Your German property purchase is to be notarised without the personal presence of all parties involved. A trusted person offers to represent both contracting parties. Organisationally that sounds simple. Before scheduling the appointment this model, however, needs its own review: who is to give which declaration for whom, and may the same person actually act on both sides?
First map out the roles in the transaction
Our editorial recommendation: name the purchasing and the selling person as well as the proposed representative with their respective task. Distinguish someone who hands over documents or coordinates appointments from someone who is to give legally significant declarations for a party.
§ 164 Absatz 1 BGB ties the direct effect for and against the represented person to a declaration in their name within the existing power of representation. [VERTRETUNG] Personal trust and organisational assistance do not yet answer this legal question. Have the actual documents presented; the personal brief description “may take care of everything” is not a complete test.
Disclose the planned dual role explicitly
§181 BGB generally restricts a representative in a legal transaction in the name of the represented when acting with themselves in their own name or as representative of a third party. The statutory text allows for a different authorisation and the exclusive fulfilment of an obligation. [ROLLEN] A person on both sides is therefore neither automatically permissible nor universally excluded.
Have the notary declare the authority on each affected side. Wording present on one side should not simply be transferred to the other side in your preparation. If someone is buying personally and at the same time wishes to act for the selling side, this deviating allocation of roles must also be expressly named.
Decide on the arrangement before the appointment
Describe your actual need first: you cannot travel, you want to negotiate a specific price or you only need someone for a later completion step. From this the technical review assignment follows. Using a single person for everything is not an end in itself.
Discuss whether personal attendance, separate representations or a professionally prepared alternative arrangement are suitable for the actual transaction. This article does not demand a blanket exemption and does not formulate a power of attorney. A clause that seems convenient must not become a matter of your own decision without an explanation of its scope. In particular have the authority to make changes to price, scope of services or payment processing explained if such changes are envisaged.
Fictitious case: trust replaces bilateral review
Two siblings wish to conclude a house transaction together. Both live far away. A mutual acquaintance is to sign for both because she knows the property and considers the agreed price reasonable. The parties initially regard the procedure as already fully clarified.
Before the appointment they expressly notify the dual representation and have both bases of authority examined. They also clarify who during the preparation actually explains the open interests of each side. The case assumes neither an effective authorisation nor a particular review outcome. Its decisive step is to make the concrete dual role visible before the entire process is built upon it.
Track changes up to the actual transaction
If later a different person is represented, an own share of acquisition is added or further declarations are required, submit the new allocation of roles again. An earlier review in your documentation only applies to the status actually reviewed.
The subsequent ratification of a declaration made without authority is a different process and does not replace this prior design decision. Your result should be able to state: This person acts in this role on this reviewed basis; this question is still open. Whether the specific declaration can be validly made and what evidence is required is decided by the professional examination of your documents.