on International Legal Cooperation (CECOJI), Protection de la Propriété Culturelle et Circulation des Biens Culturels—Etude de Droit Comparé Europe/Asie. University of Poitiers/CNRS, September 2008 ⟨http://www.gip-recherche-justice.fr/catalogue/requete_resultat2.php?reference=369⟩Google Scholar
Cornu, M. “Le Corps Humain au Musée, de la Personne à la Chose?” Recueil Dalloz 28 (July 30, 2009): 1907. Also published as “The Human Body in the Museum: From a Person to an Object?” Art Antiquity and Law XIV(3) (October 2009): 219 ff.Google Scholar
Droze, Georges, sur, Note “Fondation Abegg et Ville de Genève contre Anne Ribes et autres,” Revue critique de droit international privé, 1989, p. 100 ff.Google Scholar
Ermisse, G. “L'Actualité des Contentieux Archivistiques.” In Archives et Patrimoine, Collection Droit du Patrimoine Culturel et Naturel, by Cornu, M. and Fromageau, J., 1: 51ff. L'Harmattan, 2004.Google Scholar
Gabus, P., and Renold, M-A.Commentaire LTBC (Loi Fédérale sur le Transfert International des Biens Culturels). Geneva: Schulthess, 2006.Google Scholar
Ganslmayr, H. “Return and Restitution of Cultural Property.” Museum XXXI, no.1 (1979): p. 62 ff.Google Scholar
Gaudemet, Y.Traité de Droit Administratif des Biens, 13th ed.Librarie Générle de droit et de Jurisprudence. Paris: 2008.Google Scholar
Kecskemeti, C. “L'histoire des Contentieux Archivistiques.” In Archives et Patrimoine, Collection Droit du Patrimoine Culturel et Naturel, by Cornu, M. and Fromageau, J., 1: 41ff. L'Harmattan, 2004.Google Scholar
Kowalski, W. “Restitution of Works of Art.” RCADI 288, (2001): 9ff.Google Scholar
Kowalski, W. “Types of Claims for Recovery of Lost Cultural Property.” Museum International: Protection and Restitution 57, no. 4/228 (2005): 85ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maget, A.Collectionnisme public et conscience patrimoniale: Les collections d'antiquités égyptiennes en Europe. L'Harmattan, 2009.Google Scholar
Marin, J.-Y., “Statut des Restes Humains.” In Le Patrimoine Religieux, Enjeux Juridiques et Pratiques Culturelles, by Badevant-Guademet, B., Cornu, M. and Fromageau, J.. L'Harmattan, 2006 : 337ff.Google Scholar
Muir Watt, H., “La Revendication Internationale des Biens Culturels: À Propos de la Décision Américaine Eglise Autocéphale,” Revue Critique de Droit International Privé 81, no. 1 (January–March 1992): 1ff.Google Scholar
Mulongo, A. H., “Retour et Restitution des Biens Culturels, L'Affaire du Crâne de Broken Hill,” Museum XLIV, XLIV, no. 174, XLIV, Vol., XLIV, XLIV, XLIV, no. 2, 1992.Google Scholar
Négri, V., “Fouilles Archéologiques et Questions de Religion.” In Le Patrimoine Religieux, Enjeux Juridiques et Pratiques Culturelles, by Badevant-Guademet, B., Cornu, M. and Fromageau, J.. L'Harmattan, 2006 : 325ff.Google Scholar
Négri, V. L'Édification du Droit du Patrimoine Culturel: Évolutions et Tensions, Doctoral thesis submitted to the University of Paris XI, 2008.Google Scholar
Palmer, N.Museums and the Holocaust. London: Institute of Art and Law, 2000.Google Scholar
Perrot, X. De la Restitution Internationale des Biens Culturels aux XIXème et XXème Siècles: Vers une Autonomie Juridique. Doctoral thesis defended at the University of Limoges, December 7, 2005.Google Scholar
Pomian, K..Memory and Universality: New Challenges Facing Museums. Public debate.Paris: UNESCO, February 5, 2007.Google Scholar
Prott, L. V., ed. Commentaire Relatif à la Convention UNIDROIT. Paris: UNESCO, 2000.Google Scholar
Prott, L. V., ed. Witnesses to History, A Compendium of Documents and Writings on the Return of Cultural Objects. Paris: UNESCO, 2009.Google Scholar
Rouland, N.Le Droit des Minorités et des Peuples Autochtones. Paris: Presses Universitaires France (PUF), 1996.Google Scholar
Specht, J. “The Australian Museum and the Return of Artefacts to Pacific Island Countries,” Museum XXXI, no. 1, 1979.Google Scholar
Vigneron, S. “Rapport National—Grande-Bretagne.” In Protection de la Propriété Culturelle et Circulation des Biens Culturels—Etude de Droit Comparé Europe/Asie, edited by Cornu, M.. Centre for Studies on International Legal Cooperation (CECOJI), University of Poitiers/CNRS, September 2008. ⟨http://www.gip-recherche-justice.fr/catalogue/requete_resultat2.php?reference=369⟩Google Scholar