Restitution of the Guelph Treasure was first requested in 2008 by heirs to some of the Jewish art dealers in the consortium. The Beratende Kommission (Advisory Commission) concluded in 2014 that there was no basis for such restitution. Several of these heirs filed a lawsuit with the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., in 2015.
In 2008, several individuals (who claim to be heirs of some of the art dealers who sold the Guelph Treasure to the Prussian State in 1935) asked for restitution of the collection. SPK conducted detailed scholarly research into the circumstances of the 1935 sale and concluded that the conditions for restitution were not met. The sale is a very distinct and singular case with a unique set of facts behind it. It does not qualify as a forced sale due to Nazi persecution, although the sellers included Jews living in Germany and abroad. The following historical facts, which have been verified by source materials, support this determination:
- The purchase price paid was a market price during the Great Depression that followed the U.S. stock market crash of 1929.
- The sellers received the agreed purchase price in the form of cash and rare works of art, and no restrictions were placed on how they could use these proceeds.
- Since 1930, the Guelph Treasure had been located outside Germany, and the German state had no access to it at any time during the sales negotiations.
The Advisory Commission ruled in 2014: No forced sale
In 2012, the foundation and the applicants for restitution decided to appeal to the Advisory Commission chaired by the former President of the Federal Constitutional Court, Prof. Dr. Jutta Limbach (†). After reviewing the documents submitted, the Commission also held a hearing.
In March 2014, the Advisory Commission recommended that the Guelph Treasure not be restituted, as it was not a case of forced sale due to Nazi persecution. Both parties had announced that they would accept the Commission's recommendation. The case appeared to be closed with the Commission's recommendation.
2015-2023: Proceedings in the US – dismissed due to lack of jurisdiction
On February 24, 2015, the lawyers representing some of the applicants in the restitution claim announced that they had filed a lawsuit in a court in Washington, D.C. (United States) for the return of the Guelph Treasure (Philipp and Stiebel vs. Federal Republic of Germany and Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz).
The Stiftung Preußischer Kulturbesitz is of the opinion that the lawsuit does not belong in a U.S. court. It therefore filed a “motion to dismiss” with the District Court for the District of Columbia in Washington, D.C. in 2016. After several years of litigation, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. The unanimous decision states, among other things, that U.S. law cannot be determinative for the entire world. The case was referred back to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. On July 15, 2023, the Court of Appeals dismissed the lawsuit in accordance with the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court.
2025: Approval for a new trial in Germany
The heirs of Alice Koch, who were not represented in the original proceedings, submitted new documents to the SPK in 2022. These documents prove that Konsortin had to pay Reich flight tax a few months after the sale of the Guelph Treasure. However, in the SPK's opinion, they do not show any significant changes with regard to the sale of the Guelph Treasure.
After the new documents became known in March 2024, the applicants from 2008 again approached the Advisory Commission. Another group of potential beneficiaries also approached the Advisory Commission in April of the same year. A third group of potential beneficiaries has so far refrained from doing so.
The SPK finds itself faced with conflicting claims: the claimants are not acting jointly. Various legal successors of individual consortia are represented by different legal representatives. The parties involved also have different opinions as to who is actually entitled to compensation.
The SPK 2025 agreed to a new proceeding before the Advisory Commission, even though many questions remained unresolved. It also filed its own application so that the proceeding would also take other possible claims into account.
On December 1, 2025, the Arbitration Tribunal for Nazi-Looted Art replaced the Commission.
Recommendation of the Advisory Commission
“The Advisory Commission […] is of the opinion that the sale of the Welfenschatz was not a compulsory sale due to persecution. It cannot therefore recommend the return of the Welfenschatz to the heirs of the four art dealers and any other previous co-owners.”
Recommendation of the Advisory Commission (“Guelph Treasure”)
