JAPAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Kenji Yano, Tokyo Kokusai Partners Law Office
Content of contact orders The court may determine the following, in light of the child’s best interests: • direct contact (in-person meetings); • indirect contact (online communication, telephone, email, social media, etc); and • other forms of involvement (eg, sending gifts). Even in high-conflict cases, the court may explore the possibility of maintaining contact through phased arrangements or the involvement of third-party organi ‑ sations, with a view to ensuring the child’s safety while preserving the parent–child relationship. 2026 Amended Civil Code The amended legislation clarifies the framework for trial contact during pending proceedings, providing an explicit statutory basis for implementing contact on a provisional basis where appropriate (Amended Domestic Relations Case Procedure Act, Article 152- 3; Amended Personal Status Litigation Act, Article 34-4). Legal Approach to Custody and Parental Authority Following Marital Breakdown Basic structure Under Japanese law, the comprehensive authority to make decisions for a minor (under 18) is referred to as parental authority (Civil Code, Article 818 (1)). Parental authority consists of two principal elements. • Custody and education: (a) the rights and obligations to care for and edu ‑ cate the child (Article 820); (b) the right to determine the child’s residence (Article 822); and (c) the right to permit the child to engage in an oc ‑ cupation (Article 823). • Property management (Article 824) (a) the right to manage the child’s property; and (b) the authority to represent the child in property- related legal acts and to consent to such acts. Framework for resolving disputes following breakdown Where the marital relationship has broken down, dis ‑ putes concerning custody and parental authority are
typically dealt with through proceedings for desig ‑ nation of the custodian (Civil Code, Article 766) or a change of the parent holding parental authority (Article 819 (6)). In either case, the governing standard is the best interests of the child. Importantly, these procedures do not directly deter ‑ mine whether a specific act (such as relocation) is permitted; rather, they determine which parent should exercise custody or parental authority, including deci ‑ sions on the child’s residence. In judicial practice, while giving primary considera ‑ tion to the child’s safety, the court conducts an overall assessment by reference to the following factors. • Past caregiving arrangements – who has been the primary caregiver, the amount and quality of care, etc. • Caregiving capacity and environment – the parent’s physical and mental condition, willingness to care, understanding of and commitment to the child’s welfare, living environment, economic and educa ‑ tional circumstances, availability of support from others, consideration of sibling relationships, etc. • Parent–child relationship – the current parent– child relationship, potential for change, the child’s wishes and feelings, emotional bonds, etc. • Attitude toward the child’s relationship with the other parent – willingness to support continued The 2026 Amended Civil Code introduces optional joint parental authority after divorce. It also clarifies the circumstances in which parental authority may be exercised unilaterally, and introduces mechanisms to resolve parental disagreements, including designation of the parent exercising parental authority for a spe ‑ cific matter (Amended Civil Code, Article 824-2 (3)) and allocation of custody responsibilities (Amended Civil Code, Article 766). Court Powers in Making Orders on Residence and Parent–Child Contact Where the parents cannot agree on the child’s resi ‑ dence or parent–child contact, either parent may apply to the Family Court (Civil Code, Article 766). parent–child contact, etc. 2026 Amended Civil Code
161 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook