Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Enforcing International Cultural Heritage Law$
Users without a subscription are not able to see the full content.

Francesco Francioni and James Gordley

Print publication date: 2013

Print ISBN-13: 9780199680245

Published to Oxford Scholarship Online: September 2013

DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680245.001.0001

Show Summary Details
Page of

PRINTED FROM OXFORD SCHOLARSHIP ONLINE (www.oxfordscholarship.com). (c) Copyright Oxford University Press, 2019. All Rights Reserved. Under the terms of the licence agreement, an individual user may print out a PDF of a single chapter of a monograph in OSO for personal use (for details see www.oxfordscholarship.com/page/privacy-policy).date: 19 July 2019

Sovereign Immunity and the Enforcement of International Cultural Property Law

Sovereign Immunity and the Enforcement of International Cultural Property Law

Chapter:
(p.79) 5 Sovereign Immunity and the Enforcement of International Cultural Property Law
Source:
Enforcing International Cultural Heritage Law
Author(s):

Riccardo Pavoni

Publisher:
Oxford University Press
DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199680245.003.0005

This chapter examines the extent to which states can raise the defence of sovereign immunity from suit and execution. It describes three exceptions to immunity from suit that may apply in cases involving cultural property. The first is the ‘commercial exception’ to state immunity, such as that provided by article 10 of the United Nations Convention on State Immunity (UNCSI), or § 1605(a)(2) of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in the United States. The second is the ‘ownership, possession, and use of property’ exception and its limitations (as per article 13 UNCSI, or § 1605(a)(4) FSIA). The third is the ‘expropriation’ exception of § 1605(a)(3) of the FSIA. The chapter discusses the difficulties resulting from the recognition of these limited exceptions. In the area of immunity from execution, it considers the extent to which a ‘cultural heritage’ exemption from measures of constraint is legitimate when claims for the recovery of art based on customary or treaty obligations or for the return of cultural objects taken away in times of war or peace are brought before the courts. It also discusses the contours and feasibility of a ‘cultural human rights’ exception to sovereign and sovereign-property immunity along the lines of the Italian Ferrini jurisprudence.

Keywords:   international law, cultural heritage law, Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, United Nations Convention on State Immunity

Oxford Scholarship Online requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books within the service. Public users can however freely search the site and view the abstracts and keywords for each book and chapter.

Please, subscribe or login to access full text content.

If you think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

To troubleshoot, please check our FAQs , and if you can't find the answer there, please contact us .