In an action for information on the compulsory portion (Pflichtteil), the starting point is this: anyone who wants to quantify his or her compulsory portion needs information that only the heirs have. For this purpose, § 2314 German Civil Code (Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, BGB) gives the person entitled to a compulsory portion a claim for information against the heirs. If they refuse to give information or give it incompletely, the entitled person can enforce it by an action for information (Auskunftsklage), usually as the first stage of a stage-by-stage action (Stufenklage). He or she can also demand that the inventory be drawn up by a notary.
The claim for information and the action for information concern the first stage of enforcement. The amount of the compulsory portion is covered in the article on the compulsory portion of children. The legal position is October 2026. The article also addresses readers living abroad who are entitled to a compulsory portion under German law, or who face a German estate with assets in several countries.
Who Can Demand Information and Who Owes It
Entitled to information is the person entitled to a compulsory portion who is not an heir. Under the opening sentence of § 2314 (1) BGB, the claim applies if the person entitled to a compulsory portion is not an heir. Someone who has become an heir himself or herself, for example with a share that is too small, does not fall under it according to the wording; his or her information rights, for example as a co-heir, must be examined separately. The debtor is the heir, and where there are several heirs, each of them. § 2314 BGB grants no claim for information against the recipient of a gift itself; information about the testator’s gifts is demanded from the heir.
The duty to give information exists as soon as the succession has occurred. It does not depend on whether the compulsory portion actually exists later, but serves to clarify that. The objection that the estate is small or overindebted does not, as a rule, release the heir from giving information. With an overindebted estate the compulsory portion may be small, but this too emerges only from the information.
What the Claim for Information Covers
§ 2314 (1) BGB grants the entitled person the claim for information and further rights that he or she can assert individually or together:
← Tabelle nach links wischen, um weitere Spalten zu sehen
| Right | Content | Basis |
|---|---|---|
| Inventory | List of the estate at the date of death, assets and liabilities | § 2314 (1) sentence 1, § 260 (1) BGB |
| Presence | Person entitled to a compulsory portion may be present when the inventory is drawn up | § 2314 (1) sentence 2 BGB |
| Valuation | Determination of the value of the estate assets, for example by experts | § 2314 (1) sentence 2 BGB |
| Official inventory | Drawn up by an authority, an official or a notary | § 2314 (1) sentence 3 BGB |
The inventory must show the estate at the time of death: real estate, accounts and securities accounts, shareholdings, insurance, receivables and other values, as well as the estate liabilities. This includes digital assets, for example crypto assets; on their treatment in a succession, see Cryptocurrency in an inheritance. For the valuation, the person entitled to a compulsory portion can demand an expert opinion. The costs of the information, including the costs of the notary and of the valuation, fall on the estate (§ 2314 (2) BGB). The person entitled to a compulsory portion therefore does not have to advance them, but they reduce the estate and thus, arithmetically, the compulsory portion.
The claim for information also includes information that is relevant for the supplementary compulsory portion claim (Pflichtteilsergänzungsanspruch), that is lifetime gifts and similar benefits, to the extent they can be taken into account. You must ask specifically about them and request the heir to include them in the inventory. An inventory that shows only the estate on the day of death is not sufficient for the supplement.
Private or Notarial Inventory of the Estate
The law knows two forms. A private inventory is drawn up and signed by the heir himself or herself. An official inventory, in practice a notarial one, is drawn up by the notary, at the request of the person entitled to the compulsory portion under § 2314 (1) sentence 3 BGB. It is for the entitled person to choose which form to use. It is enough that he or she demands a notarial inventory; he or she does not first have to let a private one fail.
According to the case law of the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof), the notarial inventory offers greater reliability than the private one. The notary may not limit himself or herself to adopting the heir’s statements or checking them for plausibility, but must determine the composition of the estate himself or herself and independently (BGH, judgment of 20 May 2020, IV ZR 193/19). The Higher Regional Court of Celle (Oberlandesgericht Celle) has held that an inventory is not sufficient if the notary does not himself or herself ask about bank balances and tax refunds but relies on the statements of the heiress (OLG Celle, decision of 29 October 2020, 6 U 34/20). The person entitled to a compulsory portion may be called in when the inventory is drawn up.
