I am grateful to Patrick Boylan for confirming that the proper course of action 
for a museum is not to accept a prospective donation while ownership is 
contested in the courts (or is uncertain in any other way).

What can be done if a museum does not follow this proper course of action?

In the Denney case, Mayor Dominique Baudis accepted  the donation on behalf of the city of Toulouse and its museum while knowing that ownership was being contested in the courts. He says that he took the decision to accept  "in full knowledge of the facts." 

Supposing a similar situation were to occur elsewhere, what counter pressure, if any, could be brought to bear to get the donation mothballed pending the outcome of litigation on ownership? 


For reference: "Lessons from the Denney Collection" 
http://museum-security.org/denney/index.htm

Antony Anderson

----------
From:   Boylan P[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   02 May 1997 11:52
To:     [log in to unmask]
Subject:        CITY OF  TOULOUSE RE DENNEY CASE:

Amongst the several points in his long and detailed response to mine:

>On Thu, 1 May 1997, Antony F Anderson wrote:

> Subject: RE: staff code of ethics
>
> I maintain that a prudent course of action for the City of Toulouse -
> consistent with following the ICOM Code - would have been
> to mothball plans for a donation until all ownership issues had
> been definitively settled in the Spanish Courts. However the City
> thought differently and went ahead with the donation.

Of course I agree that this is the proper course of action for a
museum to take while ownership is contested in the courts (or uncertain in
any other way).

Patrick Boylan