Decision no. 306/2006

In 1938, the applicant, a corporation of landowners existing since the end of the 16th century, owned more than 2.000 ha of forest, meadow and pasture surface in and in the environs of Eisenerz. In 1939, the Reichswerke “Hermann Göring” (Linz) approached the applicant concerning this property since they necessitated approximately 325 ha of this surface in order to provide leeway within ore-mining at the Erzberg, which was strongly forced during National Socialism.

The Reichswerke “Hermann Göring” were able to support this request with a expropriation regulation, which had been created especially for them. In 1940, the transfer of the claimed properties by the director of the Reichsstelle for land procurement, the responsible expropriation authority, took place. The compensation sum of 300,000.00 Reichsmark, which was supposed to be paid to the applicant, had been assessed by the involved parties under mutual agreement. Finally, it was distributed among the members of the applicant.

After the end of the National Socialist regime, the applicant did not initiate a procedure in accordance with the restitution laws. However, in 1986, the applicant demanded from the governor of Styria the repeal of the decisions of 1940 on the expropriation concerning a surface of approximately 186 ha. The concerned properties, contrary to the original intentions, were never utilized for mining industry purposes. Hence, since the purpose of expropriation had not been reached, the properties were consequently to be retransferred to the applicant. In 2005, these applications were finally dismissed by the responsible minister since they had been filed too late.

The applicant claimed this property surface of 186 ha also in the procedure in front of the Arbitration Panel for in rem restitution. The expropriation had been arbitrary and politically motivated. In addition to that, single members of the applicant had been put under pressure.

One of the required prerequisites for in rem restitution is the persecution by the National Socialist regime for one of the reasons named conclusively in the General Settlement Fund Law. These also contain political reasons. The fact of expropriation for itself cannot be regarded as a National Socialist measure of persecution. The Arbitration Panel did not find any indications showing that there had been misuse or arbitrariness during the expropriation procedure. The compensation sum, in particular, had been assessed under mutual agreement and the applicant had actually been paid off. The Arbitration Panel had to dismiss the application already for the sole reason that evidence of the persecution of the applicant could not be produced.