Decision no. 628/2010

In 1938, one third of the requested property, situated in the first municipal district of Vienna, had been owned by Alice K., who was considered a Mischling 1. Grades ("first degree half-caste") in line with the Nuremberg Race Laws. In 1940, Alice K. and the co-owners were forced to sell the house to the German Reich, Reich Treasury Aviation, as the Air-District Commando XVII had required the property, and the two neighboring properties, as a Commando Headquarters.

In 1948, the former owners or their heirs – Alice K., who had lived in Vienna during the National Socialist era, died shortly after the Second World War – requested the restitution of the property, which was since being used by the Austrian Federal Railways. In 1954, their request for restitution was rejected and the Supreme Restitution Commission upheld this decision.

In the proceedings before the Arbitration Panel, the present applicant, a granddaughter of Alice K., asserted the "extreme injustice" of the restitution decision ruled in 1954. Alice K. had been persecuted on grounds of origin and on political grounds; the statement made during the course of the forced sale that she had been "aryan" had merely been a defensive lie.

In its juridical appraisal, the Arbitration Panel stated that although Alice K. had generally been subjected to National Socialist persecution as a "first degree half-caste", her origins had not been known to the German Reich at the time. For this reason, the sale of the property had not been directly connected to a persecution of Alice K. by the National Socialists. Moreover, the property had been purchased in order to extend the headquarters of the Reich Air Force, which had already existed in the neighboring building. The purchase of the property was therefore unrelated to a persecution pursuant to the Entschädigungsfondsgesetz ("General Settlement Fund Law – GSF Law"). Nor was the sale implemented in a way which allows the conclusion to be drawn that the vendors were subjected to discriminatory treatment, as the Property Transaction Office had not been involved, the purchase price was adequate and had been received for free disposal and no other restrictions during the sale were able to be established.