Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T04:14:50.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ethical Rules and Codes of Honor Related to Museum Activities: A Complementary Support to the Private International Law Approach Concerning the Circulation of Cultural Property

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2009

Manlio Frigo
Manlio Frigo
Affiliation:
State University of Milan. Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The role of ethical rules and codes of conduct in the field of art law and international protection of cultural property, together with the adoption of the relevant international conventions, has constantly increased in the last decades. This article considers the main codes of conduct drafted by international organizations as well as international, national, public, and private institutions, federations, and associations. The focus is on their influence on international trade as instruments of art market regulation. Specific attention is paid to the interaction with the private international law approach and to a survey of both direct and indirect effects of these rules on the international circulation of cultural property.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 16 , Issue 1 , February 2009 , pp. 49 - 66
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Armbrüster, C. “La revendication de biens culturels du point de vue du droit international privé.” Revue critique de droit international privé (2004): 723 ff.Google Scholar
Audit, B. “Le statut des biens culturels en droit international privé français.” Revue Internationale de Droit Compare (1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodie, N. “An Archaeologist's View of the Trade in Unprovenanced Antiquities.” In Art and Cultural Heritage, Law, Policy and Practice, edited by Hoffman, B. T.. Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Cornu, M. “L'Europe des biens culturels et le marché.” Journal du Droit International (2002): 677.Google Scholar
Frigo, M. “Cultural Property v. Cultural Heritage: A Battle of Concepts in International Law.” IRRC 2004, 367.Google Scholar
Frigo, M.La circolazione internazionale dei beni culturali, 2nd ed., (Giuffré), Milano, 2007.Google Scholar
Jayme, E. “L'immunité des oeuvres d'art prétées. Quelques procédures et législations récentes en Europe.” In Claims for Restitution of Looted Art, edited by Renold, M. A. and Gabus, P.. Genève, Zürich, Bâle, 2004.Google Scholar
Jayme, E.Neue Anknüpfungsmaximen für den Kulturgüterschutz im internationalen Privatrecht. Rechtsfragen des Internationalen Kulturgüterschutzes, Heidelberg: 1994.Google Scholar
Nafziger, J. A. R. “The Principles for Cooperation in the Mutual Protection and Transfer of Cultural Material.” Chicago Journal of International Law 8 (2007).Google Scholar
O'Keefe, P. J. “Codes of Ethics: Forms and Functions in Cultural Heritage.” International Journal of Cultural Property 7 (1998).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weller, M. “Immunity for Artworks on Loan? A Review of International Customary Law and Municipal Anti-seizure Statutes in Light of the Lichtenstein Litigation.” VandJTL (2005).Google Scholar