Twitter share

Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Stolen Art Watch, Nazi Anti-Semetic German Sonderweg Alive and Kicking in Vichy French Elite, Quisling Morality !!

Adolphe Fraenkel (1930), the original owner of the looted collection.


room where some of the Bouvier collection is shown at the Carnavalet Museum;
Please take the time to digest this tragic story and if anyone out there can offer Regine Elkan support or assistance please don't hesitate to contact her.
Art Hostage
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Régine Elkan
> 31 Impasse des Coquelicots
> 13750 Plan d’Orgon
> (04) 90-73-25-13
>
> September 11, 2008
>
> Marie-Christine Labourdette
> Direction des Musées de France
> 6, rue des Pyramides
> 75041 Paris Cedex 01
> Par Fax: (33) 1 40 15 34 10
> Par e-mail: Marie-Christine.labourdette@culture.gouv.fr
>
> Théo Klein
> Président du Musée d’Art et d’Histoire du Judaïsme
> Hôtel de Saint-Aignan
> 71, rue du Temple
> 75003 Paris
> Par Fax: (33) 1 42 72 97 47
> Par e-mail: secretariat-general@mahj.org
>
> RE : Symposium: Spoliation, Restitution, Compensation and
> Provenance Research: The Fate of Works of Art recovered
> after the Second World War (September 14-September 15 2008,
> Paris, organized by Direction des musées de France and
> Musée d’art et d’histoire du Judaïsme, (« LE PILLAGE
> DES OEUVRES D’ART: CONNAÎTRE ET RÉPARER”)
>
> Ms. Labourdette, Mr. Klein :
>
> I am the daughter of Rosalie Elkan (born April 04, 1909,
> deceased January 01, 1998) and Robert Elkan (born November
> 1902, deceased March 20, 1968). My parents, along with other
> family members were victims of significant economic and
> financial spoliations during the Vichy Regime.
>
> As you probably know, in May 2002, I initiated a
> restitution action with the « Commission d’Indemnisation
> des Victimes de Spoliations » (« CIVS »). Specifically,
> this action involved the so-called « Bouvier » collection,
> which was bequeathed to the Carnavalet Museum in Paris,
> France in 1965-1968. The executor in charge of this bequest
> was Jean Bourdel, a former President of the Paris Chamber of
> « Notaires ».
>
> Following the restitution action with the CIVS, I initiated
> a suit with the Paris Administrative Court against the
> Office of the of the French Prime Minister on February 10,
> 2006, since the CIVS reports into the Office of the French
> Prime Minister.
>
> Under your initiative, a symposium will be held this
> week-end on the issue of “Spoliation, Restitution,
> Compensation and Provenance Research: The Fate of Works of
> Art recovered after the Second World War”. During this
> symposium, the CIVS will have a significant opportunity to
> present its views on the resolution of restitution claims.
>
> With this letter, I wanted to make sure that the organizers
> of this symposium also hear the position of claimants on the
> restitution procedures run by the CIVS.
>
> My claim with the CIVS, along with my complaint with the
> Paris Administrative Tribunal, include the Fraenkel estate,
> which was aryanized during the Vichy Regime. This estate
> included substantial financial assets, and most notably a
> very significant collection of XVIIIth Century French Fine
> Furniture (more than 200 artworks). This collection is now
> being held by the City of Paris and is one of the largest
> collections of the Carnavalet Museum.
>
> As of today, these procedures have unearthed the following
> facts :
>
> - The heirs of Adolphe Fraenkel were not aware of the
> extent of the Fraenkel estate or of its looting until 1993 ;
> since 1993, the heirs of Adolphe Fraenkel have been
> diligent in preserving their rights by performing research
> of the artworks, by attempting to resolve the dispute
> directly with the Carnavalet Museum and the City of Paris,
> and by following the procedures established by the CIVS ;
> - City of Paris documents establish that the Carnavalet
> Museum violated the statutes in effect in 1966 during the
> bequest procedure of the Bouvier collection ;
> - The executor of the Bouvier bequest, Jean Bourdel, was
> also the Notaire who had control of the Fraenkel estate, and
> was the President of the Paris Chamber of « Notaires »
> from 1943 to 1944. As such, Jean Bourdel played a central
> role in the aryanisation and looting of real estate assets
> held by Jewish families in Paris during this period. On
> this point, the National Archives (AJ38) contradict the
> assessment of the Matteoli Commission Report issued in 1999.
>
> When the CIVS was founded by then Prime Minister Lionel
> Jospin on September 10, 1999, I wanted to follow the «
> rules of the game » which the French Government had
> announced, by submitting my claims to a so-called
> independent arbitral process managed by a quasi-governmental
> commission, rather than resolving my claims with either
> French or foreign courts.
>
> Following a six year process with CIVS, our experience has
> been extremely disappointing. As my suit against the French
> Prime Minister points out, the claims procedures and
> associated proceedings were marred by significant arbitrary
> abuses and the complete absence of due process:
>
> - The CIVS consistently refused to proceed with appropriate
> and necessary research and investigation with the Bourdel
> Notarial Office, whereas this Office has all the appropriate
> records and information necessary to properly assess the
> Fraenkel estate. As a matter of fact, a simple
> investigation with the Bourdel Notarial office would have
> allowed the CIVS to avoid issuing absurd and contradictory
> interpretations of the outcome of the Fraenkel estate in its
> June 25, 2004 opinion. These erroneous conclusions were
> literally made up with the Government representative to the
> CIVS, who never verified his assertions with the Bourdel
> Notarial Office or never provided and evidence or
> foundations to support them. The Government representative
> orally presented these conclusions without a written
> transcript during a CIVS hearing, while I was never allowed
> to challenge these assertions either orally or in writing
> throughout the proceedings.
> - The CIVS proceedings were marred by significant due
> process abuses when it investigated and reviewed the claims
> : most notably, the CIVS refused to admit a legal
> certificate of attestation, which established that I was a
> beneficiary of the Fraenkel collection. Most notably, the
> CIVS pressured Government officials in attempting to
> fraudulently create a new attestation contradicting the
> document I presented to the Commission.
> - The CIVS refused to investigate or perform any provenance
> research with either the city of Paris or with the Genealogy
> Research firm Coutot-Roehig regarding the bequest of the
> Bouvier collection to the City of Paris. Following a
> request by me to the CADA (“Commission d’Accès aux
> Documents Administratifs”), I obtained on my own from the
> city of Paris certain limited records which showed the
> bequest of the Bouvier collection to the City of Paris
> violated the statutes involving bequest to public
> institutions in effect at the time.
