Opinion of the Advocate General — ECLI:EU:C:2026:78
Date: 2026-02-05
Language of the case: German

Anonymised version 
Translation C-873/24 – 1 
Case C-873/24 [Marwanak] i 
Request for a preliminary ruling 
Date lodged: 
17 December 2024 
Referring court: 
Bundesgerichtshof (Germany) 
Date of the decision to refer: 
27 November 2024 
Applicants, appellants and appellants on a point of law: 
GK 
NU 
TZ 
MV 
UK 
  
Certified Copy 
BUNDESGERICHTSHOF (FEDERAL COURT OF JUSTICE, GERMANY) 
ORDER 
[…] 
of: 
27 November 2024 
 
i The name of the present case is a fictitious name. It does not correspond to the real name of any of the parties to the proceedings. 
EN 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 27. 11. 2024 – CASE C-873/24 
 
2  
Anonymised version 
in the succession case 
[…] 
Parties to the proceedings: 
1. GK, […] Potsdam (Germany), 
2. NU, […] Borger TX 79007 (USA), 
3. TZ, […] Rosstal (Germany), 
4. MV, […] Potsdam, 
5. UK, […] Fürth (Germany), 
applicants, appellants and appellants in the 
appeal on a point of law,    
[…] 
The Fourth Civil Panel of the Federal Court of Justice […] 
made, on 27 November 2024, the following 
Order: 
I. The proceedings are stayed. 
II. The following questions are referred to the Court of Justice of the European 
Union for a preliminary ruling on the interpretation of Regulation (EU) 
No 650/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 July 2012 
on jurisdiction, applicable law, recognition and enforcement of decisions 
and acceptance and enforcement of authentic instruments in matters of 
succession and on the creation of a European Certificate of Succession (OJ 
2012 L 201, p. 107). 
1. Is Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012 to be interpreted as 
meaning that a European Certificate of Succession must contain the 
information required under the national law of the State in which the 
property is located for the recording of the heir as its owner in the land 
register in respect of immovable property forming part of the estate 
and located in a Member State other than the State of the issuing 
authority where the heir has requested that such information be 
included in the European Certificate of Succession for the purposes of 
recording him or her as its owner in the land register of the State in 
which the property is located and where, if the European Certificate of 
Succession is the only document presented in support of the 
application for registration, the recording, under the national law of the 
MARWANAK 
 
3 
Anonymised version 
State in which the property is located, in the land register of that State 
can take place only if the European Certificate of Succession contains 
such information? 
2. Does it make any difference to the answer to Question 1 whether, 
under the applicable succession law, the transfer of the estate will take 
place by way of universal succession? 
3. Does it make any difference to the answer to Question 1 whether, 
instead of relying on the presentation of a European Certificate of 
Succession containing the information referred to in Question 1, the 
recording in the land register of the State in which the property is 
located, under the national law of that State, as referred to in 
Question 1, can also be obtained by the heir, or, after his or her death, 
his or her heir, presenting another document containing a declaration 
by the heir, or, after his or her death, by his or her heir, to the land 
registry of the State in which the property is located in addition to 
presenting a European Certificate of Succession that does not contain 
the information referred to in Question 1? 
Grounds: 
1 I. The proceedings concern the issue of a European Certificate of Succession. 
2 On 1 March 2013 the deceased and his wife drew up a joint will in which the 
couple named each other as the sole heir of the first to die and their daughter as 
the sole heir of the last to die. The deceased died on 5 October 2015 and his last 
habitual residence was in Germany. His daughter died on 5 January 2019 and his 
wife on 21 February 2022. The estate of the deceased included, inter alia, 
immovable property in the Czech Republic. 
3 The applicants are the children of the deceased daughter. For the purposes of the 
settlement of the estate in respect of the immovable property located in the Czech 
Republic, on 27 April 2023 they applied to the Amtsgericht (Local Court, 
Germany; ‘the Probate Court’) for the issue of a European Certificate of 
Succession designating the wife of the deceased as his sole heir and the children 
as his wife’s heirs, each with a 20% share in the succession. They also requested 
that the designation of the immovable property forming part of the estate in the 
Czech Republic be included in the Certificate of Succession. In support of their 
application they argued that, in view of the death of the heir in the meantime, 
recording the order of succession in the land register based solely on the European 
Certificate of Succession was possible under the Czech Land Registry Law only if 
the immovable property that was the subject of the recording was explicitly 
specified in the European Certificate of Succession. 
4 By order of 19 July 2023 the Probate Court rejected that application in so far as it 
had requested that the immovable property located in the Czech Republic be 
explicitly referred to. The Oberlandesgericht (Higher Regional Court, Germany) 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 27. 11. 2024 – CASE C-873/24 
 
