Illustrative narrative · not a real case
Heirs in two countries.
Two siblings, one family home — and between them a distance that could not simply be bridged. After the second parent had died, the house stood in the region; one sister still lived nearby, the other had lived in another country for years. On paper they agreed: the house was to be sold, calmly, without quarrel. The reality of the first months looked different.
Every errand with the authorities became a matter for the telephone. The sister on the spot handled what had to be handled — and the sister far away learned of everything with a delay, second-hand, often only once it had already happened. Not out of ill will, but because one was present and one was not. From this imbalance misunderstandings grew: one felt passed over, the other left alone with the work. Out of frustration, the word partition auction was spoken for the first time — the supposedly easier path that would in truth have harmed them both the most.
It was at this point that the two came to us. We did not advise one side; we addressed the community of heirs as a whole — never „you against your sister“, but „the two of you facing one task“. The first step was not a mandate and not an appointment with the notary, but a calm orientation conversation in which we sorted out what truly pressed and what could wait. Much of what looked like delay was time spent waiting on authorities and banks — not inaction of their own.
From the outset we made sure that both sisters held the same level of information. Every message went to both, at the same time. The distant sister was never second class. The mere fact that she stopped learning everything second-hand visibly took tension out of the matter.
Fairness in the process took the pressure out of the matter — the sisters stayed in conversation, across the distance.
Anonymised, condensed account of a typical course; no real individual case, no real names.
How we proceeded
The greatest knot was untied by the valuation. As long as each side held its own idea of the worth, „your agent against my agent“ stood unspoken in the room. We therefore arranged a neutral arbitration value through an independent expert — expressly not through us, but as a common ground on which both could stand. The result was not a recommendation but a fact that held for both. From then on the sisters no longer argued about figures; they talked about paths.
We then, in a calm family workshop, laid the possibilities side by side without favouring any one: a joint sale on the market, one sister taking over against compensation, the sale of a share in the estate, and, as the last resort, a partition auction. To each possibility belonged the sober three-way calculation — what it would mean for each of the two on her own share. That a partition auction stays well below the worth and costs months was never a threat here, but simply a fact. The sisters chose the joint path not because they had to, but because it added up for them both. What was taking shape we set down in a key-points paper that both could examine calmly before any signature.
Across the distance, it was not technology alone that helped, but a dependable process. Both sisters shared the same data room; every document lay ready for both. The valuation was presented to the distant sister on screen in the same depth as to her sister at the table. Where a signature was needed, it was given securely from afar; where someone had to be present, we bundled the appointments into a single longer stay instead of many separate journeys. A written weekly report reached both alike.
Two countries, one house under German law
That the estate touched two countries sounded at first like a complication. Here, placing it in context helped the most. Which law of succession applies at all is governed by the EU Succession Regulation — in essence by the deceased’s last habitual residence, with the option of choosing one’s national law. For the house itself there was reassurance nonetheless: because the deceased last had her habitual residence in Germany, German succession law governed the entire estate — and the land register and its procedures follow German law in any event. Everything ran in its familiar place — community of heirs, land register, everything in its familiar place. This clarification lifted the two’s greatest worry.
What cost time across the border was not conflict but administration. Alongside the German certificate of inheritance, a European Certificate of Succession was needed, which supplements the certificate of inheritance rather than replacing it; its processing takes time, and its certified copy is valid only for a limited period — which, in longer phases, can call for a renewal application. Certified translations by sworn professionals were added. And because between many countries there is no agreement on inheritance tax, the tax question had to be considered carefully.
On this we only prepared the facts and ordered the questions; the actual tax and legal advice lay with the responsible professionals, whom we brought the two together with. Here too, what held over the whole process held: much was time spent waiting on offices and banks, not a failing of their own — and none of it had to happen in haste.
The difficult moment — and how it eased
The most dangerous point came early, before we were involved: the moment when, out of exhaustion, the partition auction appeared to be the „easy way“. It is the classic moment in which a worn-out side is drawn to precisely the path that harms it most. We never used that path as a threat — that would be the opposite of our stance. We showed it only for what it is: one possibility among several, with consequences each of the two could read off her own share.
What lowered the temperature was not a kind word, but the process itself. Once the neutral arbitration value lay on the table, there was nothing left to mistrust. Once both sisters saw the same documents at the same time, the distance was no longer a disadvantage. And once the three-way calculation showed each what she actually stood to gain or lose, it was not pressure that made the decision, but insight.
And so the course reversed. From two sisters who threatened to lose each other across the distance came two who decided together and at their own pace — first the peace between them, then the matter of the house.
What counted in the end
In the end there was no victory for one side, but a shared, orderly decision — reached across the distance. What helped was not pressure but a fair process: a common ground, clear steps, and both sisters always at the same level. Two countries did not become two camps, but one decision.
The sale proceeded calmly. And the most important thing the two said themselves: they had done it like grown-ups — and had stayed, as sisters, in conversation.
Free initial consultation · without obligation · reply within two business days