> - Following repeated requests, the CIVS refused to perform
> any provenance research or to provide me with any of the
> files containing the authentication of expert opinion
> regarding all artworks including the Bouvier collection,
> most specifically the authentication performed by Etienne
> Ader in 1965. During a hearing on June 25, 2004, the
> Carnavalet Museum Director, Jean-Marc Léri, conceded that
> he was intimately familiar with the details of both the
> Bouvier collection AND the Fraenkel collection. This
> statement, which was not recorded in any transcript by the
> CIVS, is a vivid confirmation that the City of Paris has in
> its possession of all of the records necessary for an
> appropriate provenance research and which it did not
> communicate. The Carnavalet Museum Director also conceded
> that these records did lead to an identification of a
> Fraenkel provenance for the Bouvier collection. This
> admission shows that the City of Paris and the Carnavalet
> Museum
> have in their possession all of the appropriate
> information to perform complete and appropriate provenance
> research in order to trace back the Fraenkel collection.
> However, the Carnavalet Museum and the CIVS, which had the
> statutory obligation to perform the necessary research with
> the City of Paris, have both violated the ICOM Code of
> Ethics, the UNIDROIT Convention and the Washington
> Principles (December 03, 1998), which require a Museum to
> investigate and perform a “due diligence” research
> regarding the provenance of an artwork.
>
> Therefore, I wanted to make sure that my position is known
> : the CIVS procedures are a failure, since the CIVS does not
> apply the investigation rules which are imposed by statute,
> it does not respect the principle of confrontation of
> evidence by both parties, and it attempt to manufacture
> false evidence.
>
> If, during your symposium, the CIVS representatives provide
> any indication they are ready to reconsider their procedures
> regarding my claims, I am fully available to meet with any
> DMF representatives.
>
> If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact
> me at the address above or by email at
> regine_elkan@yahoo.fr. I thank you in advance for your help
> throughout this process.
>
> Sincerely yours

> Régine ELKAN


Plan of Orgon, on February 10, 2006
Graft Administrative Court of Paris
Administrative court of Paris
7, street of Jouy
75181 Paris Cedex 04
Telephone : 01 44 59 44 00
Telefax : 01 44 59 46 46
REQUEST IN CANCELLATION FOR ABUSE OF POWERS
decision of the Commission on the Compensation for the Victims of the Spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in force during Ocupation (“CIVS”), communicated by mail of the President of the Commission dated December 15, 2005, sent by the CIVS on December 27 2005, and received by me on December 29, 2005, and refusing the application of re-examination of a recommendation emitted by the CIVS in restricted formation on June 25, 2004.
On the base of the R-411-1 articles and R-421-1 of the code of administrative justice and for violation of the provisions of the texts described in section VI below relating to focntionnement of the CIVS.
Presented by
Mrs Régine Elkan (“Applicant”)
Against
Jean-Marc Saved
Secretary General of the Government
Matignon hotel
57, rue de Varenne
75700 Paris
Such 33-1-42-75-80-00


TABLE OF CONTENT
Paragraph Page
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I. Exposed facts 3
II. Ask 4
III. Admissibility of the request as for the deadlines 4
IV. Admissibility of the request as for the nature of the decision
disputed in what it constitutes “a decision making objection” 5
V. Admissibility of the request as for the opposing party 5
VI. On the serious doubt as for the legality of the disputed decision 6
VI.1 First means: defects of procedure 6
a. Taking of evidence of the CIVS 6
B. Absence of research of the parts and elements suitable 6
I. Notarial study Bourdel 6
II. Donation of the Collection Herdsman at the Town of Paris 7
III. Conditions of acceptance of the legacy by the Town of Paris 7
iv. Individual requests near the Town of Paris 8
v. Case of the Deposits and Consignments 8
VI. Financial credits 8
vii. Prefecture of Police force 8
C. Notarial certificate 9
D. Premature end of the instruction 9
VI.2 Second Means: material errors of appreciation 9
1. Concerning the succession Adolphe Fraenkel 9
a. Control goods 9
B. Evolution of the Successional Credits 10
C. Erroneous interpretation of the testamentary provisions 10
I. Legacy with Emilie Fraenkel 10
II. Will of Adolphe Fraenkel 11
III. Hereditary reserve 11
D. Source of the Collection Herdsman 12
2. Concerning the Private mansion to the 42 Kléber Avenue 13
3. Concerning the station of agent to the Markets of Paris 13
a. Accounts of guarantee 13
B. Post of agent 14
4. Concerning the other testamentary provisions 14
a. Conernant the succession Jeanne Fraenkel 14
B. Concerning the Elkan-Schubert succession 15
C. Concerning the Schmitko succession 15
D. Concerning the succession Siegfried Elkan 15
E. Concerning the succession Joseph Subert 15
VI.3 Third Means: New facts 16
a. Definition of a fact new 16
b. Role of Jean Bourdel 16
c. Role of Henriette Herdsman 16
D. Conditions of acquisition of works of art by the Carnavalet Museum 17
E. Procedure near the Room of the Notaries of Haute-Savoie 18
VI.4 Fourth means: Decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris 1999 19
VII. Goes down for hearing 19
VIII. Ask refunding of the irrépétibles expenses 19

Mr. President of the Court,
The applicant has the honor to seize you of a request in cancellation for abuse of power decision of the CIVS, communicated by mail of the President of the Commission dated December 15, 2005, sent by the CIVS on December 27, 2005, and received by me on December 29, 2005, and refusing my application of réeexamen of a recommendation emitted by the CIVS in restricted formation on June 25, 2004.
The request of the applicant is justified taking into consideration consideration on the form and the bottom.
1. On the form: the decision of the CIVS is sullied with considerable defects of procedures relating to the operation of this one;
2. on the bottom:
a. the decision of the CIVS is sullied with illegality in what it results from many glaring errors of appreciation as for the evaluation of the claim of the applicant at the CIVS;
B. this decision revêt character of a decision making objection;
C. this decision is also in contradiction with the decisions of other French jurisdictions concerning the restitution of goods despoiled during the Occupation during the Mode of Vichy.
I. Exposed facts
1. History before 2002: The applicant, following the discovery of the testamentary provisions of his back grandfather, Adolphe Fraenkel, of which it was unaware of all until 1993, expresses near the Town of Paris several requests for restitution of the Collection known as “Herdsman”, collection of objets d'art of great value, which was the object of a donation to the Carnavalet Museum in 1968.
2. Between 1993 and 2002, requiring it addresses itself also directly near other institutions (Prefecture of Police force of Paris, Case of the Deposits and Consignments) concerning the evolution of certain patrimonial elements of its family for the period of the Occupation lasting the mode of Vichy.
3. By decree number 99-778 of September 10, 1999, the Commission for the Compensation for the Victims of Spoliations occurred of the fact of the legislations anti-semites in force during Ocupation (“CIVS”), is created.
4. Following the refusal repeated of the Carnavalet Museum and the Management of the Cultural Affairs of Town of Paris, the applicant lodges with the CIVS a request for restitution and compensation concerning for the patrimonial elements several members of its family, of which some disappeared during the period from the mode from Vichy. This request at the CIVS, dated May 12, 2002, includes in particular the whole of the Collection Herdsman.
