The best solution is to have it drawn up by a notary. Czech law does allow a will written entirely by hand or made before two witnesses, but both are private documents whose authenticity must be proven by whoever relies on them (Section 565 of the Civil Code). A notarial deed is a public instrument and constitutes full proof against everyone until someone proves the contrary (Section 568). The difference shows up at the moment when you can no longer explain anything.
The statute decides, and for married couples the joint property is settled first, assuming any arose. This is the most commonly overlooked step: where a marriage ends by death, the spouses' property rights and duties are assessed within the succession proceedings (Section 764(1) of the Civil Code). The court determines the usual value of the joint property as at the date of death and approves the agreement between the surviving spouse and the heirs, and failing such agreement decides itself (Section 162 of the Act on special court proceedings); the default rule is that the shares of both spouses in the property being settled are equal (Section 742(1)(a)). The surviving spouse therefore keeps their half of the joint property outright, and only the other half enters the estate. From that half the spouse then inherits alongside the children. In practice a spouse takes a half plus a share of the remainder, neither everything nor nothing. That, however, is the statutory regime: spouses may agree in a notarial deed to narrow or extend the joint property, to defer its creation until the marriage ends or to opt for separate estates (Section 717), and a court may narrow or cancel it as well (Section 724).
Only this reduced estate is divided among the classes of heirs. A lower class comes into play only where nobody in the higher one inherits.
| Class | Who inherits | Shares |
|---|---|---|
| First | the deceased's children and spouse | equal shares; a child who does not inherit is replaced by their own children (Section 1635) |
| Second | the spouse, the deceased's parents, and anyone who lived with the deceased in a common household for at least a year before the death and for that reason cared for the household or depended on them for maintenance | equal shares, but the spouse always takes at least half the estate (Section 1636) |
| Third | the deceased's siblings and the person sharing the household | equal shares; a sibling who does not inherit is replaced by their children (Section 1637) |
| Fourth | the deceased's grandparents | equal shares (Section 1638) |
| Fifth | the grandparents of the deceased's parents | half to the father's side, half to the mother's (Section 1639) |
| Sixth | the children of the siblings' children and the children of the grandparents | equal shares (Section 1640) |
| nobody | the state | the estate passes to the state as bona vacantia (Section 1634) |
A childless spouse therefore does not automatically take everything: in the second class they share with the deceased's parents and with whoever shared the household, and the only thing guaranteed to them is half of the estate (Section 1636(2)). How large that estate turns out to be depends on the settlement of the joint property: where none arose or where it was narrowed, nothing is set aside in advance and everything the deceased owned goes into the estate.
You cannot get around the forced share of your children. The forced heirs are the deceased's children and, if they do not inherit, their descendants; a minor must receive at least three quarters of their intestate share and an adult at least one quarter (Section 1643, and Section 1642 on the forced share). A will therefore cannot leave a descendant with nothing unless the statutory conditions for disinheritance are met, which is a separate topic with evidentiary pitfalls of its own. Everything above the forced shares is yours to dispose of freely.
The law recognises three ordinary forms and several for emergencies. The ordinary forms are a will written entirely in the testator's own hand and signed by them (Section 1533), a will the testator did not write by hand, which they must sign and expressly declare before two simultaneously present witnesses to contain their last will (Section 1534), and a will in the form of a public instrument, that is a notarial deed (Section 1537).
Alongside these the law knows wills made under relaxed rules for emergencies. They are worth mentioning mainly because people take away from them the mistaken impression that a will is an informal matter:
These are emergency measures with a built-in expiry date: if the testator is alive, an oral will lapses after two weeks and the others after three months from the day they were made (Section 1549). Neither works as a way of settling in advance who gets what.
A handwritten will is a private document and its authenticity must be proven by the person who benefits from it. The statute is explicit: it is for anyone relying on a private document to prove its authenticity and correctness (Section 565). It is therefore enough for an overlooked relative to say the deceased did not write it, and the handwriting becomes the subject of proof, usually through a forensic document examiner. Procedurally it works like this: where not all claims to inherit can stand side by side, there is a dispute about the right to inherit (Section 168 of the Act on special court proceedings), and the court refers the participant whose claim appears weakest in the circumstances to assert it by an action, within a time limit of at least two months; if no action is brought, the dispute counts as decided against them (Section 170). An ordinary civil action with experts and witnesses follows while the estate waits. That such a dispute can run for years over a mere slip of the pen is shown by a case in which the testatrix dated her will 1915 instead of 2015 and both lower courts invalidated both her wills, so that the estate would have passed to the state; the Supreme Court set that aside in 2022 (decision file no. 24 Cdo 1583/2020).
It does not, because a will made before witnesses is a private document too, and it adds risks of its own. The witnesses must take part in a way that lets them confirm that the testator and the person making the will are one and the same person, sign the document and add details by which they can be identified (Section 1539); a person to whom something is left, a person close to them, or their employee cannot serve as a witness (Section 1540), and the same applies to an executor, a writer, a reader or an interpreter (Section 1541). Getting all of this right without a lawyer is only deceptively simple. The real trouble comes later: the validity of such a will stands or falls on what the witnesses testify years afterwards. They tend to be the testator's contemporaries, so they may not outlive them. What matters is not that they watched the testator sign: the statute requires the testator to declare expressly, before both of them present at the same time, that the document contains their last will (Section 1534), and that is what nobody confirms years afterwards. The witnesses testify that the testator signed and that they signed too, but they do not recall any express declaration, or it emerges that the two of them were not present at the same moment. And because the family usually picks them, the other side routinely challenges their impartiality. The court is then left assessing testimony about a brief moment nobody recorded.