4  
Anonymised version 
dismissed the appeal lodged against that ruling by order of 11 December 2023. It 
justified its reasoning by stating that including, for information purposes, 
individual assets of the estate which do not play a role in the presumptions and the 
protection of legitimate expectations under Regulation No 650/2012 would run 
counter to the intention of that regulation to create an instrument with formalised 
content that could be used in any Member State without any problems. A 
registration obligation cannot be inferred from the judgment of the Court of 
Justice of 9 March 2023 (Registrų centras, C-354/21, EU:C:2023:184 = 
ZEV 2023, 532) either, because the question of such an obligation is not raised 
therein. There is no provision stipulating that the issuing authority has to make 
enquiries as to whether the deceased still owned the alleged asset of the estate at 
the time of death. The inclusion of individual assets of the estate would jeopardise 
the certainty of legal transactions if the mere assertion that they formed part of the 
estate, made by an heir in a formal supporting document, were to be included, 
thereby creating the impression of being official. 
5 The applicants’ appeal on a point of law seeking the issue of a European 
Certificate of Succession that includes the specific designation of the immovable 
property forming part of the estate and located in the Czech Republic contests that 
ruling. 
6 II. The national provision in Article 1922(1) of the Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch 
(German Civil Code; ‘the BGB’), applicable to the present case, is worded as 
follows: 
7 ‘Paragraph 1922: Universal Succession 
8 (1) Upon the death of a person (devolution of an inheritance), that person’s 
property (estate) passes as a whole to one or several other persons (heirs).’ 
9 III. The decision on the appeal on a point of law depends on the interpretation of 
Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012. It will be successful if the applicants’ 
request to have the designation of the immovable property forming part of the 
estate and located in the Czech Republic recorded in the European Certificate of 
Succession should have been granted. 
10 1. The deceased’s wife inherited as the deceased’s sole heir under his will. As a 
result of being preceded in death by their daughter, the applicants, as the heirs of 
the deceased’s wife, are entitled, pursuant to Article 65(1) in conjunction with 
Article 63(1) of Regulation No 650/2012, to apply for the issue of a European 
Certificate of Succession concerning the estate of the deceased. 
11 2. Article 68 of Regulation No 650/2012 governs the substantive requirements 
pertaining to the European Certificate of Succession. Pursuant to Article 68(l) of 
Regulation No 650/2012, the certificate is to contain the share for each heir and, if 
applicable, the list of rights and/or assets for any given heir, to the extent required 
for the purpose for which it is issued. Whether that provision obliges the issuing 
authority to record immovable property located in another Member State in the 
MARWANAK 
 
5 
Anonymised version 
European Certificate of Succession with the information required under the 
national law of the State in which the property is located for the recording of an 
heir’s right of ownership in the land register, if the certificate is also necessary for 
that purpose in any case and, pursuant to its national law, the authority of the State 
in which the property is located would otherwise refuse to record that information 
solely on the basis of the European Certificate of Succession, is doubtful and 
needs to be clarified. 
12 (a) There is no established case-law of the Court of Justice in this regard. In 
particular, the questions of interpretation raised are not answered definitively by 
the decision of the Court of Justice in Case C-354/21 (judgment of 9 March 2023, 
Registrų centras, EU:C:2023:184 = ZEV 2023, 532). In those preliminary ruling 
proceedings the Court of Justice merely held that Article 1(2)(l), Article 68(l) and 
Article 69(5) of Regulation No 650/2012 must be interpreted as not precluding 
legislation of a Member State which provides that an application for registration 
of immovable property in the land register of that Member State may be rejected 
where the only document submitted in support of that application is a European 
Certificate of Succession which does not identify that immovable property (Court 
of Justice, judgment of 9 March 2023 loc. cit., paragraph 53). The question raised 
regarding an obligation on the part of the issuing authority to include, in a 
European Certificate of Succession, a list of assets for the heir concerned not only 
in the case of a succession concerning numerous heirs, but also in the case of a 
succession involving a single heir (Court of Justice, judgment of 9 March 2023 
loc. cit., paragraph 39), was not, however, answered by the Court of Justice. It 
merely recalled that the European Certificate of Succession constitutes an 
autonomous instrument of EU law (Court of Justice, judgment of 9 March 2023 
loc. cit., paragraph 40) and that the content of the certificate may vary from case 
to case depending on the purposes for which it is issued (Court of Justice, 
judgment of 9 March 2023 loc. cit., paragraph 45). It also held that Article 69(5) 
of the regulation, read in conjunction with Article 1(2)(l) thereof, does not prevent 
a Member State laying down or applying the requirements to be complied with for 
the purposes of registering rights in rem in immovable property (Court of Justice, 
judgment of 9 March 2023 loc. cit., paragraph 49). 
13 In any event, it does not unequivocally follow from all the foregoing that, in the 
facts giving rise to the request for a preliminary ruling, the Court of Justice 
considered that the issuing authority does have a registration obligation, especially 
since in that decision the Court of Justice expressly emphasised that the rejection 
of an application for registration of immovable property in a land register of a 
Member State, based on a European Certificate of Succession, on the ground that 
that certificate does not contain data relating to the identification of that property, 
does not call into question the validity of that certificate as such (judgment of 
9 March 2023, Registrų centras, C-354/21, EU:C:2023:184, paragraph 52 = 
ZEV 2023, 532). 
14 (b) Even after the decision of the Court of Justice in Case C-354/21 (judgment of 
9 March 2023, Registrų centras, EU:C:2023:184 = ZEV 2023, 532), the correct 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 27. 11. 2024 – CASE C-873/24 
 
