強佔藝術品反還問題

1. 強佔藝術品反還問題 楊智傑

2. 克林姆畫作 • Adele Bloch-Bauer, in her will（遺願）, asked her husband to donate（捐贈） the Klimt（克林姆） paintings to the Austrian State Gallery upon his death. • She died in 1925 from meningitis（腦膜炎）. When the Nazis took over Austria, her widowed（守寡） husband had to flee（逃走） to Switzerland.

3. 被納粹沒收 • His property（財產）, including the Klimt paintings, was confiscated（沒收）. In his 1945 testament（遺囑）, Bloch-Bauer designated（指定） his nephew（姪兒） and nieces（姪女）, including Maria Altmann, as the inheritors（繼承人） of his estate（資產）.

4. 阿戴爾希望畫作留在奧地利 • As Bloch-Bauer's pictures had remained in Austria, the government took the position that the testament of Adele Bloch-Bauer had determined that these pictures were to stay there.

5. 經過仲裁，最後還給阿爾德 • After a protracted（拖延的） court battle in the United States and in Austria (see Republic of Austria v. Altmann), binding arbitration（仲裁） by the Austrian court established in 2006 that Maria Altmann was the rightful owner of this and four other paintings by Klimt.

6. 至美國訴訟 • Republic of Austria v. Altmann, 541 U.S. 677 (2004), was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act（外國主權豁免法） applies retroactively（溯及既往的）.

7. 不溯及既往原則 • It is one of the most recent cases that deals with the “anti-retroactivity doctrine”（不溯及既往原則）, which is a doctrine that holds that courts should not construe（解釋） a statute to apply retroactively (to apply to situations that arose before it was enacted) unless there is a clear statutory intent that it would do so.

8. 外國主權豁免法 • This means that, regarding lawsuits filed after its enactment, the FSIA standards of sovereign immunity and its exceptions apply even to conduct that took place before 1976.

9. 允許在美國訴訟 • The result of this case for the plaintiff, Maria Altmann, was that she was authorized to proceed with a civil action against Austria in a U.S. federal district court for recovery of a painting stolen by the Nazis and then housed（藏於） in a government museum.

10. 奧地利訴訟費用太高 • As the Supreme Court noted in its decision, Altmann had already tried suing the museum before in Austria, but was forced to voluntarily dismiss（撤回） her case because of Austria‘s rule that court costs are proportional（按比例） to the amount in controversy (in this case, the enormous monetary value of the painting).

11. 訴訟費用過高所以才至美國訴訟 • That is, just to file her complaint in an Austrian court, she would have had to pay a filing fee of $135,000 (an outrageous（無節制、不道德的、無恥的） requirement when measured by American standards of due process).

12. 只解決程序問題未解決實質問題 • Although Altmann‘s forum shopping（選購論壇） was quite transparent, Justice Stephen Breyer, in his concurring opinion（協同意見）, emphasized that the Court was dealing purely with the FSIA retroactivity issue and not with "any legal determination about the merits of Austrian legal procedures."

13. 奧地利仲裁 • As a result of the Court‘s decision, both parties agreed to arbitration（仲裁） in an Austrian court in 2005, which in turn ruled in favor of Altmann on 16 January 2006.