5. From May 2002 to December 2003, several exchanges of mails supplement the file of the claim of the applicant.
6. The Mayor of Paris confirms by mail of July 8, 2002 near the applicant whom it will support the instruction of the file of claim of the applicant at the CIVS.
7. The Minister for the Culture and Transport confirms by mail of December 4, 2002 that it examines the request of the applicant and that this one is transmitted to the Management of the Museums of France.
8. On December 23, 2003, the applicant receives a report/ratio of the CIVS concerning the state of the instruction of the claim. With two recoveries, by mail of January 20, 2004 and February 29, 2004, the applicant describes at the CIVS the errors of instructions and the material errors of appreciation contained in this dated December 23, 2003 report/ratio.
9. By mail of June 25, 2004, the CIVS emits its recommendation, without taking into account any elements described by the applicant in the mails mentioned at the preceding point.
10. The applicant subjects consequently a request for re-examination thus that a dispute of the recommendation of the CIVS dated August 29, 2004.
11. The applicant, by a series of mails at the CIVS, in particular dated November 19, 2004,May 2, 2005, July 2, 2005, and of September 21 2005, subjects at the CIVS:
a. new elements, within the meaning of article 8-1-1 of the Decree n°99-778 of September 10, 1999, instituting the CIVS, and which indicates that “the applicants who dispute a recommendation put forth by the commission in restricted formation can request a new file examination their by the plenary formation. They address this request to the president of the commission by providing the new parts or by indicating the new facts on which their dispute is based or by clarifying the points on which the recommendation appears to them sullied with material error”;
B. additional evidence confirming the material error of appreciation established in the report/ratio of December 23, 2003 and the recommendation of June 25, 2004.
12. By mail of December 15, 2005, sent by the CIVS on December 27 2005, the CIVS refuses the application of re-examination of the applicant.
Following this rejection, the applicant considers that the preceding gracious appeal procedure a step near the Administrative Court was initiated by the applicant in the form of the request for re-examination, step which has been just rejected by the CIVS by confirming by its letter of December 15, 2005 its refusal to consider this request of the applicant. It is this last decision of refusal whose applicant disputes the cogency and legality.
II. Ask
The applicant asks the Court, on the base of articles R. 411-1 and 421-1 of the Code of Administrative Justice, the cancellation of the decision of the CIVS, refusing the application of re-examination described above.
III. Admissibility of the request as for the deadlines.
The disputed decision is dated December 15, 2005 and was sent by the CIVS on December 27, 2005, as appendix 1 shows it (copy of the postmark ), and was accepted by the applicant on December 29, 2005. Consequently, the two months deadline normally granted the applicant to present proceedings for annulment of the decision is largely respected, insofar as this one is lodged with the Administrative Court of Paris before the time, either on the basis of dispatch date, or on the basis of date of reception of the letter of the CIVS by the applicant. Consequently, the request of the applicant is admissible with regard to the times of recourse.
IV. Admissibility of the request as for the nature of the decision disputed in what it constitutes “a decision making objection”
This recourse for abuse of power is directed against an act making objection. An administrative act is considered to make objection when it produces by him even legal effects, that it modifies legal scheduling, that it reaches the rights and obligations of managed.
Incontestably, the decision makes objection, because:
- The décsision of the CIVS produces important legal effects:
1. in what it deprives the applicant of the rights of recourse at the CIVS concerning its claims relating to a considerable inheritance of value;
2. in what it constitutes a decision without call at the CIVS, since the statute of the CIVS does not envisage any appeal procedure if the CIVS refuses to consider the request of the applicant;
- The decision of the CIVS affects the rights of requédrant in what it deprives the applicant of any access to a resolution of its claim in equity.
V. Admissibility of the request as for the opposing party.
The disputed decision comes from the CIVS. The statute of the CIVS is described in the following lawful texts:
1. Decree n° 99-778 of September 10, 1999 establishing a commission on the compensation for the victims of spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in force during the Occupation;
2. Decree n° 2000-932 of September 25, 2000 modifying the decree No 99-778 of September 10, 1999 establishing a commission on the compensation for the victims of spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in force during the Occupation;
3. Decree n° 2000-1023 of October 19, 2000 carrying application of the provisions of the third subparagraph of article 31 of the law No 78-17 of January 6, 1978 to the file implemented by the commission on the compensation for the victims of spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in force during the Occupation;
4. Decree n° 2001-530 of June 20, 2001 modifying the decree No 99-778 of September 10, 1999 establishing a commission on the compensation for the victims of spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in strength during the Occupation.
In particular, article 8-2, Created by Decree n°2000-932 of September 25, 2000 art. 4 (JORF September 26, 2000) establishes that, “When the commission proposes that the State takes responsibility for its a measure of compensation, it transmits its recommendation to the Prime Minister (secretariat general of the Government). The decisions of compensation made by the Prime Minister (secretariat general of the Government) on the basis for the recommendations of the commission are notified with interested and the National office of ex-serviceman and victims of war which is charged to carry out them. »
These texts thus provide that the decisions of the CIVS become the base of administrative decisions made by the secretariat general of the Government. However, this last A émi, on base report/ratio of June 25 2004, a letter of the “Management of the Administrative and Financial Services of the Prime Minister” relating to the administrative decision in the connection of the applicant concerning his claims at the CIVS, in date of August 16, 2004.
The rejection by the CIVS of the request for re-examination by the applicant on December 15, 2005 confirms, in the absence of any other mail of the secretariat general of the government her dated August 16, 2004 initial decision. By consequent, the applicant can carry out his recourse near Mr. President of the Administrative Court only against Jean-Marc Sauvé, Secrétaire General of the Government, Hôtel Matignon, 57, rue de Varenne, 75700 Paris.
VI. On the serious doubt as for the legality of the disputed decision
VI.1 First means: defects of procedure
a. Taking of evidence of the CIVS
The Decree No 99-778 of September 10, 1999 instituting the CIVS stipulates in its article 4 that:
« Each request is informed by a rapporteur who carries out the checks necessary. The rapporteur can convene any person whose hearing appears useful to him and solicit of any third qualified an opinion or a consultation.”
Moreover , the same Decree stipulates in its article 5:
“A the exit of the instruction, the rapporteur formulates in his report/ratio of the proposals justified by holding account, if necessary, of the already before versed compensations to the applicant.”
Lastly, Internet site of the CIVS mentions, in the report/ratio public of #3 activity, following the commission of Washington, dated May 31, 2002 that:
“ the quality of the procedures of the CIVS with, in particular the respect of the principle of the contradictory one, which constitutes a base of the French right and gives the possibility to each part of taking note of the elements of the file and of pressing its possible observations, applies in an identical whatever the nature of spoliation, banking or material way”.