6  
Anonymised version 
interpretation of Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012 is not so obvious as to 
leave no scope for any reasonable doubt as to the manner in which the questions 
raised are to be resolved and as to be equally obvious to the courts of the other 
Member States and to the Court of Justice (‘acte clair’; see judgments of the Court 
of Justice of 15 October 2024, Kubera, C-144/23, EU:C:2024:881, juris, 
paragraph 36, with further references; of 6 October 1982, Cilfit and Others, 
C-283/81, EU:C:1982:335, paragraph 16 = NJW 1983, 1257). This is already 
illustrated by the different legal views expressed in this regard in the case-law and 
legal literature. 
15 (aa) Along with the appellate court, parts of the national case-law and of the legal 
literature expressed the view – at least until the Court of Justice delivered its 
decision in Case C-354/21 (judgment of 9 March 2023, Registrų centras, 
EU:C:2023:184 = ZEV 2023, 532) – that listing specific assets of an estate was 
out of the question […] when under German substantive succession law by virtue 
of the principle of universal succession. The list of rights referred to in 
Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012 serves only a co-heir who is a beneficiary 
through directions for the sharing-out of the estate having a material effect under 
applicable foreign succession law by enabling him or her to demonstrate his or her 
entitlement to the individual assets attributed to him or her (see OLG (Higher 
Regional Court), Düsseldorf, Germany NJW-RR 2021, 263, paragraph 10; Higher 
Regional Court, Munich, Germany, ZEV 2020, 233, paragraph 47; 
Burandt/Schmuck in Burandt/Rojahn, Erbrecht, 4th edition, Article 68 of 
Regulation No 650/2012, paragraph 4; Fornasier in Dutta/Weber, Internationales 
Erbrecht, 2nd edition, Article 68 of Regulation No 650/2012, paragraph 12, 
Article 69 of Regulation No 650/2012, paragraph 35; Grziwotz in MünchKomm-
FamFG, 3rd edition, Article 68 of Regulation No 650/2012, paragraph 15; 
Kleinschmidt in jurisPK-BGB, 10th edition, Article 68 of Regulation (EU) 
No 650/2012, paragraph 25; Köhler in Kroiß/Horn/Solomon, Nachfolgerecht, 3rd 
edition, Article 68 of Regulation (EU) No 650/2012, paragraph 3; Limbach in 
Gebauer/Wiedmann, Europäisches Zivilrecht, 3rd edition, Article 68 of 
Regulation No 650/2012, paragraph 2; Körner, Das Europäische Nachlasszeugnis, 
2020, p. 121; Raff, GPR 2018, 203, 205). That view is partially upheld having 
regard to, inter alia, the decision of the Court of Justice of 9 March 2023 (loc. cit.) 
with reference to the wording of Article 68 of the regulation and the validity, 
established by the Court of Justice, of a European Certification of Succession 
which does not contain the information required under the foreign legislation on 
registration (Lamberz, RPfleger 2023, 287, 288). 
16 In its order of 15 May 2018 (5 Ob 35/18k, ZEV 2019, 353, paragraph 26) the 
Oberster Gerichtshof (Supreme Court) of the Republic of Austria also considered 
the recording of immovable property forming part of the estate as unnecessary 
since Article 68 of Regulation No 650/2012 exhaustively regulates the 
information that must be included in a European Certificate of Succession and 
does not require such property to be mentioned. 
MARWANAK 
 
