Decision no. 411/2007

In 1938, the property, on which a Torah School, the synagogue and other buildings stood, belonged to the IKG Deutschkreutz and/or two associations belonging to it. Three properties had to be sold to the municipality Deutschkreutz in June 1940 for 5,000 Reichsmark. The fourth property was initially put up for auction for the benefit of the Municipal Savings Bank Sauerbrunn, due to an outstanding debt. Later this property was also assigned to municipality Deutschkreutz.

Subsequently, the demolition of all buildings located on the property was ordered and finally in 1941 the synagogue was demolished. By the beginning of May 1938, the entire Jewish population of the IKG Deutschkreutz had already been deported or had fled abroad. The whereabouts of the religious items and other objects belonging to the Jewish Community is largely unknown. On the order of the Reich Governor in Niederdonau on 25 July 1940, the IKG Deutschkreutz was dissolved and incorporated into the IKG Vienna.

The Chief Rabbi of the IKG Deutschkreutz was able to emigrate to the USA in 1938 and there, with former community members, he founded the association which filed this application.

After 1945, the existing Jewish Communities were granted the eligibility to assert the restitution claims of the legal persons of the dissolved Jewish Communities by means of the Second Restitution Claims Act. Should the local responsible Jewish Community be reformed during restitution proceedings, it could then take up the rights to the assets in the process of being restituted or already having been restituted.

In 1951, the IKG Vienna applied for the restitution of the properties in accordance with the Third Restitution Act, in connection with the Second Restitution Claims Act. On the orders of the Restitution Commission and the Regional Court for Civil Matters Vienna in January 1952, the claims were granted and the four properties at issue were restituted. As no new Jewish community had been founded in Deutschkreutz, and therefore the dissolved associations were also not re-established and additionally the district Deutschkreutz was later assigned to the IKG Vienna, the IKG Vienna was eligible to file a claim in accordance with the Restitution Laws.

The assignment of the restitution claims to the IKG Vienna intended by the Second Restitution Claims Act fulfils the constitutional requirements of Article 15 of the Basic Law. Even if Sec. 27 (2) of the General Settlement Fund Law provides a broad framework for the evaluation of the question of whether an association is the legal successor of a dissolved association, the Arbitration Panel sees no reason to derive from this legal position and affirm the legal succession of the applicant.

Consequently, the Arbitration Panel does not consider the applicant as the legal successor regarding the application for restitution of the dissolved IKG Deutschkreutz and its associations. Thus, pursuant to Sec. 27 (2) of the General Settlement Fund Law, the entitlement to the claim does not exist. For these reasons, the application for in rem restitution was to be dismissed.