Francesco Guardi

This case involved a Nazi-looted art claim against an important Francesco Guardi painting that was purchased just a few years ago at one of the major auction houses. We will not be showing the painting nor will we name the parties involved at their request.

A well-known old master art dealer purchased the painting at auction and, shortly thereafter, was made aware of a restitution claim to the painting. Unfortunately, this dealer hired an arrogant and uncreative “art lawyer” whose black and white legal approach to restitution cases served no purpose other than to line his pockets with hourly billing. Art Recovery International was then brought in to resolve the dispute over title to the tainted Guardi. Tossing aside the expensive and useless legal opinion, ARI conducted extensive research and uncovered important documentation that eluded the auction house in their slap-dash approach to due diligence prior to their sale of the picture. Of course the looted painting had a ‘certificate of clearance’ from a certain art loss registry despite the evidence of its looting.

ARI recommended a resolution that included a contribution by the offending auction house which represented only their profits from the sale of the Nazi-looted painting. The auction house refused and insisted that they would cancel the sale and return the Nazi-looted artwork to their consignor. Mind you, this took place in 2019, not 30 years ago when restitution claims started to be taken seriously by the major auction houses.

Let’s be clear. Several times a year you will see representatives of the major auction houses and their ‘restitution departments’ give lectures at various conferences around the world.

They will talk about what they are doing to keep Nazi-looted works from being sold in their salerooms. While such in-house restitution departments are staffed by highly qualified and principled individuals, these teams are entirely conflicted and are employed to “cleanse” artworks so that their corporate overlords can earn a Seller’s and Buyer’s commission (a combined 25-35% of the sale price) by keeping these artworks under their control.

It was absolutely extraordinary to learn that one could unknowingly purchase a Nazi-looted work of art at a top auction house and that the auction house will not stand by the purchase other than cancel the sale and reimburse only the purchase price. The customer is forced to absorb his own costs and fees associated with his purchase. Had the auction house performed a modicum of due diligence, the buyer would not have been burdened with these additional financial outlays and legal fees.

Fortunately, ARI devised a strategic and confidential resolution that pleased both the possessor and the descendants of the Holocaust victims ending the title dispute over the Guardi. Sadly, the auction house avoided scrutiny and lived on to sell and lecture another day.