B. Absence of research of the parts and elements suitable
An examination of the parts commnuniquées by the CIVS which describes the research carried out by its services within the framework of the requests for claim of the applicant show serious gaps which cannot be explained by accidental omissions.
I. Notarial study Bourdel
The research carried out by the CIVS does not include any exchange of mail with the Bourdel Study. However this one, as it was indicated by the applicant at the CIVS to many recoveries, can be only the only entity which makes it possible to confirm or to cancel all the analyses made around the successions Adolphe Fraenkel, Jean Suzanne Fraenkel and Schmitko family in particular. The absence of any exchange or seeks with L `Etude Bourdel confirms with the time a legal flaw low register in the taking of evidence and confirms the whole of the material errors of appreciation carried out in this file.
Moreover , the testamentary provisions of Adolphe Fraenkel, communicated by the applicant, must be evaluated in the light of the testamentary provisions of Emilie Fraenkel and Henriette Bouvier, that the CIVS can also very easily obtain Bourdel study. However, these steps, essential for the suitable instruction of the claims of the applicant, were clearly not taken.
II. Donation of the Collection Herdsman at the Town of Paris
With regard to the succession Adolphe Fraenkel, there cannot be an unspecified instruction closure without the search for heirs carried out by the Town of Paris in 1968, following the donation of the Collection Herdsman to the Carnavalet Museum. This research led to correspondences of which with a notarial study with Sallanches, Haute-Savoie, whose applicant does not have copy. These elements were the subject of many letters, in particular:
- near the Town of Paris;
- near the genealogical Study Coutot-Roehrig;
- near the Minister of Justice, in order to request its assistance in obtaining these documents near the Notarial study Dalmais-Cuvit-Avrillon-Jacquiot, localised in Sallanches, Haute-Savoie, and which has these documents.
- near the Notarial Study indicated above, near the Court of Bankruptcy of Bonneville, ainis that Room of the Notaries of Haute-Savoie.
The whole of these steps remained without success to date. However, this essential element in the apprehension of the file was easily résolvable by the CIVS if this one had used its capacity of instruction to obtain these documents, in particular near the Bourdel study. However, these steps, essential for the suitable instruction of the claims of the applicant, were clearly not taken.
III. Conditions of acceptance of the legacy by the Town of Paris
The Bouvier legacy for the benefit of the town of Paris in 1968 was managed by Jean Bourdel and his son Alain Bourdel as executors. This representation as an executor of Henriette Herdsman, at least constitutes a serious failure with the deontologic rules of the notarial profession in terms of conflicts of interest. Indeed, this acceptance, which, would have being subjected to an administrative opinion Prefecture of Paris or Town hall of Paris, had required by the Town council a search for heirs during which my mother was contacted. However, we did not find any document of its share gone back to 1966 when it gives up any claim on the Bouvier collection near the Prefecture of the Town of Paris.
Moreover , the aunt of the applicant, Simone Subert, contacted forever during the search for heirs to 1967 and forever expressly given up the Bouvier legacy for the benefit of the Carnavalet Museum, which should have been the subject of a file properly documented by the Prefecture of Paris and the Town council of the Town of Paris. This file forever requested by the CIVS, and forever provided, neither by the Town of Paris, neither by the Bourdel Study, nor by the genealogical Study Coutot-Roehrig. Consequently, and in the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there is a legal flaw low register as for the instruction of his claim.
iv. Individual requests near the Town of Paris
The applicant addressed himself in an individual way, before and during the period of instruction near the Town of Paris and auprès of the genealogical Study Coutot-Roehrig, in order to ask for the documents relating to the search for heirs led to the moment to this donation. These steps took action on no co-operation, nor obtaining documents of the share of the parts mentioned above.
v. Case of the Deposits and Consignments
The received correspondence on behalf of the Case of the Deposits and Consignments into dated April 4, 2003 is in contradiction with the elements provided by the applicant at the CVIS within the framework of the taking of evidence. In effect, one of the parts provided to the Commission is a receipt of transfer emitted by the Case of the Deposits and Consignments on an account of guarantee comprising of the Treasury bills in the name of Robert Elkan, the father of the applicant. It is consequently impossible for the Case of the Deposits and Consignments to affirm that it does not have any trace in its files with the name of Robert Elkan. This aspect shows, once more, that the process of research of the claims was not carried out in agreement with the Decree n° 99-778 of September 10, 1999 instituting the CIVS, which stipulate in its article 4 that “Each request is informed by a rapporteur who carries out the checks necessary”.
VI. Financial credits
Important financial credits of the succession Adolphe Fraenkel were managed by the load of Stockbroker Andre Bourdel. This load is present in many files of spoliations of financial credits found in the section of files known as AJ38. The CIVS must thus obtain the files of this load, either coming from files known as AJ38, or on behalf of the investment company or the company of purse which had taken again the accounts and credits of the load of stockbroker André Bourdel.
vii. Prefecture of Police force
The received correspondence on behalf of the Prefecture of dated May 19 Police force 2003 is in contradiction with a mail received by the applicant me on behalf of the Prefecture indicating the existence of files of denunciation of the personnel of the Markets of the Town of Paris in the files of the Prefecture of Police force. However, Robert Elkan was probably only Juif occupying a station of agent to the Markets before the Occupation. This element makes it possible to conclude that research necessary to the Prefecture of Police force to find the files concerning the father of the applicant is not insurmountable and were not carried out.
C. Notarial certificate
One of the documents included in the claim of the applicant, relating to the analysis and the interpretation of the testamentary provisions of Adolphe Franekel, is a notarial certificate establishing the successional devolution of this last for the benefit of the mother of the applicant. This document was not taken into account by the CIVS in his report/ratio of December 23, 2003 like daN its recommendation of June 25, 2004.
Moreover , the documents of the CIVS include exchanges of mail with the Meissonnier Study, whereas the applicant had expressly specified in writing with the CIVS and this study that only Giroux Master, notary in Paris, were entitled to inform the businesses of the applicant, insofar as it is this notary who is in load of the payment of the succession of the mother of the applicant, Rosalie Elkan. The applicant thus reiterates his observation concerning the exclusion of the certificate of Giroux Master, who was communicated to the CIVS by mail into dated January 20, 2004. He is inexpliquable why the rapporteur completely was unaware of this document in his mails, opinion and reports/ratios, and did not produce any part or document justifying its contradictory analysis of this succession. Consequently, and in the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there is a legal flaw low register as for the instruction of his claims.
D. Premature end of the instruction
By submitting a report/ratio to the CIVS, the rapporteur, according to the texts mentioned above, enclosed the instruction prematurely whereas the instruction was clearly limited to very few research, and from the essential elements near institutions directly concerned with the succession Adolphe Fraenkel were not obtained.
