JAPAN Law and Practice Contributed by: Kenji Yano, Tokyo Kokusai Partners Law Office
Accordingly, there is no formal minimum age require ‑ ment; entitlement depends on whether the child is in fact non-self-supporting. 3.3 Other Matters Orders Concerning Specific Disputes Between Parents Under the current Civil Code, where parents exercising joint parental authority disagree on specific matters – such as relocation, choice of school, or significant medical treatment – there is no independent proce ‑ dure designed solely to resolve that discrete issue. In practice, such disputes are addressed indirectly through broader procedures, such as the designation of a custodian (Civil Code, Article 766) or a change of the parent holding parental authority (Civil Code, Article 819 (6)), thereby determining comprehensively which parent should exercise parental authority. 2026 Amended Civil Code The Amended Civil Code introduces a new mecha ‑ nism allowing the Family Court to designate one par ‑ ent as the decision-making parent with respect to a specific matter (Amended Civil Code, Article 824-2 (3)). Following its implementation, courts will be able, within a defined scope, to resolve particular disputes directly on an issue-by-issue basis. Parental Alienation Japanese courts do not treat “parental alienation” as an independent legal concept, nor apply it as a dis ‑ tinct doctrinal framework. However, in determining matters such as custody and parent–child contact, conduct by one parent that unjustifiably interferes with the child’s relationship with the other parent may be taken into account as a relevant factor. When assessing the child’s wishes, the court care ‑ fully examines whether those wishes reflect the child’s genuine intent, whether they may have been influ ‑ enced or induced, and whether they are consistent with the child’s objective best interests. Hearing the Child’s Views It is legally possible for a child to give evidence as a witness in court, but this is exceptional in practice. In most cases, the child’s views are ascertained through interviews conducted by a Family Court investigator.
Article 65 of the Domestic Relations Case Proce ‑ dure Act provides that the child’s statement shall be heard in accordance with the child’s age and degree of development. Furthermore, where the child is 15 years of age or older, the court is required to hear the child’s statement in proceedings concerning custody and related matters (Article 152 (2) of the same Act). The child’s views are assessed carefully, taking into account the child’s level of maturity and the context of the parental conflict. In general, greater weight is given to the wishes of older children. In particular, from approximately lower secondary school age (around 12–13 years and above), the courts tend to give sig ‑ nificant weight to the child’s views, provided that they reflect the child’s genuine intention and are not clearly contrary to the child’s best interests. 3.4 ADR in Child Law Matters Out-of-Court Dispute Resolution Mechanisms For an overview of out-of-court dispute resolution mechanisms available in child-related disputes, see 2.9 ADR in Financial Matters (Out-of-Court Dispute There is no statutory requirement for the parties to engage in ADR; see 2.9 ADR in Financial Matters (Whether ADR Is Mandatory). Legal Status of Agreements See 2.9 ADR in Financial Matters (Legal Status of Settlement Agreements). 3.5 Media Access and Transparency in Children Proceedings Media Access and Transparency See 2.8 Media Access and Transparency in Financial Proceedings . In cases concerning children, particular caution is exercised in practice, in order to safeguard the child’s best interests. Anonymisation of Proceedings See 2.8 Media Access and Transparency in Financial Proceedings (Anonymity of Proceedings). Resolution Mechanisms). Mandatory Use of ADR
163 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook