JAPAN Trends and Developments Contributed by: Yuko Kanamaru, Gaien Partners
are to be examined to determine whether or not they are contrary to public policy in Japan. • Reciprocity – the “mutual guarantee” requirement under Article 118 (iv) requires that, in the foreign country where the foreign judgment was rendered, the same type of judgment rendered by a Japa - nese court would be effective under conditions which are not substantially different from those in Japan (Supreme Court of 1983). Once the court admits and issues the execution judg - ment, then the creditor can file a petition for compul - sory execution based on such execution judgment, in accordance with the provisions of the CEA, the version of which will depend on the timing of such execution. Impact to practice – matters to be kept in mind While counsels are used to the current steps for com - pulsory execution which has been long used, the new procedures after the amendment seem to be very fas - cinating because we can shorten the time required for the proceedings and realisation of the judgment. The current process takes quite some time and requires back-and-forth communications with the court. For example, once we, as counsels, have obtained a win - ning judgment which becomes final and binding after the expiration of the appeal period, we first apply for and obtain an authenticated copy of that judgment, attaching a certificate of execution and a certificate of service of the judgment to the losing party. Together with those documents and some other certified cop -
ies of official registrations (especially those relating to the subject of the compulsory execution, such as real estate or the third-party debtor whose debt will be the subject of execution), we then file a petition for com - pulsory execution onto some specific assets of the losing party. If the competent court is in a local area, it will take quite some time to obtain all the required documents. Imagine where you cannot satisfy the right admitted in the judgment and need additional compulsory execution; then you have to repeat that process all over again for other assets. If we can sub - stitute them with the digital file, we do not have to worry about the timeline that much. As can be seen, the steps for the execution of for - eign judgments are quite the same as those for nor - mal Japanese litigation and following compulsory execution. In this regard, the 2023 CEA Amendment, together with the amendments to the CCP so far, will have a full impact on the cases involving non-Japa - nese companies, such as one that has a subsidiary in Japan and does business in the country, the one that does business with a Japanese company and would like to execute its rights, or the one that obtained a judgment from the court of its own domicile and would like to realise such rights admitted thereof in Japan. It would be advisable to check the timing of the execu - tion together with the enactment situation of the 2023 CEA Amendment in order not to miss the mandated procedures and to most efficiently realise your rights.
254 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook