JAPAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Takefumi Sato, Aoi Inoue, Kosuke Tsunashima and Ryohei Ikeda, Anderson Mori & Tomotsune
3.5 Costs and Time Taken to Enforce Foreign Judgments The time and costs necessary to enforce foreign judg - ments depend on the circumstances of each case. Upon filing a lawsuit requiring a judgment of execu - tion, a plaintiff must pay advance filing fees – the amount of which is largely proportional to the amount being claimed. Attorneys’ fees are generally borne by the respective parties regardless of the outcome of the case; in other words, the successful party’s legal fees are not cov - ered by the losing party. There is no published statistical data regarding how long a lawsuit seeking a judgment of execution nor - mally takes. It typically takes around six months to two years from the filing of a lawsuit until a judgment is rendered by a district court. Appellate proceedings usually take about another six months to one year. Once a judgment of execution becomes final and irrevocable, a winning plaintiff may enforce a foreign judgment. The time required for compulsory execution is the same as enforcement of a domestic judgment. 3.6 Challenging Enforcement of Foreign Judgments The court reviews whether or not the foreign judgment in question meets the prerequisites set forth in Article 118 of the Code of Civil Procedure in lawsuits seeking a judgment of execution. Accordingly, the defendant in a foreign judgment may challenge the enforcement thereof on the grounds that it does not meet those prerequisites. Broadly speaking, a defendant challenging enforce - ment would usually cite the following elements of a foreign judgment: • lack of finality/judiciality; • lack of “indirect jurisdiction”; • invalid service; • contravention of the public order or good morals in Japan; and/or • lack of reciprocity.
As well as the above-mentioned grounds, a defend - ant may be able to raise a defence that has emerged following the rendering of the foreign judgment. If a defendant has made a payment to the plaintiff in accordance with a final and conclusive foreign judg - ment ordering them to do so, for instance, then the defendant may assert in a lawsuit seeking a judgment of execution that the foreign judgment has already been fulfilled. 4. Arbitral Awards 4.1 Legal Issues Concerning Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Domestic and foreign awards are deemed to have the same legal effects as a final and irrevocable court judgment in Japan, as per Article 45 (1) of the Arbitra - tion Act of Japan (Act No 138 of 2003), and can be enforced after obtaining an enforcement decision from a Japanese court (Article 46 of the Arbitration Act). A party seeking enforcement of an arbitral award may petition a court for an enforcement decision. Japan acceded to the New York Convention on 20 June 1961, which became effective in Japan from 18 September 1961, with a reservation of reciprocity. For - eign awards rendered in countries or regions that are not signatories to the New York Convention, such as Taiwan, can be enforced according to Article 46 of the Arbitration Act. The grounds for refusing to recognise or enforce domestic and foreign awards are effectively the same as those outlined in Article 36 (1) of the 2006 UNCI - TRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbi - tration (the “Model Law”) or Article V of the New York Convention. These recognition and enforcement rules apply even if an award is rendered in a country or region that has not signed or ratified the New York Convention. The seat of the arbitration is not an issue when recognising and enforcing awards in Japan in that sense. Japanese courts are generally considered pro-arbi - tration and view the recognition and enforcement of awards in a favourable light.
275 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook