Neue Entwicklungen im Zivilverfahrensrecht in Japan

Abstract

First, the reforms in the field of civil procedure law brought about an increased grade of digitization of the proceedings and further opportunities to conduct the proceedings online. The civil procedure reform law enters into force step after step. The second part (step two) was already set into force (opportunity to conduct the proceedings online) on 1 March 2024. The third part as the last part, which concerns the online submission of briefs and the service of process, as well as the facilitation of the hearing of a witness online, will be set into force by May 2026, at the latest. The first part of the reforms regarding the opportunity to conduct the pre-trial proceedings online is already fully implemented and works well in practice so far. The oral hearing of the main proceedings is not often being conducted online yet. At present, the courts still seem to have certain concerns, because it is still the rule that the oral hearing will take place in the courtroom. Concerning this the civil procedure reform law leaves it to the courts to decide about whether the “appropriateness conditions” are being met. Therefore, it is important to clarify in which case it shall be deemed appropriate to conduct the proceedings online, and to keep track which influence conducting the oral hearing and the hearing of a witness online had on the credibility of the witness statement.
Second, a more severe sanctioning of the debtor in execution proceedings regarding the non-disclosure of assets has become possible as well as the opportunity to obtain information about the debtor’s assets from third parties. The available figures show that creditors now file more petitions for disclosure of assets, also in order to obtain information from third parties. The reforms in regard of these two matters seem to turn out successful.
Third, the effect of dispute resolution by settlement at private mediation facilities has been strengthened. The background for this is the ratification of the Singapore Convention on Mediation by Japan. Henceforth, it is possible to file a petition for execution of a settlement agreement at a court and to execute the settlement agreement also in domestic cases, if the settlement was concluded at a certified private settlement facility. Such a proposal has been made already twenty years ago in order to promote private mediation. The ADR Reform Act has finally implemented this proposal. Nonetheless, it is still unclear whether this new opportunity will in fact contribute to the promotion of ADR at private mediation facilities. That remains to be seen.