The applicant thus concludes that the instruction was closed prematurely, which thus represents vice procedure that the applicant asks to rectify by cancelling the decision of the CIVS in order to guarantee the good course of the mission of the CIVS.
VI.2 Second Means: material errors of appreciation
1. Concerning the succession Adolphe Fraenkel
a. Control goods
In effect, like he was recalled to you during the session of the CIVS of June 25 2004, the whole of the credits of the Fraenkel family, in particular the whole of the patrimonial elements forming the Credit Net of Succession of the Succession Adolphe Fraenkel, were under the effective control of the Bourdel Study, in particular:
- rental incomes of the Private mansion Kléber Avenue coming from the Alavoine Company;
- possible inventories or incomes coming from other real goods, in particular from the grounds located in Fontenay on Loing;
- inventories of movable goods required by the calculation of the Community of Emilie Goods Fraenkel-Adolphe Fraenkel compared to the Succession Adolphe Fraenkel;
- inventories of financial credits coming from these successions and having to be maintained with the profit of minor the Lucienne Subert, then Simone Subert;
- Inventories of goods related to the Schmitko succession.
As indicated higher, the heiresses, because of their youth during the Occupation, very were unaware of reality of the testamentary provisions of Adolphe Fraenkel up to one recent time:
- Lucienne Schmitko died during the war;
- Rosalie Elkan was informed of this provision only in 1993;
- Simone Subert was informed of this provision only in 1999.
B. Evolution of the Successional Credits
As I indicated in my letter of February 29, 2004, of the elements of the credits previously quoted, in particular the Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber, were aryanisés during the Occupation, such as this was envisaged by the legislation anti-semite of the Mode of Vichy. As I indicated it to you in other mails, all the notaries were held of aryaniser the whole of the goods with the Jewish surname for this period.
C. Erroneous interpretation of the testamentary provisions
I. Legacy with Emilie Fraenkel
The CIVS supports in its opinion of June 25, 2004 that the third wife of Adolphe Fraenkel, born Emilie Poncelet, was instituted sole legatee of the collection Adolphe Fraenkel.
However, the interpretation of the CIVS is erroneous with the reading of the will of Adolphe Fraenkel, insofar as this one indicates that:
- Emilie Fraenkel, born Poncelet, accepted only the benefit of “lasting usufruct her life of the universality of all the goods being able to depend at the day on my death of the community on the goods existing between us without any other exception nor reserve” and at all does not designate beneficiary Emilie Fraenkel Adolphe Fraenkel formed by all the goods and credits preceding its marriage with Emilie Poncelet;
- Emilie Poncelet would be to be indicated sole legatee of the goods of Adolphe Fraenkel only “if my children have suddenly discussed some way that it is one of the clauses which precede by my will”.
However, with the knowledge of the applicant, this last clause could not apply bus:
- in 1931, two of the three small girls of Adolphe Fraenkel were minor;
- Simone Subert certified by a certificate provided by the applicant at the dated August 4, 2000 CIVS, that “it is only into 1999 that I discovered the true testamentary provision of Adolphe Fraenkel, who indicates well that its three grand-daughters were the heiresses of the whole of her succession”;
- The applicant and his mother, Rosalie Elkan, discovered this testamentary provision only in 1993, following requests near a notarial Study in Nice.
If the CIVS has documents showing that this clause was called upon, either by Adolphe Fraenkel, or by Emilie Fraenkel, and that consequently, Emilie Fraenkel was appointed sole legatee after 1931, which had to be the subject of a properly documented file, these documents were not provided within the framework of the request for access to the documents of the CIVS by the applicant.
In the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there are a legal flaw low register and an error of appreciation on the funds as for the instruction of his claim.
II. Will of Adolphe Fraenkel
The marriage contract between Adolphe Fraenkel and Emilie Poncelet was founded on the community of goods reduced to the acquisitions, which thus involves the following conclusions, in the light of the preceding paragraph:
- all the credits of Adolphe Fraenkel had by him before its marriage, in April 1923, concerned the succession Adolphe Fraenkel exclusively;
- all the credits of Emilie Poncelet had by it before its marriage, raised of its succession, and could thus be the subject of a donation to a third;
- all common credits, i.e. acquired during the marriage by the husbands, jointly or separately, belong at the community of goods, and, must be the subject of a division for half one, with the profit of Emilie Fraenkel and her heirs, the other with the profit of the heirs to Adolphe Fraenkel.
However, goodwill represented the da essence the community of goods between Adolphe Fraenkel and Emilie Fraenkel between 1923 and 1931. The collection Adolphe Fraenkel, as for it, had been made up essentially before 1922, since it was the increase and the place held by this collection which justified for Adolphe Fraenkel the removal of his offices located with 194 Boulevard St Germain in the Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber, acquired in 1922.
Heirs to Adolphe Fraenkel, i.e. its three grand-daughters, would have thus to profit:
- entirety of the incomes and products of the real credits had by Adolphe Fraenkel;
- entirety of the collection Adolphe Fraenkel;
- half of goodwill available to the death of Emilie Fraenkel.
If the CIVS has documents showing that the Credit Net of Succession of Adolphe Fraenkel would have distributed being in another way, which has to be the subject of a properly documented file, in particular by the Bourdel Study, it was not provided within the framework of the request for access to the documents of the CIVS by the applicant.
By consequent, and in the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there are a legal flaw low register and an important error of appreciation on the funds as for the instruction of his claim.
III. Hereditary reserve
At the time of the session of the Commission of June 25, 2004, the Commission considered that the Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber constituted the hereditary reserve for the benefit of the three grand-daughters of Adolphe Fraenkel.
However, notwithstanding the preceding paragraphs, a hereditary reserve, in the case of three surviving descendants would have required a minimal allowance of the ¾ of the credit net of succession to the three grand-daughters of Adolphe Fraenkel.
However a fast analysis of the credits of the two successions break up roughly as follows into 1931:
- Financial credits: 1.300.000 FF value 1930
- Private mansion Kléber Avenue: 700.000 FF value 1930
- Collection Adolphe Fraenkel: 3.500.000 FF value 1930
The hereditary reserve should thus have been made up, in worst case, element following, by admitting that 20% of the financial credits are ascribable A the community of goods between Adolphe Fraenkel and Emilie Fraenkel:
Leaves the credits in the succession Adolphe Fraenkel (excluding rehabilitation from half of the community of goods Adolphe Fraenkel-Emilie Fraenkel):
- Financial credits (80%): 1.040.000 FF value 1930
- Private mansion Kléber Avenue: 700.000 FF value 1930
- Collection Adolphe Fraenkel: 3.500.000 FF value 1930
TOTAL
Credit Net of Succession Adolphe Fraenkel: 5.240.000 FF
Minimal theoretical Hereditary reserve: 3.930.000 FF
The private mansion Avenue Kléber representing only 700.000FF, is approximately 13% of the approximate credit net of succession of the time, it was thus impossible that this one forms a possible hereditary reserve of the succession Adolphe Fraenkel. If the CIVS has documents showing that the Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber represents a hereditary reserve, which had to be the subject of a properly documented file, in particular by the Bourdel Study, these documents were not provided within the framework of the request for access to the documents of the CIVS by the applicant
By consequent, and in the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there are a legal flaw low register and an error of appreciation on the funds as with the instruction of its claim.
