The heir won't hand anything over – how do I compel disclosure of the estate?

When the heir ignores your requests or gives only vague answers, you have clear rights to information as a person entitled to a compulsory share – right up to a court-imposed penalty. Here is how to enforce them.

You have asked the heir for information about the estate – and you have received either no reply at all, a handwritten list with no substance, or a curt “that is none of your business”. You know you are entitled to a compulsory share. But you cannot put a figure on it, because you do not know what the estate actually contains. This is not some rare exception; it is the single most common reason why compulsory-share claims stall.

In brief

Under § 2314 BGB you have your own, enforceable right to information against the heir – whether or not he chooses to cooperate. If the first round of information is not enough, you can require a notarial inventory of the estate and a statutory declaration in lieu of an oath. If the heir keeps refusing, the claim is enforced in court by way of a claim brought in stages. A judgment can, if necessary, be enforced by a court-imposed penalty under § 888 ZPO. And you do not bear the cost of this – the estate does.

How I can help you

• Drafting and sending a legally watertight request for information, with a proper deadline
• Assessing whether a private inventory is sufficient or whether a notarial one must be demanded
• Enforcing the statutory declaration in lieu of an oath where the information is implausible or incomplete
• Preparing and conducting a staged claim if the heir blocks you indefinitely
• Checking whether gifts made in the last ten years belong in the disclosure and are missing from it
• Once the information is in: calculating and enforcing the quantified compulsory share

Your right to information: exactly what you can demand

Where you are entitled to a compulsory share but are not a co-heir, § 2314(1) BGB gives you the right to demand that the heir provide information about the composition of the estate. This is far more than a rough overview. The claim covers:

• A complete inventory of all assets (property, bank accounts, securities portfolios, cash, vehicles, jewellery, works of art, business holdings, receivables) and liabilities (debts, funeral costs, other obligations) as at the date of death.
• Gifts and gratuitous transfers made by the deceased that may be relevant to a claim to supplement the compulsory share under § 2325 BGB. Under § 2325(3) BGB, gifts made within the final year before death are taken into account in full. After that, the value tapers by one tenth for each further year. After ten years, a gift no longer counts at all. Where a gift was made to the deceased’s spouse, this period does not even begin to run until the marriage ends – which often means not until death. Heirs (and, sadly, some advisers too) regularly overlook this.
• The right to be present when the inventory is drawn up, if you wish.
• Valuation of individual items in the estate – for instance by way of an expert appraisal of property or business shares. You can insist on this too, where a bare list without figures gets you nowhere.

The fundamental mistake heirs make is believing that an informal list discharges the duty. It does not, where the inventory is plainly incomplete, out of date, or impossible to verify.

Private or notarial inventory – and when you may escalate

The heir may, in the first instance, provide the information himself, in his own private writing. In many cases that is enough – for example with modest, well-documented estates. But you are not obliged to accept it where there are well-founded doubts about its care or completeness.

In that situation, § 2314(1) BGB entitles you to require that a competent authority, an official, or a notary draw up the inventory. The practical difference is this: the notary does not simply record what the heir tells him. He makes his own enquiries, approaching banks, land registries and insurers. He documents his findings in a form that carries far more weight before a court than a private list. An heir must produce a notarial inventory. He can no longer retreat behind “I didn’t know that.”

An important point for your cost planning: under § 2314(2) BGB, the cost falls to the estate – not to you personally, and not out of the heir’s own pocket. So the argument that “a notarial inventory is too expensive” does not hold, provided the estate has the means to pay for it.

When you don’t believe the figures: the statutory declaration in lieu of an oath

Even an inventory that has been produced – whether private or notarial – is sometimes plainly incomplete. An account is missing, a securities portfolio goes unmentioned, or a vehicle’s current value is pitched obviously too low. For exactly this situation, § 260(2) BGB gives you a powerful tool. Where there is reason to believe that the inventory was not drawn up with the necessary care, you can demand more. The heir must then declare, on the record and in lieu of an oath, that he has given the information as completely as he is able to the best of his knowledge.

This is no mere formality. A false declaration in lieu of an oath is a criminal offence. In practice, simply signalling that you will take this step often gets things moving. Matters that had stood still for months suddenly spring into life. But it requires a concrete indication of incompleteness. A mere gut feeling is not enough – you need something tangible, such as a known but unlisted property, or account movements that point to an account that was never mentioned.