7 
Anonymised version 
17 (bb) The opposite view is based on the intended use of a European Certificate of 
Succession, which is to facilitate the settlement of an estate in the Member States, 
and in view of this it advocates the inclusion of individual assets of an estate in a 
European Certificate of Succession (Perscha in Deixler-Hübner/Schauer, 
EuErbVO, 2nd edition, Article 68, paragraph 22; Nordmeier, IPRax 2019, 306, 
310; Semelová, GPR 2018, 200, 202 et seq.; also, seemingly, J.P. Schmidt, ErbR 
2020, 91, 93). […] 
18 (c) The Fourth Civil Panel of the present Court also has doubts as to the correct 
interpretation of Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012. 
19 (aa) In order to achieve the uniform application of EU law it is necessary – as the 
Court of Justice has already held on more than one occasion in connection with 
Regulation No 650/2012 (judgments of 23 May 2019, WB, C-658/17, 
EU:C:2019:444, paragraph 50 = ZEV 2019, 647; of 21 June 2018, Oberle, 
C-20/17, EU:C:2018:485, paragraph 33, with further references = ZEV 2018, 
465) – that the terms of a provision of EU law which does not contain any explicit 
reference to the law of the Member States for the purpose of determining its 
meaning and scope must be given an autonomous and uniform interpretation 
throughout the European Union; that interpretation must take into account not 
only the wording of that provision but also its context and the objective pursued 
by the legislation in question. 
20 (bb) Accordingly, the wording of Article 68(l) of Regulation No 650/2012 should 
not automatically prompt an interpretation to the effect that individual assets of an 
estate must also be included in a certificate upon request if – as in the present 
case – a sole heir will acquire the estate by way of universal succession. On the 
contrary, the use of the term ‘if applicable’ and the limitation to rights and assets 
for any ‘given’ heir imply that they have to be recorded only in the event of the 
transfer of an asset of an estate to one of several co-heirs with direct material 
effect, which is not the case here. That assumption is supported by 
Article 63(2)(b) of the regulation, which states that the certificate may be used, in 
particular, to demonstrate the attribution of a specific asset or specific assets 
forming part of the estate to the persons mentioned as heirs in the certificate. An 
interpretation of the expression ‘if applicable’ in Article 68(l) of the regulation to 
the effect that only the applicant’s wish to have an asset recorded is relevant is 
indeed possible, based on the wording, but not mandatory. 
21 (cc) However, pursuant to the first and third sentences of recital 7 of Regulation 
No 650/2012, the creation of a European Certificate of Succession is intended, 
inter alia, to remove obstacles to the free movement of persons and effectively to 
guarantee the rights of heirs. The first and second sentences of recital 67 of the 
regulation also refer to the speedy, smooth and efficient settlement of a succession 
with cross-border implications within the European Union in the context of the 
creation of a European Certificate of Succession. The fact that heirs should be able 
to demonstrate easily their rights in another Member State in which succession 
property is located is explicitly required by the first sentence of recital 67 of the 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 27. 11. 2024 – CASE C-873/24 
 