D. Source of the Collection Herdsman
During the meeting of the dated June 25, 2004, Mr Jean-Marc Léri, Preserving Commission General of the Inheritance of the Town of Paris charged with the Carnavalet Museum, present at the one of hearings of the CIVS, indicated itself his intimate knowledge of the two inventories, the Bouvier inventory and the Fraenkel inventory, which confirms well that the town of Paris holds essential information in the apprehension of this file, information which was not communicated and which the family of the applicant is unaware of completely. The Conservative of the Carnavalet Museum confirmed that its research had led well to the identification of a source going up with Adolphe Fraenkel for a certain number of parts exposed to the Carnavalet Museum.
This confirmation shows that the Town of Paris, its Direction of the Cultural Affairs and the Carnavalet Museum have all the elements well to carry out research of source necessary to the reconstitution of the inheritance of Adolphe Fraenkel.
Moreover , when the mother of the applicant recognized one of these parts at the time of a visit to the Carnavalet Museum in 1993, it described the part number 85 in the catalogue of the Collection Herdsman (“85-Chair Long in two parts, etc ”) as being a shepherdess or it slept being child. However, this declaration confirms well that this part had been acquired by Adolphe Fraenkel BEFORE 1922, since Rosalie Elkan had been born in 1909, and could thus form part in no form that it is community of goods Emilie Fraenkel-Adolphe Fraenkel appréhendable by Emilie. This part could form part only of the collection Adolphe Fraenkel, made up for essence before 1922. It is thus impossible for the Carnavalet Museum or the Town of Paris to justify the presence of this part to the Carnavalet Museum by an unspecified argument. However, in the light of the analysis of the will D `Adolphe Fraenkel mentioned above, it is well the whole of the Collection Herdsman which suffers from a problem of justification of source.
2. Concerning the Private mansion with 42 Avenue Kléber
The applicant found a certain number of documents tending to show that the Bourdel Study or the tenant of the Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber, the Alavoine Company, did not pay the entirety of the rents which had for the period of the Occupation to the heiresses of Adolphe Fraenkel. This management was held by front the Bourdel Study, during and after the Occupation. The opinion of the CIVS of June 25, 2004 does not mention anything concerning the apprehension total or partial of the rents related with this good. Consequently, if the CIVS has documents showing that the entirety of the rents of 42 Avenue Kléber was actually paid to the heiresses of Adolphe Fraenkel for the period of the Occupation, this which has to be the subject of a document showing the countable bringing together of the rents and the payments to the heiresses carried out by the Bourdel Study, it was not provided within the framework of the request for access to the documents of the CIVS by the applicant.
Moreover , it does not have escaped with the applicant that the presence even of the Company Alavoine, Société American, after 1942 constituted an obvious violation of Trading with the Enemy Act of October 6, 1917. However, this presence continuous and not stopped for the period 1942-1944 in the buildings of a aryanized real estate because of the laws anti-semites of Vichy could concern only one direct protection on a level very high in the hierarchy of the Mode of Vichy.
In the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant concludes that there are a legal flaw low register and an error of appreciation on the funds as for the instruction of his claim.
3. Concerning the station of agent to the Markets of Paris
The CIVS proposes a compensation on the basis for a bank account found with the name of the station of agent found in the files of the Police station General to the Jewish Questions. However, this compensation would not be to reflect the reality of the spoliation whose father of the applicant was the victim.
a. Accounts of guarantee
In effect, the stations of agents were held to maintain near the Case of the Deposits and Consignments one or more accounts of guarantee in order to guarantee a certain level of treasury corresponding to the current obligations of the goodwill managed by the station. The applicant communicated traces of these consignments, which were to be held in the shape of obligation or Treasury bills other, in his claim of May 12, 2002.
However, since the activity managed by Robert Elkan was very important before the Occupation, in particular of the fact frozen chicken importation coming from Russia, the applicant concludes that these accounts of guarantee were to be important. In addition, these accounts produced, of the regular interests for the benefit of the manager of the station.
However, the Commission does not rule of anything at the same time on the credits held in these accounts guarantee, nor on the interest borne by those.
The applicant dmandé the communication of the copies of the documents produced at the CIVS by the Case of the Deposits and Consignments showing the accounts with the name of Robert Elkan or his station under accounts of guarantee, without success
B. Post of agent
The expropriation of Robert Elkan of an administrative station such as that of agent to the Markets of Paris had as a consequence a loss of earnings considerable corresponding to four years of commissions, therefore incomes, for the period of the Occupation. This corresponds to a direct damage because of an administrative decision of radiation on behalf of the Prefecture of the Town of Paris for racial reasons. The applicant considers that this damage also requires repair, on the basis of commission of agent calculated on an average of the current activity of a station of comparable agent, over the period 1940-1944.
4. Concerning the other testamentary provisions
a. Concerning the succession Jeanne Fraenkel
The Private mansion of 42 Avenue Kléber forever belonged to the succession of Jeanne Suzanne Fraenkel, Schubert wife, since this one died before Adolphe Fraenkel. Indeed, the succession of this last was for the benefit of its grand-daughters in the entirety of the goods which belonged to him. The collection Adolphe Fraenkel, included in the credit net of the succession Adolphe Fraenkel was the subject of a usufruct on behalf of his third wife, usufruct which, in conformity with the French law, dies out with the death of the usufruitière.
The conclusion of the CIVS on the fact that the succession Jeanne Suzanne Fraenkel was correctly liquidated pre-war period, cannot be exact that if it is confirmed by the existence of a testamentary provision and account-study reflecting the good provision of this succession. Indeed, like other successions, applicant is unaware of if this one were for the benefit of her husband or his daughters, of which two were minor at the time of its death, and were the subject thus of accounts of supervision near the Bourdel Study.
B. Concerning the Elkan-Schubert succession
Concerning the plundering of 14 rue Marié-Davy, the applicant and his sister, being old of 4 and 8 years respectively, are unaware of very what occurred concerning this apartment. The applicant cannot thus answer the assertions of the CIVS concerning the absence of plundering of this apartment.
Of another share, the CIVS mentions the existence of real credits with Fontenay-On-Loing. However, the succession Adolphe Fraenkel contains grounds located with Fontenay-On Loing, of which the applicant is unaware of also the destination and the provision. Only, obtaining the account-study near the notarial study Bourdel will be able to also solve this question.
