You like a house, price and handover date have been agreed. However, the land register contains a prohibition on disposal and encumbrance in favour of a parent of the selling person. The statement “This is only a family matter” does not answer your acquisition question. You need a solution that supports both the purchase and the intended bank security.
The entry is a separate matter for review
§ 364c ABGB distinguishes the personal obligation arising from a contractual or testamentary prohibition from its effect against third parties. The provision links this third-party effect to the circle of relatives named there and the entry in the public register. It also provides that the prohibition binds the first owner, not his heirs or other legal successors. [VERBOT]
This is not an instruction to infer effectiveness from a surname alone. Submit the current land register excerpt and the underlying deed to the legal advisory office. Have it explain who is entitled, which acts are covered and which declaration or other legal basis is required for the specific execution. Restrictions arising from subsidy law are a different matter for review and are not dealt with here.
Two undertakings instead of a general consent
Write down your actual course of action: you want to acquire ownership and use a loan for this, the security for which the bank will assess separately. Ask the contract drafter to explain how the prohibition will be dealt with for both transactions. A disposal that is verbally supported in discussion should not be taken in your planning, without examination, as a sufficient answer to every question of encumbrance.
Legal advice will decide whether consent, deletion or another proven circumstance is decisive. Also have them explain which form is required and when the appropriate document must be available. This article does not provide a usable consent clause and does not claim any general right to force the entitled person to cooperate.
A fictional procedure with two different statements
The mother of the selling person declares by telephone that she has no objection to the sale. The prospective buyer therefore considers their financing planning complete. But the bank documents and the concrete entry have not yet been discussed with the mother.
Better preparation begins with a joint statement of facts for contract drafting and the bank: the specified entry, the associated deed, the intended acquisition and the proposed security. It is then recorded which professionally checked declaration is required from whom. The telephone call remains a documented state of discussion; it is not upgraded to an unchecked proof of execution.
Hang the timetable on the missing basis
Our editorial recommendation: keep the item visibly open until professionally confirmed as completed. Ask how the purchase contract, payment and financing are to be linked to the still required cooperation. Do not rely on an unconfirmed promise of a later signature appointment nor on the assumption that the firm will be able to remove every obstacle afterwards.
If the entitled person does not declare their cooperation, their condition has changed or the deed reads differently than expected, the procedure must be reassessed. Unauthorised direct payments or a prematurely started conversion do not resolve the legal question.
Your decision outcome should be comprehensible: which concrete basis enables which action, is that basis already in place and what remaining risk has been explained to you? Only then can it be assessed whether the offered purchase fits your financing and your timetable.