8  
Anonymised version 
regulation. In accordance with the fifth sentence of recital 18 of the regulation, a 
European Certificate of Succession should constitute a valid document for the 
recording of succession property in a register of a Member State. Pursuant to the 
first sentence of recital 68 of the regulation, the authority which issues the 
certificate should have regard to the formalities required for the registration of 
immovable property in the Member State in which the register is kept. 
Article 69(5) of the regulation stipulates that the certificate is to constitute a valid 
document for the recording of succession property in the relevant register of a 
Member State. 
22 (1) If the legislation on registration of the State in which the property is located 
requires the asset of the estate to be included in the European Certificate of 
Succession for the recording of an heir in the land register solely on the basis of 
that same certificate, then the European Certificate of Succession could not have 
any practical effect if the competent national authority – following the judgment 
of the Court of Justice in Case C-354/21 (judgment of 9 March 2023, Registrų 
centras, EU:C:2023:184 = ZEV 2023, 532) in accordance with Regulation 
No 650/2012 – refuses to record such information because it has not been 
included. In such a case the European Certificate of Succession would not, 
contrary to its intended purpose, be able effectively to enforce the rights of the 
heir. That might, in such situations, imply an obligation to record the asset 
concerned in the European Certificate of Succession in order to ensure that the 
latter can produce its full effects. The first sentence of recital 68 of the regulation, 
in particular, appears to suggest this. 
23 (2) The effective guarantee of the rights of an heir, required by the first and third 
sentences of recital 7, recital 8 and the first sentence of recital 67 of Regulation 
No 650/2012, could, however, also be undermined by an obligation on the part of 
the issuing authority to include the asset concerned in the European Certificate of 
Succession. 
24 (a) This appears to follow already from the fact that the necessary investigative 
effort by the issuing authority increases – at least in Member States in which the 
principle of investigation of its own motion applies – if the issuing authority has to 
make enquiries as to whether an asset forms part of the estate. An additional factor 
is that whether an immovable property forms part of the estate is not assessed 
under succession law, but under the applicable property law in each individual 
case. If – as in the present case – foreign property law applies under the conflict-
of-laws rules of the competent Member State for the issue of the European 
Certificate of Succession, there is a risk of a considerable delay in the issue of that 
certificate if the issuing authority has doubts as to whether the asset forms part of 
the estate and must first examine the foreign law. Moreover, in certain 
circumstances costs may be incurred for obtaining legal opinions and taking 
evidence, which would also be difficult to reconcile with effective enforcement of 
the law. 
MARWANAK 
 
9 
Anonymised version 
25 The fact that, in accordance with the third sentence of recital 71 of Regulation 
No 650/2012, the evidentiary effect of the certificate should not extend to the 
question whether or not a particular asset belonged to the deceased does not alter 
this in any way, since Article 66(1) of the regulation lays down an obligation on 
the part of the issuing authority to examine all the information and declarations 
and the documents and other evidence provided by the applicant. That provision 
precisely does not provide for any restriction of the scope of the examination for 
information that is not covered by the presumptions and principle of good faith 
under the European Certificate of Succession pursuant to Article 69(2) to (4) of 
the regulation. Under the first sentence of the first subparagraph of Article 67(1) 
of the regulation the Certificate of Succession may be issued only when the 
elements to be certified have been established. In that regard, the provision also 
expressly mentions ‘any other law applicable to a particular situation’ as a 
criterion for examination. Assuming that there is an obligation to include 
individual immovable properties, the term ‘elements to be certified’ should also 
cover whether the property that is to be included forms part of the estate. 
26 It is true that Article 66(5) of Regulation No 650/2012 lays down an obligation of 
cooperation on the part of the authorities responsible for keeping the register, 
therefore the issuing authority may, if appropriate, obtain information from the 
authority keeping the land register in the State in which the property is located as 
to whether the deceased is recorded as the owner of the immovable property 
concerned in the land register. That does not, however, establish whether the 
information recorded reflects the substantive legal position. Furthermore, 
obtaining such information also entails additional time and – if translations are 
required – also additional costs, which runs counter to the speedy, smooth and 
efficient settlement of a succession, which the first sentence of recital 67 of the 
regulation sets as an example to follow, since that could delay the exercise of the 
rights of the heir not only in respect of the immovable property forming part of the 
estate, but also in respect of any other assets of the estate – at least in so far as the 
heir needs a European Certificate of Succession in order to enforce his or her 
rights. 
27 (b) That additional burden would appear to be an unnecessary formality, 
especially where – as in the present case, pursuant to Paragraph 1922(1) of the 
BGB – an estate will be acquired, under the applicable succession law, by way of 
universal succession, where upon the death of a person the assets of the deceased 
transfer as a whole to the heir. This is because in such cases the scope of the 
estate, and thus the direct entitlement of the heir, including in respect of 
immovable property forming part of the estate, is already apparent from the 
recording of the share of the estate in No 8 of Annex IV and the absence of the 
recording of any restriction in No 10 of Annex IV as well as the absence of the 
recording of any asset of the estate in No 8.4 of Form V in Annex 5 to the 
Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1329/2014 of 9 December 2014 
establishing the Forms referred to in Regulation No 650/2012 (OJ 2014 L 359, 
p. 30), which, pursuant to the second sentence of the first subparagraph of 
Article 67(1) of Regulation No 650/2012, must be used for the European 
REQUEST FOR A PRELIMINARY RULING OF 27. 11. 2024 – CASE C-873/24 
 
