JAPAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Kenji Yano, Tokyo Kokusai Partners Law Office
1. Divorce 1.1 Grounds, Timeline, Service and Process Recent Legislative Reform and Scope of This Chapter In May 2024, Japan enacted a major amendment to the Civil Code, which is scheduled to take effect on 1 April 2026 (the “2026 Amended Civil Code”). The reform introduces optional joint parental authority after divorce, and represents a structural shift in Japa ‑ nese family law. This chapter primarily explains the law as it currently stands. However, where the amendments are expect ‑ ed to have significant practical impact, reference is made to the 2026 Amended Civil Code. For further details of the reform, see the Japan Trends & Develop ‑ ments chapter in this guide. Grounds for Divorce Types of divorce Under Japanese law, divorce is categorised into three principal forms: • divorce by agreement ( kyōgi rikon ), which is effected by filing a notification with the municipal authority; • divorce by mediation ( chōtei ) or adjudication (s • himpan ) before the Family Court; and • divorce by judicial proceedings (by judgment or court settlement). Approximately 90% of divorces are concluded by agreement without substantive judicial determination. Accordingly, statutory grounds for divorce become legally decisive primarily in judicial divorce proceed ‑ ings. Nevertheless, in practice, allegations relating to the causes of marital breakdown are often taken into account in mediation and negotiation. Statutory grounds for judicial divorce (Civil Code, Article 770 (1)) The Civil Code provides five statutory grounds for judicial divorce: • adultery; • malicious abandonment;
• uncertainty as to life or death for three years or more; • severe mental illness (to be deleted under the 2026 Amended Civil Code from 1 April 2026); and • other grave grounds rendering continuation of the marriage difficult. In practice, the majority of cases are argued under “other grave grounds”. Meaning of “grave grounds rendering continuation of the marriage difficult” This ground requires the marital relationship to have broken down irretrievably, with restoration being sub ‑ stantially impossible. In assessing breakdown, courts consider: • subjective factors, such as the absence of intention by both spouses to continue the marriage; and • objective factors, such as prolonged separation demonstrating factual breakdown. The length of separation is an important consideration. A prolonged separation of approximately five years generally gives rise to a strong inference of marital breakdown, although recent practice indicates a ten ‑ dency toward shorter periods. Where the separation is relatively short, more specific proof of breakdown is required. Divorce claims by the spouse at fault The Supreme Court has held that divorce claims brought by the spouse primarily responsible for the marital breakdown are, in principle, restricted. Howev ‑ er, such a claim may be permitted where the marriage has already broken down irretrievably and granting the divorce would not contravene the principle of good faith (Supreme Court, 2 September 1987, Minshu Vol ‑ ume 41, No 6, p 1423). In such cases, a longer period of separation is gener ‑ ally required. Judicial discretion to dismiss (Civil Code, Article 770 (2)) Even where a statutory ground other than “grave grounds rendering continuation of the marriage diffi ‑
151 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook