Decision no. 1163/2016

In 1938, the requested properties in Atzgersdorf and Liesing were owned by the Jewish leather manufacturer Fritz S., who used them for his leather factory.

On 12 March 1938, Fritz S. fled to Switzerland with his wife and then, later on, to the USA. In June 1938 the entire assets of Fritz S., including the factory and the properties, were confiscated as “assets hostile to the nation and state” for the benefit of the Country of Austria and the ownership title was recorded in the land register for the Country of Austria.

Even before the confiscation, the Property Transaction Office had granted a prospective buyer, Dr. Wilhelm H., provisional authorization to acquire the factory and the properties. Following interventions by the German Foreign Office and the Reich Ministry for the Economy with the Austrian Minister of Finance Hans Fischböck – Dr. H. having been the son-in-law of the Yugoslav-German Adolf W., a leather manufacturer and industrialist who was well respected by the Nazi regime – the Country of Austria sold the leather factory to Dr. H. in March 1939 and the properties in Atzgersdorf and Liesing to Dr. H. and his wife, each purchasing a one half share.

In September 1948 Fritz S. filed an application with the Restitution Commission Vienna for restitution of the leather factory and the properties in Atzgersdorf and Liesing. The Restitution Commission issued a partial decision in the matter in which it ruled that the leather factory and the properties were to be restituted to Fritz S. Following protracted negotiations, Fritz S. ceded his restitution claims in these proceedings to August W., the brother of Adolf W., in exchange for an unknown sum, and withdrew his application in July 1950.

In principle, the Arbitration Panel is precluded from deciding on a claim that has already been decided on by an Austrian authority or settled by agreement between the parties or for which the applicants or his/her relations have “otherwise” received compensation or other consideration. However, in certain exceptional cases in which the Arbitration Panel reaches the unanimous decision that a previous settlement by agreement or decision by an authority constitutes an “extreme injustice”, the Entschädigungsfondsgesetz (“General Settlement Fund Law” – GSF Law) permits the Arbitration Panel to take a new decision on the claim.

In the case at hand, however, the claims of Fritz S. were not decided by an Austrian court or an administrative authority. Nor was a settlement by agreement reached with the adverse party to the restitution. Instead, Fritz S. ceded his restitution claims to August W. in exchange for a sum of money. Therefore, in this way Fritz S. received compensation for the properties at issue. It did not need to be examined whether an “extreme injustice” existed as the payment made to Fritz S. by August W. constituted compensation “otherwise” received by the applicants’ legal predecessor and therefore is not one of the exceptions cited in the GSF Law. Therefore, the applications for in rem restitution had to be rejected.