JAPAN Trends and Developments Contributed by: Yuko Kanamaru, Gaien Partners
tion of the period during which persons with interest should submit their opinion, and (ii) designation of the period for filing an objection to the amount of the claim or dividend of each creditor recorded in the electronic distribution list. This part has been enacted as of the date of this article. No significant update (further amendments) can be seen from 2024; but it is very important to point out that the digitalisation has been promoted more from the perspective of means of hearings, and counsels attend hearings by means of Teams for almost all the cases, except those involving multiple parties or very complicated legal matters, or those for which one of the parties does not retain counsels. Impact of the CEA Amendment As indicated above, the 2023 CEA Amendment will be enacted on a phase-by-phase basis while most parts have been enacted in line with the full enactment of the amendment to the CCP. It may seem that the entire digitalisation is still a bit far off, but, once real - ised, this amendment will be a huge step not only for domestic clients but also for foreign clients to access the court, and will make civil proceedings much more convenient. Basic process to enforce the judgment issued by a foreign court In talking about the impact of the 2023 CEA Amend - ment from an international perspective, it might be worth recapping the execution process of the judg - ment issued by a foreign court here in Japan. The CEA sets out the basis for the compulsory execu - tion (“title of obligation”); and for foreign judgments to be a title of obligation, it should be “a judgment of a foreign court for which an execution judgment has become final and binding”. In short, it is required to file a lawsuit claiming for the execution judgment to the Japanese competent court to proceed with the compulsory execution of the foreign judgment. Prerequisites set out in the Code of Civil Procedure to obtain the execution judgment are:
• international jurisdiction (the jurisdiction of the foreign court is recognised under laws, regulations, conventions or treaties); • proper service to the losing party (the defeated defendant has received a service (excluding a service by publication or any other service similar thereto) of summons or order necessary for the commencement of the suit, or has appeared with - out receiving such service); • conformity to Japanese public order and moral - ity (the contents of the judgment and the court proceedings are not contrary to public policy in Japan); and • reciprocity (a mutual guarantee exists). In this regard, the following points should be noted. • International jurisdiction – the jurisdiction require - ment under the CCP in this respect is called “indirect jurisdiction”, regarding which the Supreme Court of 1998 ruled that it is appropriate to refer to the rule of reason, taking into account the princi - ples of fairness among the parties and the pursuit of appropriate and swift judgment. In this sense, indirect jurisdiction shall be determined from the standpoint of whether it is appropriate to recognise the foreign judgment in Japan, considering the specific circumstances of the case and referring to the relevant provisions of the CCP. • Proper service – it is not required to be the service under the Japanese civil procedure, but rather it must be done such that: (i) the defendant can actually be aware of the commencement of the legal proceedings against him/her; (ii) he/she is not prevented from the appropriate exercise of the right to defence; and (iii) the service complies with applicable conventions or treaties (Supreme Court of 1998). It can also be satisfied if the unsuccessful defendant has “appeared” in court, which means that the defendant was given the opportunity to defend and actually took measures to defend him - self/herself in court, including the submission of a jurisdictional challenge. • Japanese public order and morality – the for - eign judgment must not be against public policy in Japan. In general, both the contents and the underlying facts upon which the judgment is based
253 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook