“One critical question will be, ‘Was the consideration fair?’ The plaintiffs’ position is, ‘Absolutely not. It was grossly inadequate.’ What makes this case a little unique is that something was paid for the artwork,” said Wielebinski, who is also the former executive director of London-based FraudNet, a global network of lawyers who fight financial crime and corruption and have handled numerous cases involving works of art.
The plaintiffs seek either a rescission of the sale and a return of the artwork or compensation that reflects the fair-market value at the time of the transaction.
Last year, Germany’s advisory organization on cases of suspected Nazi-looted art, the Limbach Commission, found that the 1935 sale was valid and that the price was fair. The commission decided the art would remain where it has been for some time--in the possession of a foundation operated by the German government, which has been displaying it in a Berlin museum since the early 1960s. As the determination was non-binding, the plaintiffs’ complaint said the commission’s decision does not bar them from pursuing their suit in the U.S. courts.
The German government designated the Guelph Treasure as a national cultural asset last week, about the time the suit was filed in the U.S. The declaration means that removal of the collection from Germany now requires the permission of the country’s minister for cultural affairs.
Wielebinski said he expects the Limbach Commission’s 2014 ruling and the German government’s recent decision to be serious points of contention.
At a 1998 meeting in Washington, D.C., the German government agreed to return artwork stolen by the Nazis to the legal owners or their heirs. Experts estimated that up to 50 famous works now in German museums might eventually be sent back to their rightful owners, according to a 2006 article in German weekly news magazine Der Spiegel. The article said that German diplomats attending meetings before the 1998 agreement was reached had warned in a telegram they sent home to Germany that about 110,000 items valued at $10 billion to $30 billion could ultimately be subject to claims for restitution.
A change in the existing terminology used by Germany to resolve restitution claims was implemented as a result of the Washington meeting, according to the Der Spiegel article. The new language expanded the options for restitution to include not only artwork confiscated by the Nazis, but pieces lost as a result of persecution or sold under duress, which could affect the outcome of the Guelph Treasure dispute.