Decision no. 823/2012

The property in Aspern subject of the restitution application was owned by Julius G. and his spouse Maria G. at the time of the assumption of power by the National Socialists in 1938. Each owned half. The property in Breitenlee was under the sole ownership of Julius G. Family G. belonged to the Jewish Religious Community and was considered Jewish according to the Nuremburg Laws of 1935.

The residence of the family G. was located on the 2,680 m² property in Aspern. It also contained factory buildings which were leased to a company producing wine spirits amongst other things. In 1939, Julius and Maria G. were forced to sell the entire property to Adolf W. The total area of the property in Breitenlee was 40,337 m² and included farm land and a gravel pit. Maria G. inherited this property after Julius G. had passed away on 6 April 1940. The property reverted to the German Reich pursuant to the Elfte Verordnung zum Reichsbürgergesetz (“Eleventh Decree to the Reich Citizenship Law”) after Maria G. had escaped to the United States of America.

In 1951 and 1953, the claimed properties were restituted to Maria G. who lived in New York at the time.
On 17 January 2001, the cut off day pursuant to the Entschädigungsfondsgesetz (“General Settlement Fund Law”) the majority of the areas of land in Aspern formerly belonging to Julius and Maria G. were owned privately with the exception of seven square meters of the original property holdings which were owned by the City of Vienna on the cut off day. A part of the original property in Breitenlee was owned by the City of Vienna on 17 January 2001. Another part of the property was partitioned off by Maria G. after it was restituted to her. It was owned by a private fund on the cut off day.

In its legal reasoning the Arbitration Panel determined that the claimed properties had been seized during the National Socialist era and were partially publicly owned on the cut off day on 17 January 2001. The application was, however, rejected by the Arbitration Panel as both properties had been restituted in their entirety to the aggrieved owner.