C. Concerning the Schmitko succession
Concerning the real credits of the Schmitko succession, the applicant is astonished by the conclusion of the CIVS as for the absence of aryanisation of these goods, in measurement where all the Schmitko family, namely Lucienne, Boris and Henri Schmitko died during the Occupation during the bombardment of Boulogne-Billancourt in Mars 1942.
However, the opinion of the CIVS does not mention any aryanisation or spoliation of this succession, whereas it was completely controlled by the Bourdel Study. As the notarial profession was held of aryaniser the whole of these successions, requiring it asked to confirm that the Case of the Deposits and Consignments did not find any element relating to the liquidation or aryanisation of this succession.
In the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant also concludes that there is a legal flaw low register as for the instruction of my claim.
D. Concerning the succession Siegfried Elkan
The applicant notes that the opinion of the Commission does not mention anything the succession Siegfried Elkan, his grandfather, deceased in 1941. As the notarial profession was held of aryaniser the whole of these successions, the applicant requested from the CIVS the confirmation that the Case of the Deposits and Consignments did not find any element concerning the liquidation of this succession. The applicant asked the communication of copies of the documents produced at the CIVS by the Case of the Deposits and for Consignments showing that no credit of this succession was aryanisé. These documents were not produced. Consequently, in the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant also concludes that there is a legal flaw low register as for the instruction of his claim.
E. Concerning the succession Joseph Subert
With regard to both houses located in Fontenay on Loing, at least for one of them, requiring it learned that it had been rented before the Occupation by a certain Laveissière family, which repurchased the property after 1944. The applicant did not receive any information on the traces of apprehension of rents by a provisional administrator for this good during the Occupation.
In the absence of documents on this subject, the applicant also concludes that there is a legal flaw low register as for the instruction of my claim.
VI.3 Third Means: New facts
a. Definition of a new fact
Within the framework of a procedure, a version different from the already known facts, or the sudden awakening of the consequences of acts made in the past are not new facts. A new fact is generally a fact which occurred or new information which was identified after the decision, judgement or report/ratio were returned. In this case, the new elements must have played a part determining in the apprehension of the file.
b. Role of Jean Bourdel
In his letter of dispute of August 29, 2004, the applicant informed the CIVS of the role determining and capital that Jean Bourdel, notary of the Fraenkel family, played as a President of the Room of the Notaries of the Town of Paris and his role in the aryanisation of a very great number of real estate belonging to Jewish families during the Occupation. This element, in an obvious way, can only play one essential part in the apprehension of the file of the applicant. Indeed:
- the President of the Room of the Notaries of Paris had a direct role in the policy of spoliations of the mode of Vichy, and thus used this position in the provision of the patrimonial and successional elements which it controlled in a direct way, in particular sucessions quoted above;
- the President of the Room of the Notaries of Paris had access to all the means necessary to the policy of spoliation and provision of goods, namely, access to the police force, the financial institutions (Case of the Deposits, stockbrokers) necessary to the liquidation of the financial credits of the Fraenkel succession.
c. Role of Henriette Herdsman
In his letter of dispute of August 29, 2004, the applicant informed the CIVS of the role determining and capital that Henriette Bouvier has cheek near the Laval family. Indeed, this mail informed the CIVS of many mentions of Henriette Bouvier in the book “Pierre Laval seen by his Daughter” of Yves Pourcher (Editions Seeks It Midi, 2002). These extracts show the great intimacy which existed between Henriette Bouvier and Josée Laval, girl of Pierre Laval. This intimacy, related to an important trade, are elements establish by this book, who allowed to provide to Henriette Bouvier protection necessary to the apprehension of the Fraenkel Collection before the release. This element is in contradiction with the declarations of Jean-Marc Léri in its letter of January 21, 2004 at the CIVS.
More particularly, an attentive reading of this book shows that Henriette Bouvier appears on pages 137, 194, 294 and 297, and makes it possible to establish the following conclusions:
- Henriette Bouvier was it or one of most important the decorator (S) of the Laval families and Chambrun, being given a very important trade between Henriette Bouvier and these families during the Occupation;
- the file of claim of the applicant at the CIVS contains a certificate on the honor making it possible to conclude that the inventory pre-war period of Henriette Bouvier being non-existent, the commercial inventory during the Occupation describes in the book could come only from the inventory Adolphe Fraenkel;
- If Henriette Bouvier sold objets d'art and objects decorative to the Laval families and Chambrun, it is thus established that in fact only elements of the inventory Adolphe Fraenkel were transmitted by commercial transactions during the Occupation to these families.
D. Conditions of acquisition of works of art by the Carnavalet Museum
By mail of November 19, 2004, the applicant informed the CIVS of questions of source concerning of other works of art held by the Carnavalet Museum. Indeed, this one holds not only all the parts relating to the Legacy Henriette Bouvier, but too two fabrics of Master of the 17th century:
- a table by François Eisen (1695-1778) entitled “Homage to the good small drainage canal.” Gift Cailleux 1949. Number of inventory-- P 2545
- a table by Nicolas Bertin (1667-1736) entitled “the Resurrection of Christ.” Gift Hermann Voss 1955. Number of inventory--P 1940.
The applicant was enclosing in his letter a copy extracts of the report/ratio entitled “Art Link-Final Looting Investigation carryforward”, emitted by the Unit known as “Office off Strategic Services” (OS) of the Department of the War of the Government of the United States. This report/ratio subjects an not-exhaustive list of collaborators, merchants and civils servant having an important activity on the markets of art in the countries controlled by the neutral IIIe Reich or countries. This report/ratio mentions references concerning Paul Cailleux (page 95), Antiquaire specialist in the 18E Century, thus that Hermann Voss (page 79), Director of Linz Museum, the Gallery of Dresden, and person in charge for the policies of spoliation of art of the Government of A. Hitler after 1943.
The applicant was also enclosing in his letter a copy extracts of the Book entitled “the AAM Guide to Provenance research, Nancy H. Yeide, Konstantin Akinsha, Amy L. Walsh)”. In both cases, the author considers that the names indicated above, called of “Red Flags”, constitute an indicator requiring a more thorough research in order to confirm than part N `is not despoiled. In the case of the parts indicated, the possibility of spoliation is of course reinforced by the date of donation, in both cases posterior with the Release, and the type of work, which in both cases, belonged to categories of works subjected to a very keen demand during the Occupation.
