Local chief sentenced

Head of office raped: Municipality must pay

After a mayor raped the head of a local authority and was finally convicted, the municipality concerned must now pay compensation to the victim. The Supreme Court came to the conclusion that the municipality was liable for the rape.

The case made headlines for months: The then ÖVP politician - first a local councillor, then mayor of Scharten - had sexually harassed a female municipal employee twice between 2014 and 2016, raped her three times and later also slandered her. The former head of the local council, who is now behind bars, received a legally binding sentence for this: seven years in prison.

Permanent incapacity to work
However, the case continued to occupy the courts long after the court ruling. The victim demanded compensation from the municipality for her loss of earnings and sued the Republic as part of official liability proceedings. The plaintiff civil servant was initially on sick leave due to a depressive disorder caused by the mayor's sexual assaults and was eventually forced into early retirement due to permanent incapacity for work caused by illness. The claim amounted to 73,000 euros plus any future damages.

Court of appeal rejects claim
The court of first instance found the municipality liable for the rapes committed by the mayor in the municipal office - but both the municipality and the former mayor appealed against this decision. The Court of Appeal rejected the claim for benefits because the rapes were not sufficiently connected to the performance of official duties, in particular the exercise of the employer's duty of care.

Breach of duty of care
As has now become known, the Supreme Court (OGH) did not share the legal opinion of the Linz Higher Regional Court. "Due to his executive position as head of the municipal office, the mayor is also the person most responsible for complying with the duty of care towards the head of the office. By carrying out the rapes in the municipal office and therefore in the temporal and local (spatial) context of the plaintiff's work as head of the office, the mayor massively interfered with her physical integrity and thus also violated his duty of care as a superior," it says in the reasons for the judgment.

"He did exactly the opposite of what would have been his official duty as part of his duty of care. The rapes committed by the mayor against the head of the department are in any case attributable to the municipality under liability law," it continues.

Appointed as head of office for five years
The plaintiff was appointed head of the office for a limited period of five years. Her claim for loss of earnings exists for this period. For the period thereafter, it has not yet been determined whether the plaintiff was no longer appointed as head of the municipal office due to her state of health caused by the rapes or - as the municipality claims - was no longer appointed as head of the office due to her inappropriate behavior (regardless of her sick leave). The court of first instance must make findings on this in the proceedings to be continued.