Decision no. 652/2010

In their application for restitution, the applicants Maria J. and Leopoldine W., explained that the requested property had been seized by the German Reich as a result of the political persecution of the owners, the R. spouses. The properties subject of the application had been acquired by the German Armed Forces for 19,475 Reichsmark during the course of the creation of a military training area.

In June 1949, the R. spouses, the parents of the applicants, claimed the restitution of the properties pursuant to the Dritte Rückstellungsgesetz ("Third Restitution Act"). As the necessary consent of the Allied Commission for this had not been granted, the proceedings were only able to be resumed after the State Treaty 1955 and the transfer of the properties to the Republic of Austria. The competent authority from this time, the Financial Directorate for Vienna, Lower Austria and Burgenland examined the renewed restitution claim as to whether the sale to the German Armed Forces had occurred in compliance with the guidelines of the Dritte Staatsvertragesdurchführungsgesetz ("Third State Treaty Implementation Act"), namely as a result of the "misapplication of the law" or "solely due to political persecution" of the affected persons. As the restitution claimants had not been able to produce and evidence of this, the Financial Directorate held that the requirement of a seizure had not been met and dismissed the application by decision. The R. spouses did not appeal this decision.

In its juridical appraisal, the Arbitration Panel examined whether political persecution was decisive for the sale of the properties to the German Armed Forces in 1941. It reached the opinion that the creation of the military training area per se did not constitute persecution and also that the handling of the property purchase did not reveal any indications of political persecution of the R. spouses. For this reason, the Arbitration Panel was unable to determine a property seizure in accordance with the GSF Law and therefore rejected the application for restitution.