All Cases
Nedjemankh and His Gilded Coffin – Metropolitan Museum of Art and Egypt
The gilded Coffin of Nedjemankh, a priest of the ram-god Heryshef, was purchased in 2017 and exhibited in 2018 by the Metropolitan Museum of Art. Following an investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, the Met learned that the Coffin had been looted in 2011, during the Egyptian revolution. It also learned that it had received upon its purchase a false ownership history, fraudulent statements and fake documentation, including a forged 1971 Egyptian export license for the coffin. As such, the Met unconditionally returned the coffin to the Government of Egypt.
Obélisque d’Axoum – Italie et Ethiopie
En 1937, Mussolini ordonne l’enlèvement de l’obélisque d’Axoum et son transport en Italie. Il faudra attendre 2007 pour que l’obélisque retrouve le site d’Axoum.
Odalisque Painting – Paul Rosenberg Heirs and Seattle Art Museum
In June 1999, the Seattle Art Museum returned the painting Oriental Woman Seated on Floor (also known as Odalisque), by Henri Matisse, to the heirs of Paul Rosenberg. The painting was donated to the museum in 1991 by the Bloedel family.
On the Shore of the Seine – United States v. Baltimore Museum of Art
In 1951, Pierre-Auguste Renoir’s painting “On the shore of the Seine” was stolen from the Baltimore Museum of Art in the United States. Over fifty years later, Marcia Fuqua bought this painting for US $7 at a flea market and tried to auction it off after learning of its value.
One-Thousand-Five-Hundred-Pound, Hand-Carved Lintels Removed from Religious Temples in Thailand – United States of America and City & County of San Francisco
In 2017, the government of Thailand formally requested that the United States restitute two ancient stone lintels of Khmer origin that had been removed from Thai temples between 1959–1968 and acquired by the Asian Art Museum in San Francisco. From 2017 to 2020, the United States and Thailand negotiated with the Museum for the restitution of the lintels, but in October 2020, the United States sued the Museum in federal court to seek their forfeiture. In February 2021, the Museum and the United States settled the case for a conditional restitution of the lintels to Thailand.
Orpheus Mosaic – Turkey and Dallas Museum of Art
In December 2012, the Dallas Museum of Art returned to Turkey a fragment of a Roman mosaic. In addition, the parties concluded a comprehensive art exchange program.
Parrot Lady Sculpture – Canada and India
“Parrot Lady” is a 800 year old sandstone sculpture from a Khajuraho temple in India. It was returned by Canada to India in 2015 in accordance with the 1970 UNESCO Convention.
Pâté de Jambon – Anonymous German Heirs and Glasgow City Council
“Pâté de Jambon”, a painting by Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin, was the object of a forced sale in 1936. The owners, the Jewish shareholders of an art gallery, were forced to sell the artwork to meet an unfair Nazi tax demand.
Pièces d’or géantes – Inde c. Crédit Agricole Indosuez SA
Deux pièces d’or géantes anciennes d’une valeur exceptionnelle, tant d’un point de vue économique que culturel, sont mises en gage auprès d’une Banque à Genève par le petit-fils de l’ancien Nizam de la Principauté d’Hyderabad. L’Inde introduit une action auprès des tribunaux genevois dans le but d’en obtenir la restitution.
Portrait d’Isabelle d’Este – Cecchini c. Italie
Dans le cadre d’une procédure pénale, le procureur du Tribunal de Pesaro (Italie) a adressé à la Suisse une demande d’entraide judiciaire portant sur un tableau attribué à Leonardo da Vinci qui aurait été transféré d’Italie en Suisse, par sa propriétaire, sans l’autorisation des autorités italiennes. Après avoir fait séquestrer le tableau, le Ministère public du Tessin ordonne la remise de ce dernier à l’Italie. La propriétaire de l’œuvre recourt contre cette décision jusqu’au Tribunal fédéral, qui casse la décision précédente.
