Finally, the intention of this thesis is to shed light on the deeply rooted issue of restitution that has remained almost stagnant since the end of World War Two. The subject of provenance and restitution has only come to light in recent years, in large part due to the Gurlitt Collection. This recent scandal has highlighted the regrettable lack of progress that has been made in Germany - and in the world - since 1945 in terms of implementing viable restitution frameworks. This is not a commonly known fact. With this thesis, I intended to propel and continue the discussion of what must be done in order to establish stronger frameworks – ethical and legal - regarding restitution and provenance research. This multi-faceted discussion can be used as a vessel, that carries the dark story of the Gurlitt family not only as a narrative, but also as a concrete example and point of direction for future research and financial investments required in moving forward in the field of restitution. All questions related to the Gurlitt Collection can, by no means, be answered in this thesis, in part because of the continued ‘non-transparent’ sources that control the information regarding the collection, and in part because of the lack of answers derived from the absence of legal frameworks in place in most countries dealing with looted art. While the Washington agreement has been a remarkable international tool, it remains legally difficult to base restitution cases on non-binding rules only. On a positive note, the dynamic shift that has resulted from numerous works that have recently been discovered, or ‘re-discovered’ globally in private and public collections, whether museums or auction houses, has received pressing attention leading to a substantial increase of provenance research regarding cultural objects stemming from 1933-1945 and prior. It is safe to assume that Cornelius Gurlitt and his sister knowingly inherited the questionable art collection of their father Hildebrand, who also knowingly hid the provenance of some of the works. This collection has been kept in the dark long enough, and with each new restitution, the ‘Gurlitt Affair’ has shown an unfortunate lack of transparency in conducting provenance research. While there is no way to change the past, it is time for Germany and for all countries that continue, knowingly or not, to protect art which has been stolen, looted or bought under duress, to atone for theirs mistakes in finding viable and just solutions for the future.