10  
Anonymised version 
Certificate of Succession (see judgments of 9 March 2023, Registrų centras, 
C-354/21, EU:C:2023:184, paragraph 46 = ZEV 2023, 532; of 17 January 2019, 
Brisch, C-102/18, EU:C:2019:34, paragraph 30 = ZEV 2019, 350). That 
established, for the authorities and courts of the Member State in which the 
European Certificate of Succession is to be used, the direct entitlement of the heir 
to the assets of the estate to the extent of his or her share of the estate, the non-
applicability of special rules of succession law in respect of certain assets of the 
estate and the non-applicability of a special succession regime for the purposes of 
Article 30 of the regulation governing the succession in respect of certain assets of 
the deceased in a way that differs from succession law. 
28 The fact that this would save the registration authority from having to examine 
foreign law does not automatically imply that the asset concerned should be 
included. Such an examination is not required on the basis of the presumption laid 
down in the second sentence of Article 69(2) of Regulation No 650/2012 that the 
person mentioned in the certificate as the heir has the status mentioned in the 
certificate. Even if one were to take a different view, authorities and courts of the 
Member State in which the European Certificate of Succession is presented for the 
purposes of the recording of rights in the land register could easily establish the 
mode of succession to the deceased’s estate provided for under the applicable 
succession law, for example on the basis of the information made available within 
the framework of the European Judicial Network in civil and commercial matters 
in light of the first subparagraph of Article 77 of the regulation. 
29 (c) In view of the purpose of the regulation, the loss of effectiveness for the heir, 
accompanied by the disadvantages which an obligation to include such 
information may entail, as described above, might therefore militate against an 
obligation to include such information, at least in cases in which the estate will be 
acquired by way of universal succession. That is why the subject of the second 
question referred is whether the fact that, under the applicable succession law, the 
transfer of the estate will take place by way of universal succession has any 
bearing on the answer to the first question referred for a preliminary ruling. 
30 (dd) An interpretation of the provision to the effect that there is no obligation on 
the part of the issuing authority to include details of immovable property in the 
European Certificate of Succession could also follow from the fact that, as an 
alternative to the inclusion of the asset concerned in the European Certificate of 
Succession by the issuing authority, the presentation of additional documents by 
the heir to the authority of the State in which the property is located which is 
competent to record such information is also possible, which, in conjunction with 
the European Certificate of Succession from which the details of the immovable 
property are missing, may enable the heir to be recorded as its owner in the land 
register. In any event, in its decision in Case C-354/21 (judgment of 9 March 
2023, Registrų centras, EU:C:2023:184 = ZEV 2023, 532) the Court of Justice 
would seem not to have ruled out that information required under the legislation 
on registration of the State in which the property is located may also derive from 
documents attached to the European Certificate of Succession. Moreover, the sixth 
MARWANAK 
 
11 
Anonymised version 
sentence of recital 18 of Regulation No 650/2012 also mentions that the 
authorities involved in the registration may request additional documents required 
under the law of the Member State in which the register is kept. It could be for the 
State in which the property is located to enable the applicant to do this effectively 
under its national law if its registration authorities refuse to record rights in rem 
despite the presentation of a European Certificate of Succession because it does 
not contain information on the estate asset concerned by the registration. The 
seventh sentence of recital 18 of the regulation, which states that the competent 
authority may indicate to the person applying for registration how the missing 
information or documents can be provided, may also be understood in that sense. 
31 In the event that the European Certificate of Succession does not state the 
immovable property concerned by the registration, Paragraph 69(6) of the Czech 
Land Registry Regulation enables the legal successor of the deceased to make a 
declaration under Paragraph 66(4)(a) to (d) and (f) of the Czech Land Registry 
Regulation in order to have it recorded in the land register. Since it could be 
considered that the applicants, as the heirs of the original heir, are also covered by 
the term ‘legal successors’, the third question referred for a preliminary ruling 
seeks to ascertain whether the inclusion of individual assets of the estate can be 
dispensed with in any case because the applicants can choose to make such a 
declaration. 
32 (ee) Since, consequently, the correct interpretation of Article 68(l) of Regulation 
No 650/2012 can neither be inferred from the regulation itself nor from the 
previous case-law of the Court of Justice, a request for a preliminary ruling is 
necessary. 
[…]