A will drawn up as a notarial deed is that public instrument the statute speaks of. That reverses the evidentiary position and removes most of the risks described above. Where a fact is confirmed in a public instrument, this constitutes full proof against everyone as to the origin of the document, the time it was made and the fact which its author confirmed took place in their presence, until the contrary is proven; and where a public instrument records an expression of will signed by the person making it, this constitutes full proof of that expression against everyone (Section 568). It is therefore the challenger who must prove their case, not the heir who must prove authenticity. A notarial will is also entered in the Register of Legal Acts in Contemplation of Death kept by the Czech Chamber of Notaries (Section 35b), so it is found by itself after your death, and the original stays with the notary. That removes the most banal way of losing a last will: the document simply not turning up after the funeral.
Make an appointment with a notary, any notary; every notary can draw up a will as a notarial deed and the fee follows the notarial tariff, which is the same for all of them. Before the appointment, work out who would inherit from you without a will, bearing in mind that for married couples the joint property is settled first, and prepare a list of your assets and of the people who are to inherit, including their dates of birth, so identification is beyond doubt; count on your children's forced shares as well. If you own assets that need day-to-day care, that is a business, rented flats, a shareholding or pending litigation, ask the same notary about appointing an administrator of the estate. Why that matters for such assets is the subject of the next piece.
Source: Act No. 89/2012 Coll., the Civil Code (Sections 565, 568, 742, 764, 1532 to 1550, 1634 to 1643); Act No. 292/2013 Coll. on special court proceedings (Sections 162, 168 to 170); Act No. 358/1992 Coll., the Notarial Code (Sections 35b, 53, 63, 64); Supreme Court decision of 28 June 2022, file no. 24 Cdo 1583/2020. The link leads to the full text (nsoud.cz).
Under Section 565, it is for anyone relying on a private document to prove its authenticity and correctness; where a private document is used against the person who evidently signed it, against their heir or against a legal successor, authenticity and correctness are presumed to have been acknowledged. That second sentence addresses the use of a document against the signatory, not the situation of an heir relying on it for their own benefit, which stays under the first sentence. Where a private document is unsigned, it is for the person using it to prove that it comes from the person they claim (Section 566(1)). Against this stands Section 568 with its full proof against everyone until the contrary is proven. The difference is therefore not whether a will can be challenged, but who bears the burden of proof and what is presumed until something is established.
The court examines the claims of everyone it has notified or who has duly asserted a claim, and where not all claims can stand side by side, there is a dispute about the right to inherit (Section 168). If resolving it turns only on the legal assessment of undisputed facts, the court rules by resolution who the proceedings will continue with (Section 169). But where disputed facts have to be proven, typically the authenticity of handwriting or the course of a signing before witnesses, the court refers the participant whose claim appears weakest in the circumstances to assert it by an action within at least two months; if no action is brought, the dispute counts as decided against them (Section 170). Whoever relies on a challenged private document usually ends up in the claimant's seat, with everything that entails: costs, experts and time.
Under Section 63(1) of the Notarial Code a notarial deed must contain, among other things, the declaration of natural persons that they have capacity to act on their own within the scope of the act recorded, the record that their identity was established or that the notary knows them personally, and the record that the deed was approved by the parties after being read out. Where the notary does not know a party personally, their identity must be established by a valid official identity document or confirmed by two witnesses of identity, and if identity is not established the notary refuses to draw up the deed (Section 64). The notary also refuses any act contrary to statute or other generally binding rules, and any act in which they, their employee or a person close to them is involved (Section 53). These are precisely the steps that, with a homemade will, are reconstructed in court years later, and that in a deed are confirmed by a person carrying their own professional responsibility for it.
Under Section 764(1), where a marriage ends by death, the spouses' property rights and duties are assessed within the succession proceedings according to the property regime that existed between them, otherwise under the rules of Section 742 with the exception of subsection (1)(c), unless the surviving spouse agrees otherwise with the heirs. The procedural side is governed by Section 162 of the Act on special court proceedings: the court determines the usual value of the property in the joint estate as at the date of death and approves the agreement between the surviving spouse and the heirs unless it conflicts with the deceased's instructions or with the law; failing agreement it decides itself what belongs to the estate and what to the surviving spouse. Where the heirs and the surviving spouse disagree on the decisive facts about what forms part of the joint property, the disputed assets are disregarded. The default division is equal (Section 742(1)(a)), though the statute allows other factors to be taken into account, such as care for the family or merit in acquiring the property.
They do have one formal advantage, which will do you no good. Where a will under Sections 1543, 1544 or 1545 is made properly, that is where the person recording it signs it together with both witnesses, reads it to the testator in their presence and the testator confirms it expresses their last will, such a will is treated as a public instrument (Section 1547(1)). Where the prescribed formalities were breached but it is still certain that the document reliably records the last will, this does not invalidate the will, but the document is not treated as a public instrument (subsection 2). For a military will under Section 1545 the statute even provides that its validity cannot be denied. All of this, however, is tied to an emergency: wills made under the relaxed rules lapse after two weeks (oral) or three months if the testator is alive, and those periods do not run while the testator is unable to make a will in the form of a public instrument (Section 1549). The statute itself says where it sends the testator as soon as they are able: to a public instrument.
Provisions cited from the current wording of Act No. 89/2012 Coll., Act No. 292/2013 Coll. and Act No. 358/1992 Coll., verified on 11 August 2026 against the official collection. Case law verified from the full text: Supreme Court decision 24 Cdo 1583/2020 of 28 June 2022. Literature: the editors of Právní prostor (11 November 2025, the most common mistakes in drawing up a will), Hollmann/Krotilová (pravniprostor.cz, 25 January 2024, the will as an unsuitable tool for passing property between generations).