Japan - Market Insights

Introduction

This piece discusses certain aspects of Japan’s Act Partially Amending the Code of Civil Procedure (Act No. 48 of 2022; the “2022 Amendment Act”). The purpose of the 2022 Amendment Act is (a) to amend and establish certain provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (CCP) and of other relevant acts, in order to enable the comprehensive digitization of civil litigation procedures (e-Court, e-Filing, and e-Case Management systems); and (b) to introduce new procedures and regulations under the CCP. The 2022 Amendment Act is being implemented in stages. While a number of provisions amended or introduced by the 2022 Amendment Act are already in force, the remaining provisions will come into force on May 21, 2026; and since certain of these would appear to be of interest to domestic and foreign practitioners in commercial litigation, this piece provides brief notes focusing specifically on those provisions.

Comprehensive digitization in civil litigation procedures

The 2022 Amendment Act introduces wide-ranging changes to the CCP. One of the major changes is to enable the comprehensive digitization of civil litigation procedures. Specifically, this includes the following:

• With respect to written complaints, written petitions, briefs, and the like, can be filed with the court through a court-designated electronic system (Article 132-10 of the CCP as amended by the 2022 Amendment (“Amended CCP”)).
• In principle, case records are to comprise and be stored as electromagnetic records in files on servers used by the court. In addition, parties can access (i.e. inspect and download) case records in respect of their own case by accessing the said servers from their own devices.
• There is to be a loosening of the requirements with respect to the appearance and participation of parties and relevant persons by way of video conference or teleconference system, such as allowing the parties to attend a formal court session without physically appearing in the courtroom.

Attorneys retained for a case will, in principle, file a complaint or petition with the court through a designated electronic system (Article 132-11(1) of the Amended CCP). Additionally, court records will, as a general rule, be created and maintained in digital form. Furthermore, as regards witness examinations using a video conference system, while the pre-amendment CCP permits such examination when certain requirements are fulfilled, the requirements will be loosened. Specifically, such examination will also be permitted, if the court deems it appropriate, in cases:

• where the court finds that it is difficult for the witness to appear before the court, either due to the location of their address; their age, physical or mental condition; or other circumstances; or
• where there is no objection from the parties.

Note, however, that it is not permitted either:

• to conduct witness examination by way of video conference in respect of persons located abroad; or
• for persons located outside of Japan to participate in witness examination by way of video conference.

Introduction of Court Proceedings of Statutorily-Limited Duration

The pre-amendment CCP contains no provisions setting specific time limits for the duration of civil litigation proceedings and/or the period until the judgment is rendered. The 2022 Amendment Act introduces new proceedings (the Court Proceedings of Statutorily-Limited Duration) under which parties are required to submit their arguments no later than five months from the date of the first court session of the proceedings, and the Court is required to conclude the proceedings (including examining evidence) no later than six months from the date of the first court session. Further, the Court is required to render its judgment within one month after the date of the conclusion of the proceedings.

The Court shall direct that the case in question be heard under these new proceedings: (a) if both parties to the case file requests to that effect, or one party files such a request and the other party consents; and (b) if the case involves neither a consumer contract nor a civil dispute over an individual labor relationship; unless (c) the court finds that utilizing these proceedings for the case would be inequitable to either party or would prevent a fair trial, in consideration of the nature of the case, the degree of burden that the parties would have to bear in conducting the litigation, and other circumstances. In this regard, it is conceivable that a case involving an imbalance of evidence between the parties (such as a case concerning a claim for damages under the Product Liability Act) is, fundamentally, considered to be a case “inequitable to either party”.

Another notable amendment

One other amendment of note is a new provision whereby a party who files a brief or evidence after a deadline determined by a presiding judge shall explain to the court the reasons for the party’s failure to meet the deadline (Article 162(2) of the Amended CCP). While the Amended CCP itself does not impose any sanctions for breach of this provision, failure to file a brief and/or evidence by the abovementioned deadline would be a factor considered by the court when the court in determining whether arguments/evidence filed after the deadline will be dismissed pursuant to Article 157(1) of the CCP.