Finding treasure legal advice

Teagan1225

What happens when you find treasure? Who owns it ? How do you find the full value if the state has possession of it ? Will the finders get money for it ? Does the fact they found it in there own land change anything?

longhalloween

Teagan1225 wrote: »

What happens when you find treasure? Who owns it ? How do you find the full value if the state has possession of it ? Will the finders get money for it ? Does the fact they found it in there own land change anything?

If an archaeological object doesn't have an owner, ownership defaults to the state.
So anything you find, regardless of where you find it, belongs to the state and must be given to the state.

You can find more info here:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=88616036

Teagan1225

But is there any possible way of finding the value of the find and is there definitely going to be rewards for the finder?

longhalloween

Teagan1225 wrote: »

But is there any possible way of finding the value of the find and is there definitely going to be rewards for the finder?

Technically the find has no value as it's not yours and it's illegal to buy and sell it, and no museum would give you a value. Best bet is to hand it in ASAP.

There's no guarantee of reward, but generally you'll get something from the National Museum:

• Finders who have found archaeological objects in a legitimate manner are paid finder’s rewards.

But was it found in a legitimate manner?

Teagan1225

longhalloween wrote: »

Technically the find has no value as it's not yours and it's illegal to buy and sell it, and no museum would give you a value. Best bet is to hand it in ASAP.

There's no guarantee of reward, but generally you'll get something from the National Museum:


But was it found in a legitimate manner?

Yes it was found in a legitimate matter but isn't the finder not entitled to find out what it is actually worth ?

234

Teagan1225 wrote: »

Yes it was found in a legitimate matter but isn't the finder not entitled to find out what it is actually worth ?

Well obviously the nature of the object will dictate that. In the case of ancient archaeological finds it may be very difficult to value it. It would only be once it is handed over to the National Museum that you would be able to tell.

longhalloween

234 wrote: »

Well obviously the nature of the object will dictate that. In the case of ancient archaeological finds it may be very difficult to value it. It would only be once it is handed over to the National Museum that you would be able to tell.

It's worth whatever someone will pay for it. But since it can't be sold, what it's worth is irrelevant.

You could put a value on the materials of the object, for example, a 1000 year old gold ring is worth whatever the price of gold is at the moment.

The Museum wouldn't give you a price.

Peregrinus

Teagan1225 wrote: »

But is there any possible way of finding the value of the find . . .

Yes. You can ask a dealer in such objects to give you an estimate of the value. If you no longer have the item in your possession (because you've handed it over to the National Museum, for example) then you can give him a description, photgraphs, etc.

What you'll get is only an estimate, of course. The only way of finding out for sure what it is worth is to put it up for auction, which of course you cannot do. The dealer will estimate its value on the assumption that it could be freely sold at auction, and he will do this by comparing it with prices achieve at auction for comparable items.

Note that this is a notional value. It assume no restrictions on sale, export, etc, whereas in reality there are restrictions. So a notional bronze age sword (say) in this condition which could be freely sold is estimated to fetch so much, but the bronze age sword that you actually have won't fetch that, because nobody would bid for a sword to which they would not get good legal title.

I seem to recall that the convention used to be that a finder's reward paid by the National Museum was about 10% of the estimated value on free sale - more if the finder found it on his own land. But that was a good while ago; I have no idea if there is a current rule-of-thumb for finder's rewards.

longhalloween

Peregrinus wrote: »

The dealer will estimate its value on the assumption that it could be freely sold at auction, and he will do this by comparing it with prices achieve at auction for comparable items.

Yep.
But if you find the next Ardagh Chalice, then the dealer has nothing to compare it against, only jewellery of similar quality and weight, which is nothing compared to the intrinsic value of the artefact, which can't be quantified.

Teagan1225

longhalloween wrote: »

Yep.
But if you find the next Ardagh Chalice, then the dealer has nothing to compare it against, only jewellery of similar quality and weight, which is nothing compared to the intrinsic value of the artefact, which can't be quantified.

I'm currently studying constitutional law and I have looked into Webb v Ireland and the national monuments amendment act 1994. The question I'm trying to answer is the following; In the course of digging new foundations for his home nick finds an ancient chalice of significant value. Nick reports his find to the national museum and they do a huge excavation on the site and find more artefacts. The state takes the hoard into possession but nick wants to find out the full value of the hoard. What advise would you give nick on the constitutional issue raised by the find?

234

Teagan1225 wrote: »

I'm currently studying constitutional law and I have looked into Webb v Ireland and the national monuments amendment act 1994. The question I'm trying to answer is the following; In the course of digging new foundations for his home nick finds an ancient chalice of significant value. Nick reports his find to the national museum and they do a huge excavation on the site and find more artefacts. The state takes the hoard into possession but nick wants to find out the full value of the hoard. What advise would you give nick on the constitutional issue raised by the find?

From memory, Webb creates an entitlement to compensation. Compensation, by its very nature, involves some quantification of the value of the supposed loss. As such there would need to be a valuation of the artefacts. There would obviously have to be some rational relationship between the compensation given and the value of finds, otherwise the National Museum could simply throw a tenner at you. In order to be sure that his rights are being vindicated Nick should have access to the valuation.

longhalloween

234 wrote: »

There would obviously have to be some rational relationship between the compensation given and the value of finds, otherwise the National Museum could simply throw a tenner at you. In order to be sure that his rights are being vindicated Nick should have access to the valuation.

A bit of googling threw up these links:
Finder's Fees in Estonia: http://news.postimees.ee/1370626/topmost-finder-s-fee-nearly-100-000
Estonia seems to have similar heritage laws to us.

A guy who thought the fee was too small in Sweden: http://www.thelocal.se/20091126/23498

In both cases the finder's fee seems to be an arbitrary value, since the finds themselves don't have a fixed value.

Here's one from Scotland, where they pay the finder the full market value and encourage metal detecting, unlike here where it's all but illegal:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2013/03/130306-finders-keepers-treasure-hunting-law-uk-us/

cassid

You get a nice little card from the museum saying you donated the items, my mother's aunt found a load of coins in Dublin and she is well passed away but her name is still listed