On 27th May 1999 the Spanish Supreme Court ruled that: "the succession of Mr. John Anthony Denney deceased is governed by his national law, that is, by English law, which recognises the freedom to make a will for its nationals and, as a consequence the Chamber must proceed to reject the claim, revoking the ruling of first instance." 

They consider that the litigation was very necessary and, although the case went against them, they hope that the resulting clarification of the law will benefit others. They believe the Denney case represents an exceptionally interesting example of the Conflict of Laws, meriting close study not only by Private International Lawyers but by experts in the field of Art and Law. They draw attention to the important guiding principles enunciated in the Supreme Court’s decision :  namely, that renvoi should be applied flexibly and not automatically and should be subject to conditions and limitations, such as to preserve "unity of succession" and to ensure a "harmony of solutions". They hope that the application of these principles  will now result in consistent interpretation of the Civil Code in matters of succession, wherever foreign nationality and domicile in Spain are factors to be considered. 

The Spanish Supreme Court cites the Adams case (1987), which resolves ambiguity in Article 12.2 of the Spanish Civil Code by applying the unity of succession principle to the Spanish property of a testator domiciled in England, as evidence of a new reluctance by English Courts to apply renvoi. The case certainly provides a clear example of judicial reasoning and anticipates the principles so recently enunciated by the Supreme Court, but it does not appear to cover the situation where the testator has a Spanish domicile. If harmonious solutions are to be achieved in the future, the question of whether any break in the unity of succession can arise if the testator is domiciled in Spain may need most careful study in the context of both the Denney and Adams decisions. 

A number of issues concerning the security of art loans have been raised by the case, with the result that some museums have already tightened up their loan processes to reduce risks. "Lessons from the Denney Collection", recently published by the Institute of Art and Law, records the background to the case and in particular the unauthorised removal of Anthony Denney’s collection of modern art from the Dallas Museum of Art following his death and its subsequent donation to the City of Toulouse. It is hoped the paper will be widely disseminated and encourage a lively debate on the security of art loans to museums and  will lead to the development of an International Art Loans Register accessible via the Internet. 

They wish to thank : the Tate Gallery, Dallas Museum of Art, French Institute London,  National Trust, Royal Academy, Rendcomb College and the Haute Garonne Archives and many other institutions and individuals, without whose help the significant facts relating to Anthony Denney’s vanished art collection could never have been established ; Toulousains for their hospitality : La Dépêche du Midi for balanced press reporting and Le Satiricon for its witty and satirical article "Art and Bad Manners", which summed up the municipal art politics of Toulouse by saying that "the City found itself the happy recipient of an unwritten will". 

Now that the case is over, Anthony Denney’s children and grandchildren are free to enjoy the rich "virtual inheritance" he bequeathed them : not least, his creative inspiration, many happy memories of him and the  truly amazing story of his disappearing art collection.