The National Gallery of Victoria in Australia has returned a painting lost by a Jewish family during the Nazi era in Germany to the descendants of the rightful owners, The Jewish Independent reported Thursday.

Descendants of Dr. Henry Bromberg have been attempting to reclaim Lady with a Fan by Gerard ter Borch, a 17th-century painting, for 20 years.

The painting was part of a collection held by Max Emden and Henry Bromberg. When the Nazis came to power, they seized the collection. This led to a dispute both between the museum and the family and between the descendants themselves, who disagreed on which branch of the family now rightfully owned the painting. 

The museum initially rejected the family's claim when put forth by the Emden family due to a lack of evidence that the painting had been stolen or part of a forced sale.

The gallery claimed that Emden had sold the painting not because of Nazi pressure but due to unrelated hyperinflation and depression.

A patron looks at paintings by Amedee Ozenfant (L), Albert Gleizes (C) and Fernand Leger (R) at the Art Deco 1910-1939 exhibition for the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne June 26, 2008.
A patron looks at paintings by Amedee Ozenfant (L), Albert Gleizes (C) and Fernand Leger (R) at the Art Deco 1910-1939 exhibition for the National Gallery of Victoria in Melbourne June 26, 2008. (credit: REUTERS/Mick Tsikas)

In 2022, the Bromberg family, cousins of the Emdens, also put forth a claim on the painting.

The Emdens withdrew their claim earlier this year. The painting was returned to the Brombergs, according to The Guardian.

The quiet return of the Nazi-looted painting

The return happened with surprisingly little fanfare compared to the only previous return of a stolen Nazi painting from the museum.

When Head of a Man, a painting which was attributed to Vincent Van Gogh at the time the NGV acquired it, was found to be stolen, the museum was very open about how the decision was made to return the painting to the descendants of the rightful owner.

A statement was released with details on the painting, the claim, and navigating both legal and ethical responsibilities.

It is unclear why the museum has not released a similar statement this time around.