Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  cultural good
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
This article attempts to analyze the legal regulations developed in the field of cultural heritage protection after 1989, with particular reference to the acquis after 2003. A thesis has been formulated that the period after 1989 was characterized by a clear redefinition of objectives and priorities in the field of cultural heritage protection compared to the period of the People’s Republic of Poland. To prove the thesis, the author referred to legal acts and jurisprudence, as well as to literature based on studies and articles from scientific journals on the legal protection of monuments. The research methods used were the legal acts analysis method and the literature analysis method. The presented content shows that the issue of legal protection of cultural heritage in Poland after 1989 was treated as one of the most important aspects of the long-term cultural policy of the state, although the work on the new law lasted for a relatively long time, 14 years after the political and structural transformation. The 2003 Act regulated a number of important issues regarding the protection of monuments and the care for monuments, redefining, and in many aspects setting, new directions in the field of cultural heritage protection in Poland. At the same time the legislator rejected the possibility of continuing the direction in this sphere, which had been chosen in the period between 1944 and 1989.
EN
The subject of this paper is an analysis of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention, preceded by an introductory paragraph presenting earlier attempts at similar solutions undertaken by the international community. The absolute duty of returning a stolen cultural good is then discussed, followed by a reference to the limitation dates and indemnity payable to the buyer who has exercised due care while purchasing the work of art. Certain specific solutions are also presented. A similar analysis is then made in respect of the possessor of a stolen or illegally exported cultural good. Some recommendations for improvements to the solutions of the Convention are proposed.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.