On July 2, 2025, the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) issued a far-reaching decision (Case No. IV ZR 93/24) with significant implications not only for general practitioners and healthcare companies, but also—most importantly—for inheritance law in Germany. This decision sets new standards for the validity of bequests and other benefits granted to treating physicians.

Facts and background

In the underlying case, a long-time patient left his general practitioner a piece of real estate as a bequest in his will. The central legal issue was whether this bequest contravened § 32(1), first sentence, of the Professional Code of the Medical Association of Westphalia-Lippe, which prohibits physicians from accepting benefits in connection with their professional activities.

Key inheritance law provisions

The decision pivots on several core provisions of the German Civil Code (BGB):

• 134 BGB – Statutory Prohibition: Transactions that violate a statutory prohibition are generally void.
• 138 BGB – Immoral Transactions; Usury: Transactions that offend moral principles are also void.
• 2171 BGB – Impossibility, Statutory Prohibition: A bequest that is impossible or violates a statutory prohibition at the time of inheritance is void.
• 2174 BGB – Right to Bequest: The bequest entitles the beneficiary to claim the bequeathed asset from the heir or person charged with the legacy.

The BGH’s decision

The BGH clarified that the bequest of real estate to the treating physician is not automatically void under § 134 or § 2171 BGB solely due to a possible violation of professional rules prohibiting benefits. The Court pointed out that such professional codes generally do not lead to civil-law nullity of bequests unless the legislature specifically dictates so. Key is whether the bequest constitutes an immoral undue influence under § 138 BGB, which must be assessed individually.

The Court emphasized that a bequest would only be void if it unduly compromised the physician’s independence or gravely violated public morals. The lower appellate court is now tasked with determining whether such immorality exists in this case. Thus, in principle, the validity of testamentary benefits is reinforced—unless they serve abusive purposes or grossly breach moral standards.

Inheritance law implications for clients from the USA and Canada

For clients from the USA and Canada who are involved in cross-border estate planning between their home countries and Germany, or are considering bequests to treating physicians or other professionals, this decision provides important guidance:

• Testamentary benefits for treating physicians will generally remain valid unless they clearly contravene statutory prohibitions or the prohibition of immoral transactions.
• Professional conduct rules become relevant in inheritance law only when they expressly reference civil-law nullity.
• Every planned testamentary provision should be carefully drafted and, where appropriate, legally reviewed to mitigate risks of immorality or breaches of professional rules.

Recommendations

This decision increases legal certainty for will and estate planning, especially in cross-border scenarios. Nonetheless, it remains prudent to obtain legal advice whenever designating physicians or other professionals as beneficiaries, and to thoroughly consider potential issues arising from professional or moral prohibitions.

For further queries and tailored estate planning advice, our team is ready to assist you with all matters relating to German inheritance law.

Source: BGH decision dated July 2, 2025 – IV ZR 93/24