Decision no. 648/2010

In 1938, the properties in Rudolfsheim and Leopoldstadt belonged to the father of the applicant, Julius R., his grandmother Cäcilie R., his uncle, Erwin R., and his aunt, Margarethe L. As Jews, all of the owners were persecuted after the Anschluss and had been forced to sell the property in Leopoldstadt. The shares of the property in Rudolfsheim belonging to Erwin, Julius and Cäcilie R. reverted to the German Reich. In contrast, Margarethe L. remained the owner of her share. She fled with her husband and daughter to Yugoslavia and in 1941 was deported with them to the concentration camp Jasenovac. None of them survived the Holocaust. Julius R., his wife and Cäcilie R. were able to emigrate to the USA via Prague. Erwin R. and his wife, who had already been living in Prague since 1936 were also able to flee to the USA.

After the end of the National Socialist regime, Cäcilie, Julius and Erwin R. filed for the restitution of the shares of the property in Rudolfsheim which had been seized from them at the Financial Directorate for Vienna, Lower Austria and Burgenland. In 1948, their claims were granted. Furthermore, they inherited the share of the late Margarethe L. and in 1959, they sold the property to the City of Vienna. As the property requested before the Arbitration Panel had already been restituted to the aggrieved owners in previous proceedings, the application for a renewed restitution was rejected.

With regard to the property in Leopoldstadt, the aggrieved owners did not pursue restitution proceedings. No indications of an out-of-court settlement of their restitution claims were found. However, in 1960/61 the collection agencies had laid claim to the property. Pursuant to the State Treaty of 1955, the collection agencies were entitled to file claims for property seized during the National Socialist era which had remained “heirless” or had not yet been claimed. In 1961, the Collection Agency A waived the restitution of the property in exchange for a payment of 15,000 Schilling. Moreover, because the property had not been publicly-owned on the cut off day, the Arbitration Panel was unable to pronounce a recommendation for restitution.