The heir also owes his or her cooperation. In the case before the Federal Court of Justice, the heir had not allowed the notary to request account data from a bank abroad. The court decided that the person entitled to a compulsory portion can demand the supplementing or correction of a notarial inventory even if it is incomplete because of the heir’s lack of cooperation. In principle, a notarial inventory already available cannot be supplemented; the entitled person is then referred to the declaration in lieu of an oath. Exceptions exist, among other cases, if the inventory is obviously incomplete, for example because the heir refused the necessary cooperation. According to this decision, an asset declaration made by the heir abroad does not replace a notarial inventory of the estate, because it remains a private declaration.
The notary’s costs are governed by the GNotKG (Court and Notary Fees Act). The value of the transaction is measured by the value of the assets covered (§ 115 GNotKG), and the fee under the fee schedule is twice the simple fee (no. 23500 KV GNotKG). The notary states the specific amount on request before the inventory is drawn up. As with the valuation, the estate bears the costs.
Declaration in Lieu of an Oath
If it is to be feared that the inventory was not drawn up with the necessary care, the person entitled to a compulsory portion can demand that the heir declare in lieu of an oath that he or she has stated the estate to the best of his or her knowledge as completely as he or she is able to (§ 260 (2) BGB). In matters of minor importance the duty does not apply (§ 259 (3) BGB). The declaration is made before the local court (§ 889 ZPO). It does not replace missing information, however, but only confirms the heir’s statements. Anyone who expects a complete inventory should therefore first enforce the requirements for the inventory.
The Route to the Action for Information
The procedure falls into four steps:
- Out-of-court demand: You demand in writing that the heirs give information under § 2314 BGB and set a deadline. State whether you demand a private or a notarial inventory, and ask expressly about gifts and assets abroad.
- Assessing the reply: Check whether the inventory contains the estate, the liabilities and the values and whether documents are enclosed. Missing accounts, shareholdings or properties are a reason to ask further.
- Action: If the heirs refuse to give information or it remains incomplete, the action follows for information, for a notarial inventory or for supplementing. The standard is the stage-by-stage action under § 254 ZPO; only it makes the payment claim pending immediately and suspends its limitation (BGH, judgment of 24 January 2019, IX ZR 233/17).
- Enforcement: Since information is an act that cannot be performed by a third party, the judgment is enforced by a coercive fine or coercive detention (§ 888 ZPO).
Precision matters in the application. The claim must be definite: it should state the reference date (the death), the scope (assets, liabilities, gifts), the form (private or notarial) and, where applicable, the right to be present. An imprecisely worded application leads to judgments that are hard to enforce.
The local court has subject-matter jurisdiction up to an amount in dispute of 10,000 euros, above that the regional court (§ 23 no. 1 GVG), where representation by a lawyer is mandatory (§ 78 (1) ZPO). The amount in dispute of a stand-alone action for information depends on the claimant’s interest in the information and is estimated (§ 3 ZPO). Courts often apply a fraction of the expected payment claim; there is no fixed ratio. In a stage-by-stage action, the higher of the combined claims applies (§ 44 GKG).
A calculation example for the order of magnitude: if in a fictitious action for information the court sets an amount in dispute of 20,000 euros, one side’s lawyer’s costs with a hearing are 2,618.00 euros gross (1.3 procedural fee and 1.2 hearing fee from 872 euros, flat rate 20 euros, 19 % VAT). The court fee is 1,215 euros (3.0 from 405 euros). Figures for notary costs and expert opinions come on top and cannot be stated as a flat amount.
Limitation of the Claim for Information
Information is an ancillary claim to the compulsory portion. Like the compulsory portion claim, the claim for information is subject to the regular three-year limitation (BGH, judgment of 12 March 2025, IV ZR 88/24); the court therefore examines limitation already at the information stage. Anyone who waits long before enforcing therefore also risks losing the information. The regular limitation is three years from the end of the year of knowledge (§§ 195, 199 (1) BGB); alongside it, the maximum period of 30 years from the death applies (§ 199 (3a) BGB). A pure action for information suspends only the limitation of the claim for information, not that of the payment claim (BGH, judgment of 24 January 2019, IX ZR 233/17). The standard is therefore the stage-by-stage action, which also suspends the payment claim from the start. More on calculating the period is in the article on limitation of the compulsory portion.
