Important information on the legal dispute of Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr

Written justification of the judgment of the OLG Hamm of May 7, 2025

In the written reasons for the ruling of May 7, 2025, the Hamm Higher Regional Court did not take the following significant facts into account in its decision:

1. The Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr twice denied the existence of Arthur Levy’s bank balance to the plaintiff in writing – contrary to the files – before the action was filed (no account available);

2. the bank deposits were expropriated to finance the war chest during the National Socialist regime;

3. the civil limitation period of 30 years must not be applied to this Nazi crime, especially since

a) the Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr has not submitted any effective proof that Arthur Levy’s bank account has been closed (letter of termination etc.) – this means that the business relationship with the Sparkasse has not yet been terminated.

b) the claimant only became aware of the existence of the account in November 2019

c) according to the federal study “Social Impact Fund” commissioned by the Federal Government (Schalast und Partner Rechtsanwälte, 2021, cf. dormant assets ), the Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr was obliged to use all communication channels to locate the descendant of the account holder Arthur Levy entitled to inherit before the end of the limitation period

d) the plea of the statute of limitations due to the misinformation about the existence of the account (before filing the action) constitutes a breach of good faith (unlawful).

The judges at the OLG Hamm: Elmar Lemken (center), Dr. Telg gen. Kortmann, Dr. Züllighoven
Source: Süddeutsche Zeitung / May 7, 2025

Following the judgment of the Hamm Higher Regional Court, further documents have since come to light which prove that the Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr also made false statements in 1963 about the plaintiff’s great-grandfather, Simson Cohen, regarding his bank account at the same savings bank and made the demonstrably false protective claim to the authorities that the account documents had been bombed or destroyed. The savings bank thus systematically covered up the truth about the expropriated Jewish bank deposits

For this reason, an action for restitution was also filed with the Hamm Higher Regional Court on May 27, 2025, so that the new findings would allow the proceedings to be reopened at the 2nd instance. The new documents have shown that the Sparkasse an Volme und Ruhr itself deliberately provided false information to other corporate bodies. However, the Hamm Higher Regional Court assumed that the plaintiff’s grandfather and account holder Arthur Levy could have received correct information after the foundation of the FRG. However, the newly discovered documents show that Arthur Levy would certainly have been given incorrect information about his account if he had asked the savings bank. The plea of the statute of limitations is therefore unfaithful and unlawful. In addition, the reversal of the burden of proof becomes definitive; the savings bank must prove that it would have provided truthful information about Arthur Levy’s account, which it fails to do.