Portrait of a Young Peasant – Beyeler v. Italy
In its judgment of 5 January 2000, the European Court of Human Rights held that the Italian State violated Mr. Beyeler’s right to peaceful enjoyment of his possessions while using its pre-emption right over the Van Gogh painting “Portrait of a Young Peasant”.
Portrait of a Youth – Reichel Heirs v. Sarah Blodgett Dunbar
In the mid-2000s, Claudia Seger-Thomschitz, one of the heirs of Oskar Reichel, attempted to recover the painting “Portrait of a Youth” from Sarah Blodgett Dunbar on the grounds that it had been lost as a result of Nazi persecution. The 2010 appeal decision of the United States Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals settled the case in favour of Sarah Blodgett Dunbar.
Portrait of Greta Moll – Moll Heirs v. National Gallery of London
The “Portrait of Greta Moll” has been subject to a claim for return. The heirs of the painting’s subject argued the painting was stolen in the aftermath of the Second World War and claimed that the National Gallery of London did not purchase the work in good faith. The case has been heard in two courts of the United States.
Portrait of Wally – United States and Estate of Lea Bondi and Leopold Museum
After having been taken from Lea Bondi, a Jew forced to flee Austria following the Anschluss, the painting “Portrait of Wally” by Egon Schiele was seized by the US Forces at the end of the war. The portrait was first returned by the US Restitution Division to the Austrian Federal Office for Preservation of Historical Monument (BDA).
Poster Collection – Sachs Heirs v. Foundation German Historical Museum
Hans Sachs began collecting posters from the end of the nineteenth century. This collection was considered lost as a result of its seizure by the Nazis in 1937. In 2005, Peter Sachs, as Hans Sachs’ son and sole heir, located his father’s collection at the German Historical Museum and demanded its restitution. A judgment of the German Federal Court of Justice made possible the return of the poster collection to Peter Sachs.
Pre-Columbian Archaeological Objects – United States v. McClain
This case affirmed the conviction of several dealers who conspired to sell archaeological objects removed from Mexico in violation of the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA). Under the NSPA, it is a crime to deal in property that has been “stolen, unlawfully converted or taken, knowing the same to be stolen”.
Pulcinell Sculpture – Budge Heirs v. Anonymous Purchaser
A sculpture of Pulcinell was purchased by an anonymous buyer at auction in London in 2016. The buyer applied for an export license and the case came before the Reviewing Committee on the Export of Works of Art and Objects of Cultural Interest of the United Kingdom. During the review, it was discovered that the sculpture had been subject to forced sale by Nazis in 1937. The heirs of Emma Budge, the dispossessed owner of the sculpture, discovering what had become of the sculpture, attempted to secure its restitution.
Quatre momies – Chili et Personne privée
Le 20 janvier 2011, un particulier restitue quatre momies vieilles de 4000 à 6000 ans au Chili. Des représentants du Chili, des responsables du Musée d’Ethnographie de la Ville de Genève et le Service spécialisé de l’Office fédéral de la culture ont joué un rôle déterminant dans cette affaire.
Quedlinburg Treasures – Quedlinburg Church and Meador Heirs
After the withdrawal of US troops from the medieval town of Quedlinburg in Nazi Germany, the “Quedlinburg Treasures” were found to be missing. This theft was perpetrated by US soldier Joe T. Meador. After his death, the manuscripts passed on to his brother and sister who attempted to sell them. Some manuscripts were purchased by West German entities, whereas the Church of Quedlinburg purchased the rest of the treasures pursuant to a settlement agreement with the Meador Heirs.
Road to Calvary – Oppenheimer Heirs and Private Person
In 1935, Nazi authorities took from Jakob and Rosa Oppenheimer a painting entitled “Road to Calvary” by Brunswijker Monogrammist and sold it at auction. The painting resurfaced in 2006 when a Dutch private individual brought it to Sotheby’s determined to sell it. Instead of asking for the painting’s restitution, the Oppenheimer heirs demanded a portion of the sale’s proceeds. The Dutch Restitutions Committee issued a binding opinion on the matter, as requested by the parties.
Document Actions
