What are the Practical Realities of Non-Recourse Loans and Typical Lender Covenants in Japanese Real Estate Finance? Debt financing is a cornerstone of most significant real estate investments globally, and Japan is no exception. For investors, particularly those utilizing Special Purpose Companies (SPCs) or engaging in large-scale projects, the distinction between recourse and non-recourse lending is a critical consideration that profoundly impacts risk exposure and financing strategy.
Navigating Japan's Real Estate Specified Joint Enterprise Act: What Foreign Investors Using SPCs for Direct Property Investment Must Know? Japan's real estate market continues to attract global capital, with many international investors utilizing Special Purpose Companies (SPCs) to structure their investments. While SPCs offer advantages in terms of liability limitation and tailored investment strategies, they do not operate in a vacuum. A key piece of Japanese legislation,
How Do TMKs (Tokutei Mokuteki Kaisha) Facilitate Real Estate Securitization in Japan, and What Are Their Key Requirements and Tax Benefits? Real estate securitization has become a globally recognized method for transforming illiquid property assets into tradable securities, offering originators a means to unlock capital and investors an avenue to participate in diverse real estate-backed income streams. Japan, with its sophisticated financial market, has developed a specific legal and regulatory framework
What is a GK-TK Scheme in Japanese Real Estate Investment, and What are its Pros and Cons for Foreign Investors? Japan's real estate market has long been a focal point for international investors seeking stable returns and diversification. However, navigating the landscape of investment vehicles available in Japan requires a nuanced understanding of local legal and tax frameworks. Among the various structures, the "GK-TK scheme" stands
Drawing the Line on Fame: Japan's Supreme Court Defines Right of Publicity Infringement in the Pink Lady Case Judgment Date: February 2, 2012 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, First Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 21 (Ju) No. 2056 (Claim for Damages) The "Pink Lady case," decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2012, stands as a landmark judgment in Japanese intellectual property law. It was the
Faith, Commerce, and Names: Japan's Supreme Court on Religious Organizations and Unfair Competition Law (Tenrikyo Toyofumi Kyokai Case) Judgment Date: January 20, 2006 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Second Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 17 (Ju) No. 575 (Claim for Injunction Against Use of Name, etc.) The "Tenrikyo Toyofumi Kyokai case" (天理教豊文教会事件), decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2006, addressed novel questions at the intersection
Chanel in a Snack Bar? Japan's Supreme Court on 'Broad-Sense Confusion' and Famous Brands Judgment Date: September 10, 1998 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, First Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 7 (O) No. 637 (Claim for Prohibition of Unfair Competitive Acts) The "Snack Chanel" case (スナックシャネル事件), decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1998, is a pivotal judgment that reinforced the scope
Manpower vs. Woman Power: Japan's Supreme Court on Business Name Similarity and Broad-Sense Confusion Judgment Date: October 7, 1983 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Second Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 57 (O) No. 658 (Claim for Injunction Against Use of Trade Name, etc.) The "Nippon Woman Power" case (日本ウーマン・パワー事件), decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1983, is a significant judgment
Timing is Everything: The Earth Belt Case and Proving 'Well-Known' Status in Japanese Unfair Competition Law Judgment Date: July 19, 1988 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Numbers: Showa 61 (O) No. 30 & No. 31 (Claim for Injunction Against Manufacturing of Imitation Goods, etc.) The "Earth Belt" (アースベルト - Āsu Beruto) case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1988,
Team Effort: How Japan's UCPA Protects Group Brand Identity – The Football Symbol Mark Case Judgment Date: May 29, 1984 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 56 (O) No. 1166 (Main Claim for Injunction against Unfair Competition, etc.; Counterclaim for Damages) The "Football Symbol Mark Case," decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1984, is a landmark judgment
How 'Well-Known' is Well-Known Enough? The Emax Case on Proving Trademark Recognition in Japan Judgment Date: February 28, 2017 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 27 (Ju) No. 1876 (Main Claim for Injunction, etc. under Unfair Competition Prevention Act; Counterclaim for Injunction, etc. for Trademark Infringement) The "Emax" case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2017,
Aesthetic Appeal vs. Inventive Step: Japan's Supreme Court Clarifies Design Protection Standards in the Flexible Hose Case Judgment Date: March 19, 1974 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 45 (Gyo-Tsu) No. 45 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "Flexible Hose case" (可撓伸縮ホース事件 - Katō Shinshuku Hōsu Jiken), decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1974, is a foundational
