Facts
The case concerns the restitution of a painting by Kasimir Malevich that was stolen in 1978 from the apartment of the complainant's parents in Leningrad (now St. Petersburg). The respondent, an art collector, had acquired the painting in 1989 through a Geneva gallery. The complainant, the sole heir of his parents, sued for the restitution of the painting.
The District Court dismissed the claim, as did the High Court of the Canton of Zurich. The complainant then filed a civil law appeal with the Federal Supreme Court.
Considerations
The Federal Supreme Court upholds the appeal and remands the matter to the High Court. It concludes that the respondent did not exercise sufficient diligence to dispel the suspicion that the painting he acquired could be a stolen work.
While the High Court found that the respondent neither knew nor should have known the defect in title, he should have taken further steps after receiving a warning from an art expert that a stolen Malevich painting was on the market. In particular, it would have been appropriate to commission the expert or other…