Il contenzioso transnazionale dinanzi alle corti statali quale via per la restituzione delle opere d’arte trafugate dai nazisti: rimedio effettivo o vicolo cieco?

This paper addresses the inadequacy of court litigation as a possible avenue for recovering Nazi-looted art claims. In the context of these types of disputes national courts are charged with the difficult task to deal with the double-faced dimension of Nazi-looted artwork. As movable assets, such cultural goods have a private law dimension and are subject to property rights. At the same time Nazi looted-art bears an undeniable public interest dimension because of its heritage and memory value. The difficulty of reconciling the two (at times) conflicting interests at stake is worsened by the fact that litigation in this field has very often a cross-border character. This raises conflict of laws questions that are so complicated to be perceived as legal barriers to restitution claims, not unlike defenses such as statutory limitations or adverse possession. The analysis of some recent US decisions proves that judges often struggle to embrace solutions and interpretations in line with the pro-restitution policy underlying the Washington Principles. As a possible way out, the promotion of arbitration in this field (as recently envisaged by the German government) is considered and assessed.