Talks by Marie-Sophie de Clippele
International Journal of Cultural Property, 2015
Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in continuing tension. The t... more Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in continuing tension. The traditional conception of property right is based on an absolute individual right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. However, interference in this right may restrict its exercise and impose charges on the owner, such as classification measures and conservation easements. This paper formulates a hypothesis about an increased protection of cultural heritage along with that of private ownership. Against the background of a complex constitutional allocation of cultural powers, Belgian law provides a pertinent illustration of this development. At the one hand, Belgian governments have been adopting more extensive legislation protecting cultural heritage. On the other hand, Belgian courts, traditionally reluctant to recognize any compensation right when the protective measure only restricts the ownership, gradually appear to undertake a more thorough analysis of the fair balance between the conflicting interests, notably in favor of the owner. The authors gauge the merits of a new model of cultural heritage protection.
La prochaine journée d’étude du réseau ModerNum sera consacrée au patrimoine (Bibliothèque royale... more La prochaine journée d’étude du réseau ModerNum sera consacrée au patrimoine (Bibliothèque royale de Belgique, 26 avril 2019). Les réflexions s’articuleront autour de deux pôles : la matinée sera consacrée à la perte du patrimoine durant l’époque moderne ; tandis que l’après-midi proposera une réflexion sur les enjeux de la conservation du patrimoine moderne.
Papers by Marie-Sophie de Clippele
The Stoclet Palace is a mansion located in Brussels, built in the early part of the twentieth cen... more The Stoclet Palace is a mansion located in Brussels, built in the early part of the twentieth century by the architect Josef Hoffmann (a founder member of the Viennese Secession group of artists and architects). Construction of the Palace was commissioned by the banker and art lover Adolphe Stoclet and the resultant work was a modern, twentieth-century building characterised by an absence of clutter and with every detail of the building having been designed by Hoffmann. In 2009 the building was designated a World Heritage Site by UNESCO. This article discusses the decision to list, not only the building itself, but the chattels within, also designed by Hoffmann, and the challenge to this decision on the part of the Stoclet sisters, granddaughters of Adolphe Stoclet. The case raises important questions as to the potential scope of decisions to list culturally significant buildings, the human rights implications of such decisions as well as shedding light on the intricacies and incons...
En se basant sur l’arret de la Cour de cassation du 13 juin 2013, ce commentaire de jurisprudence... more En se basant sur l’arret de la Cour de cassation du 13 juin 2013, ce commentaire de jurisprudence poursuit l’analyse des decisions juridictionnelles relatives au classement des objets faisant partie integrante du palais Stoclet. Il reprend deux aspects principaux de l’arret, a savoir la notion elargie de patrimoine culturel immobilier et l’atteinte accrue aux droits des proprietaires mobiliers.
Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in tension with one another.... more Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in tension with one another. The traditional conception of property right is based on an absolute individual right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. However, interference in this right may restrict its exercise and impose charges on the owner, such as classification measures and conservation easements in name of the general interest of the community to protect cultural heritage. This paper formulates a hypothesis about an increased protection of cultural heritage as well as of private ownership in Belgian law. At the one hand, Belgium, inspired by international and European law, has adopted more and broader legislation for the safeguard of cultural heritage. The famous Palais Stoclet case has clearly confirmed that Belgian jurisprudence also widely recognise the importance of protecting cultural heritage. On the other hand, Belgian judges, who traditionally don’t recognise any compensation right when the pr...
Le champ d’application des lois de protection des biens culturels differe considerablement selon ... more Le champ d’application des lois de protection des biens culturels differe considerablement selon l’ordre juridique national en cause. Il depend de la conception de l’art et de la civilisation du pays protegeant son patrimoine culturel et peut-etre aussi de la possibilite de mettre a execution ces regles etablies. La variabilite des regles s’explique egalement par les differents interets etatiques en jeu et par une richesse inegale du patrimoine. Deux grands courants peuvent etre distingues qui regroupent d’un cote, des pays riches en patrimoine culturel et souvent victimes de nombreuses exportations illicites, et, de l’autre cote, des pays plus pauvres en termes de biens culturels mais davantage tournes vers le marche de l’art. La distinction est importante car elle permet de mieux saisir la ratio legis et les choix politiques derriere des lois plus ou moins attentatoires au droit de propriete, les Etats disposant d’une large marge d’appreciation a cet egard. Les pays dits protectio...
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique, 2021
Cultural heritage can offer tangible and intangible traces of the past. A past that shapes cultur... more Cultural heritage can offer tangible and intangible traces of the past. A past that shapes cultural identity, but also a past from which one sometimes wishes to detach oneself and which nevertheless needs to be remembered, even commemorated. These themes of memory, history and oblivion are examined by the philosopher Paul Ricoeur in his work La mémoire, l’histoire, l’oubli (2000). Inspired by these ideas, this paper analyses how they are closely linked to cultural heritage. Heritage serves as a support for memory, even if it can be mishandled, which in turn can affect heritage policies. Memory and heritage can be abused as a result of wounds from the past or for reasons of ideological manipulation or because of a political will to force people to remember. Furthermore, heritage, as a vehicule of memory, contributes to historical knowledge, but can remain marked by a certain form of subjectivism during the heritage and conservation operation, for which heritage professionals (represe...
