Decision no. 4/2004

In 1938, the agricultural and slivicultural real property with a size of approximately 220 hectares located in the district Oberwart, Burgenland, was under the ownership of the Hungarian citizens Klara W., Blanka Sp. and Ladislaus Si. The owners, who resided in Hungary and who were considered Jews, were threatened several times with the commencement of a "forced aryanization". Eventually, Klara W., Blanka Sp. and Ladislaus Si. sold 208 hectares of their property for 87,000 Reichsmark to the German Reich, Reich Forestry Administration, between 1941 and 1942.

After the National Socialist regime had extended its extermination policies to the Hungarian- Jewish population in March 1944, Klara W. and Blanka Sp. were also affected. Both of them were murdered in Auschwitz during the months of June and July 1944. Ladislaus Si. who was drafted by the Hungarian Army to the labour service has been missing since 1944. After the fall of the National Socialist regime the Soviet occupying forces took over the administration of the real property for the purposes of their USIA enterprises. Finally, with the State Treaty of Vienna 1955 the ownership passed to the Republic of Austria.

In 1956, Edith Sch. claimed the restitution of the properties, sold between 1941 and 1942, from the Republic of Austria. Her husband Karl Sz. was also killed during the National Socialist era. However, he had outlived the widow to his uncle, Blanka Sp., and their children Klara W. and Ladislaus Si. Finally, Edith Sch., heiress to her husband Karl Sz., became the sole heiress to Klara W., Blanka Sp. and Ladislaus Si. This was due to the fact that no other relatives had made themselves known during the probate proceedings before the District Court regarding the estate of the three owners who had been declared dead.

In October 1961, Edith Sch. entered into a restitution settlement with the Republic of Austria. In return for the payment of approximately 1.5 million Schillings Edith Sch. waived the restitution of the 208 hectares claimed by her.

In the present case the Arbitration Panel was faced with the specific problem that today's applicants, Ivan P. and Margita P., derived their right to the inheritance from a nephew of Blanka Sp. Hence, they were able to prove a stronger claim to the inheritance from the prior property owners than Edith Sch. Consequently, the Arbitration Panel concluded that Edith Sch. was not the heiress of the originally aggrieved persons. However, since the Arbitration Panel lacks competence to reopen probate proceedings and correct their consequences, the applications of Ivan P. and Margita P. were rejected with the decision no. 4/2004.