RETURN OF THE CULTURAL OBJECTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW, EUROPEAN UNION LAW, AND LITHUANIAN LAW

Pavelas Ravluševičius
{"title":"RETURN OF THE CULTURAL OBJECTS UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW, EUROPEAN UNION LAW, AND LITHUANIAN LAW","authors":"Pavelas Ravluševičius","doi":"10.20912/rdc.v16i40.589","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the legal problems associated with the return of cultural objects in International, European Union, and Lithuanian Laws, as well as the extraterritorial application of mandatory norms. Particular importance is given to the influence of the UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects and the Directive 2014/60/EC on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State. Attention is paid to the correlation of civil law doctrines with the protection of the owner’s rights and the bona fide purchaser of a cultural object on the one hand, and International and European Laws about the return to the owner and compensation to the owner of a cultural object on the other hand, because Lithuanian legislation and case law do not apply the vindication doctrine to protect owner’s rights of cultural objects and thus differs from the traditional approach to solving the problems of returning cultural objects within the civil law framework. The article deals with the related problems of recognition of the owner’s rights and changes in the evidence presumptions. The issue of restoring the owner’s rights to illegally confiscated cultural objects during the existence of the USSR was decided in the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania. Courts of general jurisdiction considered claims for the return of cultural objects belonging to foreign entities - the Federal Republic of Germany and the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation. Particular importance was the question of the application of International and European Laws in judicial practice. According to the results of the study of the practice of the Republic of Lithuania, it is proposed to regard the return of cultural objects as an independent way of protecting the owner’s rights, which makes secondary the bona fide purchaser doctrine in relation of a cultural object.","PeriodicalId":32798,"journal":{"name":"Revista Direitos Culturais","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Direitos Culturais","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20912/rdc.v16i40.589","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article examines the legal problems associated with the return of cultural objects in International, European Union, and Lithuanian Laws, as well as the extraterritorial application of mandatory norms. Particular importance is given to the influence of the UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects and the Directive 2014/60/EC on the return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State. Attention is paid to the correlation of civil law doctrines with the protection of the owner’s rights and the bona fide purchaser of a cultural object on the one hand, and International and European Laws about the return to the owner and compensation to the owner of a cultural object on the other hand, because Lithuanian legislation and case law do not apply the vindication doctrine to protect owner’s rights of cultural objects and thus differs from the traditional approach to solving the problems of returning cultural objects within the civil law framework. The article deals with the related problems of recognition of the owner’s rights and changes in the evidence presumptions. The issue of restoring the owner’s rights to illegally confiscated cultural objects during the existence of the USSR was decided in the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Lithuania. Courts of general jurisdiction considered claims for the return of cultural objects belonging to foreign entities - the Federal Republic of Germany and the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation. Particular importance was the question of the application of International and European Laws in judicial practice. According to the results of the study of the practice of the Republic of Lithuania, it is proposed to regard the return of cultural objects as an independent way of protecting the owner’s rights, which makes secondary the bona fide purchaser doctrine in relation of a cultural object.
根据国际法、欧盟法和立陶宛法律归还文物
本文探讨了国际法、欧洲联盟法和立陶宛法律中与归还文物有关的法律问题,以及强制性规范的域外适用。特别重视国际统一私法协会《关于被盗或非法出口文物的公约》和关于归还从成员国领土非法移走的文物的第2014/60/EC号指令的影响。注意民法学说与保护文物所有人权利和善意购买人的关系,以及国际法和欧洲法与归还文物所有人和赔偿文物所有人的关系,因为立陶宛立法和判例法不适用平反原则来保护文物所有者的权利,因此不同于在民法框架内解决归还文物问题的传统方法。本文论述了权利人权利的承认与证据推定变更的相关问题。立陶宛共和国宪法法院在实践中决定恢复苏联存在期间非法没收文物所有者的权利。一般管辖法院审理了归还外国实体(德意志联邦共和国和普鲁士文化遗产基金会)文物的索赔。特别重要的是国际法和欧洲法在司法实践中的适用问题。根据对立陶宛共和国实践的研究结果,建议将归还文物视为保护所有人权利的一种独立方式,这使得对文物的善意购买人原则处于次要地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
28
审稿时长
16 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信