However, according to the payments of the ICOM (International Council off Natural history musea or the International Council of the Museums), whose Carnavalet Museum is one of the members, thus that obligations rising in particular from convention UNIDROIT and the Convention of L `UNESCO concerning the measures to be taken to prohibit and prevent the import, the export and the transfer of illicit properties of the cultural assets (1970), the obligation of investigation or “due diligence” on the source of a cultural asset is allocated to the cultural institution, in this case the Carnavalet Museum, therefore at the town of Paris. If the source of the one of these parts would be problematic, this established fact would then affect the credibility of the whole of the process of acquisition of cultural property of the Carnavalet Museum.
the Code of ethics of the ICOM for the museums sets the minimal standards of professional practices and performance for the museums and their personnel. While adhering to the organization, each member of the ICOM commits himself respecting this Code. This code mentions in particular in its section “ 2.3. Source and obligation of diligence”:

“Before acquisition of an object or a specimen offered to the purchase, in gift, loan, legacy or exchange, all the efforts must be made to make sure that it was not illegally acquired in (or exported unlawfully) its country of origin or a country of transit where it could have had a legal title of property (including the country even where the museum is). On this matter , an obligation of diligence is imperative to establish the complete history of the object since its discovery or creation. »
These elements thus reinforce the initial dispute of the applicant, indicating that the procedure of treatment of its request within the CIVS is subjected to a legal flaw low register , insofar as the CIVS should have been enquérir near the Town of Paris of the integrity of the process of acquisition of the Collection Herdsman in 1966, and in particular if the procedure of search for heirs were correctly carried out at that time.
E. Procedure near the Room of the Notaries of Haute-Savoie
By dated September 21, 2005 mail, the applicant informed the CIVS of a procedure in progress near the Room of the Notaries of dated September 20, 2005 Haute-Savoie.
This letter draws up several points:
- the most complete confusion reigns on the patrimonial and successional situation of the mother of the applicant;
- the applicant requested on several occasions from a drawn up notarial study with Sallanches the documents necessary to the establishment of the succession of his mother, without success;
- the applicant lodged with the Minister of Justice, which in referred near the Room of the Notaries of Haute-Savoie, a request in order to obtain the whole of information concerning the patrimonial situation of his mother, whose following elements relate to the claims auprès of the CIVS:
a. the product of the sale of a Private mansion to the 42 Kléber Avenue, 8E District, in Paris in 1960, as well as the product of the sale of grounds located with Fontenay-on-Loing for the benefit of the mother of the applicant, these two goods belonging to the succession Adolphe Fraenkel, whose liquidation and division are the subject of the one of my claims at the CIVS;
B. the product of the sale of a station of agent to the Markets of Paris (poultry-game) in 1960, subjected well to a procedure of aryanisation in 1940, and which is also the subject of the claims auprès of the CIVS;
C. the search for heirs carried out by the Town of Paris following the donation of the Collection Herdsman to the Carnavalet Museum in 1966-1968.
This request near the Minister of Justice follows upon a procedure of report, ordered by the Court of Bankruptcy of Bonneville, which followed upon a procedure of setting under supervision of the mother of the applicant.
As this mail indicates it, the notarial study of Sallanches mentioned in the letter did not provide information necessary to the establishment of the succession of the mother of the applicant, in particular with regard to the elements mentioned above which are covered by the claims auprès CIVS.
By consequent, the situation concerning the succession of the mother of the applicant constitutes an additional new fact, which impacts in a substantial way the requests of claims at the CIVS. The refusal of the notarial study of Sallanches to produce the documents related to the search for heirs carried out by the Town of Paris following the donation of the Collection Herdsman to the Carnavalet Museum is, indeed, an essential element in the apprehension of this file.
VI.4 Fourth means: Decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris 1999
The Court of Appeal of Paris (1st Room A) by a decision of June 2 1999, establishes a precedent concerning the provision and sales of works of art belonging to a succession liquidated during the Occupation. The file of the applicant has many similarities with the facts established in the decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris of June 2, 1999, in particular:
- the liquidation of the cultural goods during the Occupation within the framework of a succession;
- the discovery of the presence of these goods by the heirs after the War in a Museum dependent on a governmental entity.
The maintenance of the decision of the CIVS near the applicant would lead to an intolerable contradiction with the decision of the Court of Appeal of Paris and would not respect any logic of right. Consequently, the applicant requests of the President of the Administratif court of Paris the cancellation of the decision of the CIVS so that the file of the applicant is informed in a suitable and complete way by the CIVS.
VII. Goes down for hearing
Owing to the fact that the applicant resides in province, and that, because of its limited incomes, it is difficult for him to move, requiring it request, in case of audience near the Administrative Court of Paris within the framework of the procedure requested, a convocation together with minimum a three weeks of notice.
VIII. Ask refunding of the irrépétibles expenses
The applicant had to engage, with the title of this procedure, the expenses irrépétibles it is quite founded to request refunding with height of E500 on the base of the L.761-1 article of the code of administrative justice.
Likes the Court.
By these reasons, and all others to produce, deduce or compensate, the need for office, the applicant shows that it likes the administrative Court of Paris:
To cancel the decision of the Commission on the Compensation for the victims of the spoliations occurred because of the legislations anti-semites in force during Ocupation, communicated by mail of the President of the Commission dated December 15 2005, sent by the CIVS on December 27, 2005, and received by me on December 29 2005, and refusing the application of réeexamen of a recommendation emitted by the CIVS in restricted formation on June 25, 2004.
.
The applicant
Régine Elkan

____________________________

APPENDICES OF THE REQUEST
I. MAILS WITH THE CIVS
1. copy seal post office of the letter of the decision of the dated December 15 CIVS 2005, showing the sending on December 27, 2005
2. Letter of claim of the applicant at the dated May 12, 2002 CIVS
3. letter complementary to the applicant to the dated July 29, 2002 CIVS
4. answer of Dated December 12, 2002 CIVS
5. letter of requiring with the CIVS of February 24, 2003
6. answer of Dated April 16, 2003 CIVS
7. report/ratio of Dated December 23, 2003 CIVS
8. letter of requiring with the dated January 20, 2004 CIVS
9. letter of requiring with the dated February 29, 2004 CIVS
10. decision of Dated June 25, 2004 CIVS
11. letter of secretariat general of the dated August 16, 2004 government
12. letter of dispute of the applicant with the dated August 29, 2004 CIVS
13. letter of requiring with the dated November 19, 2004 CIVS
14. letter of requiring with the dated May 2, 2005 CIVS
15. letter of requiring with the dated September 21, 2005 CIVS
16. decision of dated December 15, 2005 commission
II. MAILS WITH THIRDS
17. Letter of the Mayor from dated July 8, 2002 Paris
18. answer of requiring near the Mayor of dated July 24, 2002 Paris
19. Letter of Ministry for the dated December 4, 2002 Culture
20. Letter of requiring near the Minister for dated February 29, 2004 Justice
21. letter of requiring near the genealogical study dated May 18 Coutot-Roehrig 2004
22. Letter of the applicant near the mayor of dated September 7, 2004 Paris
III. OTHER DOCUMENTS
23. Decision of Court of Appeal of Paris of June 2, 1999

APPENDIX
Art Hostage comments:
Shameful this whole episode !!!
to be continued..........................................................................

No comments: