The picture was not going to give the owner

[ФАИв]

Сообщение от Veronic

Incidentally, the law in this situation is absolutely not on the side of the Belgian collector. Generally, in this case we obtain two paintings. One (who moved) by an unknown author, and the second (which is exported) Bryullov, and here the law prohibits the export of cultural goods, or am I mistaken? In this situation it would be difficult to prove that it is not, even pictures will not help.
Eugene, keep abreast of the process. I wonder what it will end.

First, if the picture in the Temporary Importation and framed correctly, then at least Andrei Rublev, though Shishkin, though Vangog, it does not matter you can take on it and temporary.

In this case - I agree with Vyacheslav - very smell zakazuhoy, since - the estimated charges - intent to sell, what with the temporarily imported goods are not allowed to do. But I - that are interested, as I understood authorities say - wanted to sell Brullov, and concluded that it is Bryullov? And in general, to prove intent in a court case is complicated. Such cases in the courts, usually falling apart)). They excite a very different purpose, not to bring to trial and to exert pressure.

To become - is not only our method. Recall the 2004 "Torkviniya and Lucretia" by Rubens. So the Germans have driven the owner of the full program! to select a picture, Schroeder even Putin complained.

Links
http://www.taday.ru/text/49325.html
http://www.izvestia.ru/culture/article203348/