Typical Defects of the Inventory and What to Do
← Tabelle nach links wischen, um weitere Spalten zu sehen
| Defect | Consequence | Reaction |
|---|---|---|
| Only assets, no liabilities | Compulsory portion cannot be calculated | Demand supplementing |
| Accounts or securities accounts missing | Estate incomplete | Demand bank information, demand notarial inventory |
| Values missing | Valuation open | Valuation under § 2314 (1) sentence 2 BGB, expert opinion |
| Gifts not mentioned | Supplementary claim cannot be examined | Specific question about gifts, demand information again |
| Inventory private despite doubts | Reliability low | Demand notarial inventory under sentence 3 |
| Notary without own investigation | Inventory may not suffice | Supplementing or new preparation (BGH IV ZR 193/19, OLG Celle 6 U 34/20) |
Three Mistakes Laypeople Make with Information
First: accepting an incomplete private inventory. Anyone who accepts incomplete statements and stays silent for a long time loses time that runs against limitation. Demand more early, set deadlines and, in case of doubt, demand the notarial inventory.
Second: requesting the notarial inventory without fixing its scope. After a notarial inventory is available, supplementing is possible only in exceptional cases. Therefore work in advance to ensure that the notary asks banks, the land register and the tax office; the notary determines the type and scope of the investigations at his or her dutiful discretion. Also demand to be present when the inventory is drawn up.
Third: suing only for information and forgetting the payment. A stand-alone action for information does not suspend the limitation of the payment claim (BGH, judgment of 24 January 2019, IX ZR 233/17). Anyone who does not make the payment claim pending may find it time-barred after the information.
Information on Assets Abroad
If assets are abroad, obtaining information becomes more demanding. The notary cannot request information from banks abroad without the heir’s cooperation. In such cases the heir must cooperate, for example by powers of attorney or by enforcing his or her own claims for information against the bank. Which inheritance law applies at all is determined in the EU in principle by the testator’s last habitual residence (Art. 21 (1) EuErbVO); Art. 21 (2) EuErbVO exceptionally lets the law of a state with a manifestly closer connection apply. A compulsory portion under German law, and thus § 2314 BGB, comes into consideration only if German law applies, for example by virtue of a choice of law under Art. 22 EuErbVO. Denmark and Ireland do not apply the Regulation; German courts treat them like third countries. What foreign law says about information and the compulsory portion is a matter for an adviser on the spot.
Further reading: Compulsory portion law and foreign assets, Bequeathing real estate abroad, the CRS reporting duties for foreign accounts, the tracing of heirs with a foreign connection and the estate guardianship with a foreign connection.
Conclusion
The claim for information under § 2314 BGB is the basis of every compulsory portion calculation. It covers the estate, liabilities, values and, on request, gifts. The entitled person can demand a notarial inventory from the outset, which under the case law the notary must prepare by his or her own investigations. Before the action, the demand, the deadline and the scope should be clear; in the action, the limitation of the payment claim should stay in view. With assets abroad, the applicable inheritance law is decisive first, and the heir’s cooperation is especially important.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I demand information about the estate from the heir?
Yes, if you are entitled to a compulsory portion and are not an heir. Under § 2314 (1) BGB, you can demand an inventory, a valuation and an official, usually notarial, inventory. The estate bears the costs (§ 2314 (2) BGB).
Does the inventory of the estate have to be notarial?
No, but you can demand it. Under § 2314 (1) sentence 3 BGB, the entitled person can demand a notarial inventory from the outset; the law does not require doubts about a private inventory. The notary then determines the estate himself or herself.
Who pays the notary for the inventory of the estate?
The estate. § 2314 (2) BGB assigns the costs of the information to the estate. They reduce the value of the estate, and thus arithmetically the compulsory portion, but the person entitled to a compulsory portion does not have to advance them out of his or her own pocket.
What can I do if the heir refuses to give information?
Set a deadline in writing; after that the action comes into consideration, usually as a stage-by-stage action so that the payment claim becomes pending at the same time. The judgment is enforced by a coercive fine or coercive detention (§ 888 ZPO). Watch limitation.
Can I have a notarial inventory of the estate supplemented afterwards?
Only in exceptional cases. In principle, where a notarial inventory is available, the entitled person is referred to the declaration in lieu of an oath. Exceptions exist if the inventory is obviously incomplete, for example because the heir refused the necessary cooperation (BGH, judgment of 20 May 2020, IV ZR 193/19).
Attorney Dr. Johannes Fiala and the law firm, with a focus on international inheritance law, tax law and asset protection in Munich, advise persons entitled to a compulsory portion and heirs on claims for information, from the demand to the heirs through the notarial inventory of the estate to the action for information where there are assets abroad. Dr. Fiala has published extensively on questions of emigration and asset protection. Contact the firm without obligation to have your individual situation discussed in an initial consultation.
