Vienna A 72-year-old Austrian journalist spent his holidays in the Tyrolean town of Ischgl from March 7th to 13th, 2020. He later fell ill with Covid-19 and died of it in April of that year.
The widow and son of the deceased have now sued the Republic of Austria for damages: the authorities would have known how dangerous the virus was and that it was rampant in Ischgl; nevertheless they did nothing for a while to protect the tourists and the inhabitants of the place from the epidemic. In the room there is the accusation that the main concern of the authorities was to allow the winter sports operations, which are economically important for Tyrol, to continue running as undisturbed as possible.
The fate of the journalist formed the prelude to a series of civil law proceedings that could keep Austria busy for years to come: especially since the Austrian consumer protection association and the lawyer commissioned by it, Alexander Klauser, deploy heavy artillery against the country.
They support the plaintiffs and, if they can find a litigation financier, also seek a type of class action against Austria. Allegedly 6000 victims have reported to the consumer protection association. 15 lawsuits are already in court.
Top jobs of the day
Find the best jobs now and
be notified by email.
The cases go back to the events on March 13, 2020. It was a fatal day for Ischgl and the tourists present in the village. Thousands of them left their accommodations in a hurry after Austria’s Chancellor Sebastian Kurz announced at a press conference that the entire Paznaun Valley would be quarantined because of the pandemic.
Covid-19 spread in half of Europe
Since then, Ischgl has been considered a super-spreader location: tourists who were already infected and those who were infected with the corona virus on their chaotic departure would have spread Covid-19 in half of Europe, is the suspicion.
The relatives believe that the aforementioned Austrian journalist was also infected before or on the journey home. To derive the right to compensation from this is, however, legally complex – and that is exactly what the Supreme Court in Vienna was about on Friday.
First, the plaintiffs have to prove that the authorities are at fault. Second, they will only receive compensation if the damage is clearly attributable to this fault and the ski tourists were actually infected in Ischgl and not elsewhere. In other words: The judge must ask herself whether the authorities’ dutiful action would have averted the damage to the journalist and other victims.
Klauser and the consumer protection association are thus faced with a difficult task. That is probably one of the reasons why the lawyer proposed another settlement to the opposing party at the beginning of the day of the trial. “We are still interested in a friendly solution,” he said.
Corona victims are suing Austrian authorities
He suggested that a round table be convened, possibly as part of a mediation. The lawyers of the Finanzprokuratur, who represent the republic, rejected this request. At this point in time, a comparison is not possible, they said. On the day of the trial, the lawyers of the Financial Procuratorate continued to take the position that the authorities had acted correctly from the point of view of the time (“ex-ante”).
Lawyer submits tons of questions
Lawyer Klauser, on the other hand, relied on the “serious misjudgments” that the Ischgl expert report by former judge Ronald Rohrer had already established in October 2020.
The events at the beginning of March 2020 are central to Klauser’s argumentation. At that time, there were reports that Icelandic tourists who had returned home and who had stayed in Ischgl fell ill with Covid-19. The Tyrolean authorities took the position that the infection must have taken place on the plane from Munich to Iceland. However, Rohner already made it clear that this was “untrue due to the objective information available”.
It is unclear why the Tyrolean authorities held on to their statements on March 5th and 8th. This is where attorney Klauser set the lever. He submitted countless questions with which he wanted to prove that the authorities were only interested in taking Ischgl out of the field of fire against their better judgment.
The penetrance of Klauser’s questions clearly annoyed the judge, and the lawyers of the financial procurator said that Klauser could have submitted his questions in writing before the trial. They accused the lawyer of the consumer protection association to organize a “dance” for the numerous journalists present. Klauser, in turn, asserted legal reasons for his question.
In the end, the first hearing on the Ischgl case lasted three and a half hours instead of the estimated two hours. The judge will now clarify whether a so-called official liability suit against Austria is possible. The tough first day of the process should be symbolic of the lengthy proceedings to come. The next hearing will take place at the end of September. Then the relatives of a deceased German will demand compensation.
More: Who is responsible for the infections in Ischgl? Legal subtlety is central to the process
.