When nothing else works: the staged claim and enforcement

If the heir fails to respond despite a deadline, or the information remains permanently inadequate, the next step is to go to court. At that point you cannot yet put a figure on your monetary claim, because you do not yet know the value of the estate. That is why I use the staged claim under § 254 ZPO. It combines several stages in a single set of proceedings:

1. a claim for information (production of an inventory of assets),
2. where needed, a claim for the statutory declaration in lieu of an oath,
3. and only then the quantified monetary claim for the specific compulsory-share amount – which you can only formulate once you have received the information.

The advantage: you do not have to wait until all the information is in. You can begin proceedings before that. What is more, bringing the staged claim suspends the limitation period for your compulsory-share claim as a whole.

If the court orders the heir to provide the information and he still fails to do so, that is not the end of the road. Providing information is an act that cannot be performed by anyone else – no one but the heir can carry it out for him. For precisely this situation, § 888 ZPO provides a means of applying pressure. On application, the trial court orders a coercive penalty payment. If that cannot be collected, coercive detention follows. Both are designed to make the debtor act. Unlike other enforcement measures, § 888(2) ZPO requires no prior warning – the coercive measure can be imposed straight away.

An example from practice

A daughter is disinherited by her father’s will; her brother inherits the entire estate. She requests information about the estate in writing. Weeks later, the brother sends half a page listing the known bank accounts. Not a word about the apartment building the father had transferred to the brother four years before his death. The daughter knows of this transfer from earlier conversations with her father. Her solicitor first demands a notarial inventory and insists that the gift be included, pointing to the tapering rule in § 2325(3) BGB, under which the gift still counts at 60% after four years. Only when the brother continues to stonewall is the staged claim brought. In the course of the proceedings he produces the complete inventory, gift and all. Without that step, he would have faced a coercive penalty.

Common mistakes

• Pushing for the quantified amount too soon. Without reliable information, the compulsory share cannot be calculated properly. Bringing a monetary claim prematurely risks defeat for lack of substance.
• Forgetting about gifts. Many clients ask only about the “estate as at the date of death”. They overlook that lifetime transfers made in the last ten years must be expressly demanded as well.
• Settling for an amateur list even though there are already real doubts about its completeness – and then, months later and after the deadline has passed, demanding a notarial inventory after all.
• No deadline letter with proof of delivery. Without a documented, reasonable deadline, you later lack the evidence that the heir was in fact in default.
• Losing sight of limitation. The limitation period for the compulsory-share claim keeps running even during drawn-out negotiations with the heir. That is so unless it is suspended by a claim or by agreement.

Frequently asked questions

Do I have to set a deadline first before I can bring a claim?

It is not strictly required, but it is strongly advisable. Without a prior, documented request with a reasonable deadline, you run the following risk: the heir immediately acknowledges the claim, and you are ordered to pay the costs of the proceedings – even though you ultimately succeed.

Who pays the notary for the notarial inventory of the estate?

Under § 2314(2) BGB the cost is borne by the estate, not by you and not by the heir personally. This applies regardless of whether a compulsory share is in fact paid out in the end.

What if the heir claims there is no estate worth mentioning?

That assertion does not release him from the duty to provide information. You can still demand an inventory, notarial if need be, and where there are well-founded doubts you can require the statutory declaration in lieu of an oath.

Can I also demand information about accounts held in a third party’s name?

If, in economic terms, this was the deceased’s own money, or if there is a gift within the meaning of § 2325 BGB, it belongs in the disclosure. That has to be assessed on the facts of the individual case, looking at how the account was operated and the circumstances of the transfer.

How long do I have to assert the right to information?

The right to information is subject to limitation, just as the compulsory-share claim itself is. The essentials – in particular when the period starts and how long it lasts – are covered in detail in the article Enforcing the compulsory share.

Your next step

When an heir is playing for time, your position does not get worse simply by waiting. But every week without reliable information makes it harder to put a figure on the claim later. It also eats into the running limitation period. I will review your case, draft the request for information at the right level of escalation, and, if it comes to it, see you through the staged claim all the way to enforcement. You will find more about your rights concerning the compulsory share, and other subjects from the field of inheritance law, in the overview. Or you can arrange an initial consultation straight away.

The next part of this series looks at how to work out the actual sum payable on your compulsory share, correctly, from the inventory of the estate once you have it.

This article provides general information and does not constitute legal advice. It cannot replace advice tailored to your individual case.

This article provides general information and is no substitute for legal advice in an individual case. Last updated: 2026-09-20.

Request an initial consultationWhat will it cost me?08091 617 7777