A Second Chance to Prove Use: Japan's Supreme Court on Evidence in Non-Use Trademark Cancellation Appeals (Chez Toi Case) Judgment Date: April 23, 1991 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 63 (Gyo-Tsu) No. 37 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "Chez Toi" (シェトア) case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1991, addressed a critical procedural question in trademark law:
No Backtracking in Court: Japan's Supreme Court on Amendments During Trademark Refusal Lawsuits (eAccess Case) Judgment Date: July 14, 2005 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, First Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 16 (Gyo-Hi) No. 4 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "eAccess case," decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2005, provides a critical clarification on the procedural intricacies of trademark
Time-Barred But Not Defenseless: Japan's Supreme Court on Invalidity and Abuse of Rights in the Emax Trademark Case Judgment Date: February 28, 2017 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 27 (Ju) No. 1876 (Main Claim for Injunction, etc. under Unfair Competition Prevention Act; Counterclaim for Injunction, etc. for Trademark Infringement) The "Emax" case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2017,
No Free Rides: The Popeye Muffler Case and Abuse of Trademark Rights in Japan Judgment Date: July 20, 1990 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Second Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 60 (O) No. 1576 (Participation in Trademark Infringement Injunction, etc. Claim) The "Popeye Muffler" case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1990, is a landmark judgment that established crucial limitations on
Parallel Imports in Japan: The Supreme Court's Fred Perry Test for Genuine Goods Judgment Date: February 27, 2003 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, First Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 14 (Ju) No. 1100 (Damages, Trademark Infringement Injunction, etc. Claim) The "Fred Perry" case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2003, is a landmark ruling that established a clear three-part test
Not Just the Product, But the Source: Japan's Supreme Court on Goods Similarity (Tachibana Masamune Case) Judgment Date: June 27, 1961 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 33 (O) No. 1104 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "Tachibana Masamune" (橘正宗) case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1961, is a foundational judgment that fundamentally shaped the
The Kozosushi Saga: When Fame and Market Reality Reshape Trademark Battles in Japan Judgment Date: March 11, 1997 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 6 (O) No. 1102 (Trademark Infringement Injunction, etc. Claim) The "Kozosushi" (小僧寿し - Little Monk Sushi) case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1997, is a highly influential judgment in trademark
Trademark Similarity in the Real World: The Daishinrin Case and 'Actual Trade Circumstances' in Infringement Judgment Date: September 22, 1992 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 3 (O) No. 1805 (Trademark Infringement Injunction Claim) The "Daishinrin" (大森林 - Great Forest) case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1992, offers significant insights into how "actual circumstances of
Defining 'Trade Reality' in Trademark Similarity: The Hodogaya Chemical Case Judgment Date: April 25, 1974 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, First Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 47 (Gyo-Tsu) No. 33 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "Hodogaya Chemical Co. Mark Case" (保土谷化学工業社標事件 - Hodogaya Kagaku Kōgyō Shahyō Jiken), decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 1974,
Dissecting Marks: Japan's Supreme Court on Similarity of Composite Trademarks (Tsutsumi no Ohinakkoya Case) Judgment Date: September 8, 2008 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Second Petty Bench Case Number: Heisei 19 (Gyo-Hi) No. 223 (Action for Rescission of a Trial Decision) The "Tsutsumi no Ohinakkoya" case, decided by the Japanese Supreme Court in 2008, provides critical guidance on a frequently encountered issue
The Iceberg Mark (Hyozan-jirushi) Case: Japan's Supreme Court on Judging Trademark Similarity Judgment Date: February 27, 1968 Court: Supreme Court of Japan, Third Petty Bench Case Number: Showa 39 (Gyo-Tsu) No. 110 (Action for Rescission of a JPO Appeal Board Decision Regarding Rejection of a Trademark Application) The "Hyozan-jirushi" (氷山印 - Iceberg Mark) case stands as a seminal decision in
What is a 'Provisional Execution Clause' (Kari-Shikko Sengen) in a Japanese Judgment and How Does It Impact Creditors? In the realm of civil litigation, obtaining a favorable judgment is a significant milestone. However, the practical value of that judgment often hinges on its enforceability. Typically, a judgment must become "final and binding" (確定 - kakutei), meaning all avenues of appeal are exhausted or appeal periods have
Monetary Claims in Japanese Judgments: Understanding Principal, Interest, Damages, and Payment Orders in the 'Shubun' For businesses involved in cross-border transactions and disputes, a favorable judgment is often only as valuable as its ability to be clearly understood and enforced. When a Japanese civil court issues a judgment (判決 - hanketsu) involving monetary claims, the "Shubun" (主文) – or the main operative text – is
