The Mauritshuis has successfully navigated a legal dispute over the display of its Rembrandt paintings, highlighting the complexities of art ownership and the interpretation of wills. The case revolves around the will of Abraham Bredius, who bequeathed a collection of 25 paintings, including five Rembrandts, to the Mauritshuis in 1944. The key phrase in the will, written in French, stated that the works "devront rester exposés exclusivement dans ledit Musée," meaning they must remain exclusively on display in the museum. However, the heirs of Bredius's partner, Joseph Kronig, argued that the museum's practice of storing some paintings in a depot and making them available on request or online violated the will's terms. The heirs' lawyer, Gert Jan van den Bergh, emphasized that the court should adhere to the literal language of the will, not the museum's current practices. Despite this, the court ruled in favor of the Mauritshuis, stating that the museum had been handling the works with care and that part of the collection was on permanent display. This decision has sparked further debate, with sociology professor Olav Velthuis suggesting that it may discourage museums from accepting donations, as they fear future legal challenges. The case also draws parallels to a similar dispute involving the National Gallery in London and the art dealer Angus Neill, who sought the return of a Bellini painting due to its removal from display. These cases underscore the ongoing tension between the preservation of art and the evolving practices of museums, raising questions about the interpretation of wills and the rights of heirs in the art world.
