Post by account_disabled on Feb 18, 2024 9:26:29 GMT
The Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation this Thursday rejected a proposal from the firm Decanor SA, in the framework of the case in which the expropriation requested by the National State of the historic mural “Ejercicio Plastico” by the Mexican artist David Siqueiros, who He went into exile in Argentina before assassinating Soviet leader Lev Trotsky. Once the case reached the Court, the Supreme Court, with the signature of Horacio Rosatti, Carlos Rosenktranz, Juan Carlos Maqueda and Ricardo Lorenzetti, dismissed the appeal because it is not directed against a final sentence or comparable to such and Thus it comes to a judicial battle of almost 40 years ended, leaving the work within the national historical heritage.
Judicial sources explained that "there is still no final Europe Mobile Number List ruling, so the Court rejects the company's appeal. The history of the mural dates back to , when Siqueiros accepted the proposal of the journalistic businessman and owner of the newspaper Crítica Natalio Botana and painted the mural in the basement of his villa in Don Torcuato, with the help of Antonio Berni, Lino Enea Spilimbergo, Juan Carlos Castagnino and Enrique Lázaro. The mural was going to be sent to Mexico but former president Raúl Alfonsín stopped its departure and finally, after years of litigation, it remained in the Bicentennial museum, next to the Casa Rosada.
In the first instance, the National State's proposal was rejected because it was considered that, for the purposes of proceeding to take possession of the property, the existence of a final judicial ruling is an unavoidable requirement, a situation that was not established in the case. The National State appealed that decision and Chamber IV of the National Chamber of Federal Administrative Litigation admitted the appeal and annulled the ruling, transferring possession of the mural to the National State and imposing the costs on the defendant company. The Chamber understood that “the appellant is right regarding article 25 of the Expropriation Law, it does not require the issuance of a final judgment to obtain possession of the movable property subject to public utility.