Suchergebnisse

AbstractPerhaps surprisingly, a number of Canadian jurisdictions have been at the cutting edge of legal exemptions from seizure or attachment processes for artworks on loan. Starting with the curious case of Hermitage treasures displayed in Winnipeg in the mid-1970s and using other intriguing examples, this article traces the historical origins of Canadian legislation with particular regard to the international context. The current state of the law in Canada is summarized and compared to that of other international jurisdictions.

This Comment will first examine the text of the IFSA to determine the scope of protection available under the Act. Second, this Comment will note the Congressional purposes underlying the IFSA, as evidenced by the available legislative history. Third, this Comment will examine the scope of immunity available under the Act. Fourth, this Comment will consider the procedures and substantive criteria employed in deciding whether immunity should be granted. Finally, this Comment will question the compatability of the IFSA with the more recently enacted Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976, under which Congress transferred the authority for granting immunity to foreign sovereigns from the State Department to the courts, in order to "depoliticize" determinations of immunity.

AbstractSome countries' laws favoring good-faith purchasers over the victims of theft make it difficult to recover stolen artworks. Nonetheless, the loan of such artworks for exhibition abroad may create opportunities to utilize the host country's legal system for recovery. This article examines representative cases illustrating legal options available to plaintiffs in the United States and the United Kingdom. In the United States, laws at the federal and state level may prevent the seizure of artworks loaned for temporary exhibition, but recent cases show that immunity is not absolute and that such artworks may be subject to suit in the United States. The United Kingdom recently enacted a similar law. That law, however, has been criticized, and future interpretations by U.K. courts will be needed before its true affect can be seen. The article also discusses the backgrounds against which the U.S. and U.K. laws were enacted, illustrating the link between the laws and Russian concerns about protecting cultural artifacts that were nationalized after the Russian Revolution or taken by Soviet troops during World War II.

Abstract:Australia has, like many other states over the past few years, introduced a statute that provides immunity from seizure for cultural objects on loan from abroad and immunity from suit for certain parties. This article explores the historical context that lead to the adoption of this statute and comprehensively explores the legislative regime, highlighting its peculiarities.

What is the status and regime of assets held by state enterprises and state agencies? Do they benefit from immunity from enforcement? This presentation attempts to uncover the present state of the law, while insisting on the unresolved questions.

Recent press and Congressional discussion regarding the question of French taxation of property in France owned by the United States Government and used for mutual defense purposes suggests the desirability of considering whether international law forbids a state to impose taxes on public property owned by another state.

The author applauds the Florida Supreme Court for adopting a balancing of interests test to determine whether an agency of the State must comply with municipal zoning ordinances when it seeks to conduct its affairs, whether governmental or proprietary in nature, within the boundaries of the municipality