Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Rejecting Renvoi for Movable Cultural Property: The Islamic Republic of Iran v. Denyse Berend

  • Derek Fincham (a1)
Extract

In Iran v. Berend, the High Court in London had occasion to revisit one of the most enduring problems of private international law and cultural property. Effective regulation of the illicit market in cultural property is extremely difficult, because many measures aimed at stemming the illicit trade actually contribute to the black market. Courts in both England and the United States have shown that they are prepared to use criminal laws to convict persons involved in the illegal trade in antiquities exported in violation of foreign patrimony laws. As a result, much cultural property policy debate in recent years has focused on the extent to which the criminal law can impact the illicit trade. The extent to which national ownership declarations can be used in civil disputes remains less clear.

Copyright
References
Hide All

Bibliography

[Anonymous] Note. “A Distinction in the Renvoi Doctrine.” Harvard Law Review 35 (1922): 454456.
Bator, Paul. “An Essay on the International Trade in Art.” Stanford Law Review 34 (1981): 275384.
Chait, Matthew. “Renvoi in Multinational Cases in New York Courts: Does Its Past Preclude Its Future?Cardozo Journal of International & Comparative Law 11 (2003): 143175.
Coggins, Clemency. “Illicit Traffic of Pre-Columbian Antiquities.” Art Journal 29 (1969): 94114.
Brainerd, Currie. Selected Essays on the Conflict of Laws. Durham: Duke University Press, 1963.
Gerstenblith, Patty. “Identity and Cultural Property: The Protection of Cultural Property in the United States.” Boston University Law Review 75 (1995): 559688.
Goldberg, Adam. “Reaffirming McClain: The National Stolen Property Act and the Abiding Trade in Looted Cultural Objects.” UCLA Law Review 53 (2006): 10311071.
Harwood, Richard. “Dealing in Cultural Objects (Offences) Act 2003.” Art, Antiquity & the Law 8 (2003): 347355.
Kramer, Larry. “Return of the Renvoi.” N.Y.U. Law Review 66 (1991): 9791044.
Kreder, Jennifer. “The Choice between Civil and Criminal Remedies in Stolen Art Litigation.” Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 38 (2005): 11991252.
Lorenzen, Ernest G.The Renvoi Theory and the Application of Foreign Law.” Columbia Law Review 10 (1910): 327344.
Mackenzie, Simon. “Dig a Bit Deeper: Law, Regulation and the Illicit Antiquities Market.” British Journal of Criminology 45 (2004): 249268.
Mackenzie, Simon. Going, Going, Gone: Regulating the Market in Illicit Antiquities. Leicester: Institute of Art and Law, 2005.
Yasaitis, Kelly Elizabeth. “National Ownership Laws as Cultural Property Protection Policy: The Emerging Trend in United States v. Schultz.” International Journal of Cultural Property 12 (2005): 95113.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

International Journal of Cultural Property
  • ISSN: 0940-7391
  • EISSN: 1465-7317
  • URL: /core/journals/international-journal-of-cultural-property
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed