Entwicklung und Aufgaben der Haftungsbeschränkung des Arbeitnehmers in Japan

Abstract

This  article  points  out  the  main  characteristics  and  purposes  of  Japanese  employee  liability in comparison with German law and tries to give an outlook on the future of  employee liability. Regarding the limitation of liability, Japanese legal practice is based  solely on trust and good faith and takes a comprehensive view of the circumstances of  each case. Therefore, one cannot easily predict to  what extent an employee would be  sentenced to pay compensation by the court in a given case. By contrast, German jurisprudence  justifies  the  limitation  of  liability  with the  employer’s  business  risk  and  the  employee’s personal rights. Based on this reasoning, clear evaluations of liability become possible in light of the trichotomy of negligence (light, ordinary, and gross negligence). Taking this legal practice into account, the limitation of liability in Japan should  be modified in the following way: First, according to the principle of strict liability and  the principle of equivalence, an employer should shoulder damages that were caused by  the light negligence of an employee. On the one hand, it is to be expected that an employee may cause such a damage under the employer’s instructions, working conditions,  or company organization; on the other hand, the employer can easily take the damages into consideration and can alleviate them relatively easily by taking out an insurance  policy or by setting prices accordingly. Article 1 para. 2 of the State Liability Law limits  the state’s or a public entity’s right of recourse  against its public servants to intent and  gross  negligence.  This  regulation  also  identifies  an  important  direction  for  private  employees  concerning  their  liability.  If  an  employee causes  damage  with  gross  negligence, that employee must assume a certain degree of liability. However, if an employee  is entrusted at work with assets of high value or a high potential of far-reaching damages,  and  if  under  those  circumstances  the  employee causes  severe  damage  by  gross  negligence, that employee’s liability should be limited according to the idea of a humane  life (Art. 1 para. 1 of the Labor Standards Law) and its corresponding foundation, the  right to subsistence (Art. 25 of the Japanese Constitution). Nevertheless, if an employee  intentionally causes damage to an employer, the limitation of liability is generally not  applicable. In a borderline case, a careful judgment should be made to determine whether  the limitation of liability is applicable.  

(Transl. by the Editors)