On 1 December 2025, Germany’s institutional arbitration body for Nazi-looted art commenced operations, replacing the former Advisory Commission. For the first time, victims of National Socialist persecution and their legal successors have access to a formalised and legally binding procedure. Below are some of the key procedural features of the arbitration body for Nazi-looted art.
Procedural features of particular interest from an arbitration perspective
The institutional arbitration body and its supporting arbitral office are administered by the German Lost Art Foundation (Deutsches Zentrum Kulturgutverluste, DZK), which is headquartered in Magdeburg. The arbitral office itself is based in Berlin. Importantly, the entire institutional framework rests on legally binding agreements concluded between all levels of government of the Federal Republic of Germany.
Access to arbitration
- Claimants may initiate arbitral proceedings unilaterally, relying on a “standing offer” made by public owners and other institutions holding cultural property (currently more than 200).
- Eligibilitay: Everyone, (or heir) who raises a claim of loss of his cultural property due to Nazi persecution between 30 January 1933 and 8 May 1945 on condition that the object is located in Germany.
- The costs of the arbitral tribunal are borne by the German state (excluding the parties’ legal representation costs).
Preliminary proceedings
Within a period of 20 months, claimants must first seek to resolve their request through bilateral negotiations with the institution holding the cultural property. Bilateral negotiations prior to 1 December 2025 should count.
Arbitrator pool
The composition of the arbitrator pool reflects a deliberate balance. A total of 36 arbitrators were selected on a parity basis by representatives of the Jewish community (50%) and the German state (50%). Arbitral panels consist of two Presidents and a five-member tribunal.
Substantive assessment
- Claims are assessed on the basis of a specially developed assessment framework.
- Restitution is the primary remedy; direct monetary compensation is not available.
- No good faith defence, no acquisitive prescription, no time bars.
- In cases of sales, a far-reaching presumption applies that the loss was due to Nazi persecution, with limited exceptions for certain flight-related transactions.
Standard of proof
In determining a just and fair solution, due account must be taken of the fact that, because of the passage of time and the specific circumstances of the Holocaust, gaps and uncertainties in provenance are unavoidable. In particular:
- indirect forms of evidence are accorded special significance (including circumstantial evidence, exclusion scenarios, and historical contextualisation),
- prima facie evidence is admissible where typical patterns of events can be demonstrated on the basis of historical knowledge,
- affidavits are permitted as evidence,
- a high degree of probability is sufficient for the tribunal’s conviction; absolute certainty is not required,
- a new presumption of ownership applies based on actual or former possession of the object, unless the object constituted commercial stock held by an art dealer.
The arbitral tribunal does not merely issue a recommendation but renders a legally binding decision on the basis of the mandatory assessment framework. At the same time, it is required to promote an amicable settlement at all stages of the proceedings. Appropriate space must be given to the consideration and presentation of the individual history of persecution.
The foundational documents of the reform of the Advisory Commission are available in German, English, French, and Hebrew: Reform der Beratenden Kommission | Kulturstaatsminister – Der Beauftragte der Bundesregierung für Kultur und Medien
We have previously reported on this topic here:
Nearly 80 years after the end of National Socialism: Germany to replace Nazi-loot advisory panel with binding arbitration – Koch Boës – Rechtsanwälte