Revue interdisciplinaire d'études juridiques, 2018
Les sociologues Luc Boltanski et Arnaud Esquerre dressent dans leur dernier ouvrage, Enrichisseme... more Les sociologues Luc Boltanski et Arnaud Esquerre dressent dans leur dernier ouvrage, Enrichissement. Une critique de la marchandise (2017), le portrait d’une nouvelle economie exploitant les secteurs de la culture, de l’art, du patrimoine, du tourisme et du luxe. Leurs analyses demontrent de maniere structurelle la pregnance de la logique du profit dans ces domaines. Partant d’un compte-rendu de leurs travaux, nous poursuivons nos reflexions a l’aide de lectures issues de disciplines variees et portant sur le patrimoine culturel, confirmant tour a tour le danger de la marchandisation du patrimoine et de la culture. Enfin, une analyse du droit, lequel adopte une position ambivalente vis-a-vis du patrimoine culturel et en particulier des biens culturels mobiliers, nous permet d’en degager tantot une vision economique de libre echange, tantot une volonte de protection de ces biens culturels.
Revue interdisciplinaire d'études juridiques, 2018
L’actualite des communs ne se situe pas, fondamentalement, dans le champ du droit, mais ce sont b... more L’actualite des communs ne se situe pas, fondamentalement, dans le champ du droit, mais ce sont bien les fondamentaux du droit qu’elle defie, telles les notions de propriete et de responsabilite, de maniere conciliante ou plus radicale. Les communs sont comme une nebuleuse et pourtant il y a une ligne claire qui les federe, faite de trois constantes : un souci de l’acces, l’existence d’une communaute engagee et la revendication d’un projet. L’approche par les communs sublime l’importance des pratiques nouvelles, car le commun est avant tout un genre d’agir. La presente contribution introduit les resultats d’un exercice collectif mene a l’Universite Saint-Louis Bruxelles, a la croisee des enjeux de l’environnement et de la culture, a l’initiative de son Centre d’etude du droit de l’environnement (CEDRE).
International Journal of Cultural Property, 2015
:Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in continuing tension. The ... more :Private ownership and cultural heritage protection are two interests in continuing tension. The traditional conception of property right is based on anabsoluteindividual right to the peaceful enjoyment of possessions. However, interference in this right may restrict its exercise and impose charges on the owner, such as classification measures and conservation easements. This paper formulates a hypothesis about an increased protection of cultural heritage along with that of private ownership.Against the background of a complex constitutional allocation of cultural powers, Belgian law provides a pertinent illustration of this development. At the one hand, Belgian governments have been adopting more extensive legislation protecting cultural heritage. On the other hand, Belgian courts, traditionally reluctant to recognize any compensation right when the protective measure only restricts the ownership, gradually appear to undertake a more thorough analysis of the fair balance between the conflicting interests, notably in favor of the owner.The authors gauge the merits of a new model of cultural heritage protection.
International Journal of Legal Semiotics, 2021
Cultural heritage can offer tangible and intangible traces of the past. A past that shapes cultur... more Cultural heritage can offer tangible and intangible traces of the past. A past that shapes cultural identity, but also a past from which one sometimes wishes to detach oneself and which nevertheless needs to be remembered, even commemorated. These themes of memory, history and oblivion are examined by the philosopher Paul Ricoeur in his work La mémoire, l'histoire, l'oubli (2000). Inspired by these ideas, this paper analyses how they are closely linked to cultural heritage. Heritage serves as a support for memory, even if it can be mishandled, which in turn can affect heritage policies. Memory and heritage can be abused as a result of wounds from the past or for reasons of ideological manipulation or because of a political will to force people to remember. Furthermore, heritage, as a vehicule of memory, contributes to historical knowledge, but can remain marked by a certain form of sub-jectivism during the heritage and conservation operation, for which heritage professionals (representatives of the public authority or other experts) are responsible. Yet, the responsibility for conserving cultural heritage also implies the need to avoid any loss of heritage, and to fight against oblivion. Nonetheless, this struggle cannot become totalitarian, nor can it deprive the community of a sometimes salutary oblivion to its own identity construction. These theoretical and philosophical concepts shall be examined in the light of legal discourse, and in particular in Belgian legislation regarding cultural heritage. It is clear that the shift from monument to heritage broadens the legal scope and consequently raises the question of who gets to decide what is considered heritage according to the law, and whether there is something such as a collective human right to cultural heritage. Nonetheless, this broadening of the legislation extends the State intervention into cultural heritage, which in turn entails certain risks, as will be analysed with Belgium's colonial heritage.
Aménagement - environnement : urbanisme et droit foncier, 2019
L’année européenne du patrimoine culturel en 2018 a non seulement lancé un nombre considérable d’... more L’année européenne du patrimoine culturel en 2018 a non seulement lancé un nombre considérable d’activités et de projets autour du patrimoine au sein de l’Union européenne, mais elle a aussi été marquée, à l’échelle régionale, par une modification importante de la législation wallonne dans le domaine du patrimoine culturel immobilier. Fort inspiré des textes internationaux et européens, et notamment de la Convention-cadre du Conseil de l’Europe pour la valeur du patrimoine dans la société (Faro, 2005), le législateur wallon s’est doté d’un nouveau Code wallon du patrimoine, entièrement autonome des autres Codes et domaines voisins, tels que le Code du développement territorial ou le Code de l’environne-ment (décret du 26 avril 2018 relatif au Code wallon du patrimoine, M.B., 22 mai 2018). Le même jour de l’adoption de ce nouveau Code, soit le 26 avril 2018, le législateur promulgue également un décret apportant des modifications fiscales en faveur des propriétaires privés de monuments classés, par la mise en place d’un système de crédit d’impôt en cas de suc-cession, de partage ou de donation (décret du 26 avril 2018 modifiant le Code des droits de succession et le Code des droits d’enregistrement, d’hypothèque et de greffe en vue d’exempter de droits de partage, de do-nation et de succession des biens immobiliers classés comme monument, M.B., 17 mai 2018). Ces deux volets, liés non seulement par leur date d’adoption, offrent ainsi une nouvelle politique de protection patrimoniale, au demeurant élaborée par la tout aussi nouvelle Agence wallonne du patrimoine (AWaP). Cet article a pour objet de commenter les récentes modifications législatives et est divisé en deux parties : la première relative au nouveau Code wallon du patrimoine, et la seconde portant sur les mesures de financement et de soutien à la protection du patrimoine immobilier, reprenant des éléments du nouveau Code ainsi que du décret fiscal.
RIEJ, 2018
L’actualité des communs ne se situe pas, fondamentalement, dans le champ du droit, mais ce sont b... more L’actualité des communs ne se situe pas, fondamentalement, dans le champ du droit, mais ce sont bien les fondamentaux du droit qu’elle défie, telles les notions de propriété et de responsabilité, de manière conciliante ou plus radicale. Les communs sont comme une nébuleuse et pourtant il y a une ligne claire qui les fédère, faite de trois constantes : un souci de l’accès, l’existence d’une communauté engagée et la revendication d’un projet. L’approche par les communs sublime l’importance des pratiques nouvelles, car le commmun est avant tout un genre d’agir. La présente contribution introduit les résultats d’un exercice collectif mené à l’Université Saint-Louis Bruxelles, à la croisée des enjeux de l’environnement et de la culture, à l’initiative de son Centre d’étude du droit de l’environnement (CEDRE).
Art Antiquity and Law, 2016
The enforceability of “vesting laws” – legislation which seeks to vest ownership of antiquities i... more The enforceability of “vesting laws” – legislation which seeks to vest ownership of antiquities in the nation from which they originated – has once again become the subject of a court decision, this time in Belgium. Readers will be familiar with the decisions of the US courts in Hollinshead, McClain and Schultz and the English Court of Appeal in Barakat. These decisions, all from common law jurisdictions, recognise the enforceability of such laws where the antiquities are being traded overseas. Arguments that such items do not fit the US definition of “stolen property” have been rejected, as have arguments that the recognition of such legislation would amount to enforcing a penal or public law, which is not justiciable in foreign court. In the recent proceedings before the Belgian courts the Islamic Republic of Iran sought the return of 349 objects which had been brought into Belgium in 1964 by a French-Belgian collector in the case of a Belgian diplomat. The collector had, at that time, been married to an Iranian physician named Maleki, and had acquired the objects while based in Teheran, partly through local excavations and partly from local dealers. The factual scenario in this case was extremely complicated. Suffice to say here, the Brussels Court of Appeal found against Iran on the basis that its title to the objects had expired. This decision was quashed by the Court of Cassation and referred for decision back to the Liège Court of Appeal which held that the objects should, notwithstanding the passage of 50 years, be returned to Iran. The Court found that Mrs Maleki had failed to prove that she had acquired the objects lawfully, and that Iran had, under the terms of its legislation, established ownership of the objects. This reasoning was in direct contrast to that of the Brussels Court of Appeal which had held that the Iranian law on which the claim was based was basically of a penal nature and sought to enforce Iranian confiscation measures, rather than directly conferring ownership rights on the Iranian State. The Liège Court’s decision, while in stark opposition to the findings of the Brussels Court, fits the trend of common law cases such as Schultz and Barakat which have upheld such vesting statutes.
Uploads
Talks by Marie-Sophie de Clippele
Papers by Marie-Sophie de Clippele