At the hearing at the Inner City District Court in Vienna, the taking of evidence begins with the hearing of both parties. Veronika and Sebastian Bohrn Mena have sued Schilling for the public retraction of several statements that they describe as “inconsistent with the facts”, “insulting to honor” and “damaging credit”.
More on the topic
“Spy affair”: Pilz convicted of prohibited publication
The court date is the second hearing in the revocation action against Schilling. The plaintiffs accuse the former climate activist of having “spread” untrue allegations “to a large number of third parties” since 2022 and thereby “endangered” the plaintiffs’ “economic reputation,” which Schilling denies. Specifically, it is about the statement that Sebastian Bohrn Mena was violent towards his wife several times and in various ways, as a result of which Veronika Bohrn Mena suffered a miscarriage. Schilling should also retract that the Bohrn Mena couple would personally enrich themselves through a charitable foundation they founded and run and thereby act “like the mafia”. Schilling emphasizes that she “never publicly disseminated” the incriminating allegations.
Will Schilling come personally?
At the first session of the proceedings in June, Judge Andrea Zlöbl pushed for an amicable settlement as part of an internal court settlement procedure. This hasn’t happened yet. “We proposed a settlement procedure, but this was rejected by the other side,” Schilling’s lawyer Maria Windhager told the APA on Monday. In the summer, an offer to initiate settlement proceedings without lawyers was not desired; the time before the hearing date was too short for a new offer made by the other side 14 days ago, said Bohrn Menas’ legal representative, Peter Zöchbauer. However, settlement discussions were offered at lawyer level.
At the second hearing, those involved – Schilling and the Bohrn Menas – will be heard. There was currently no confirmation from her lawyer that Schilling would appear in person. Lists of possible witnesses are also submitted with the requests for evidence. The legal representatives of both sides did not want to give any information in advance about which witnesses should be called. Zöchbauer confirmed that Schilling’s lawyer had submitted a request not to comply with the plaintiffs’ requests for evidence. After the decision on the requests for evidence, the court will also determine the further timetable for the proceedings on Thursday.
