Japan Compliance

Judgment Dates: March 24, 2011, and July 15, 2011 Residential lease agreements in Japan often contain clauses that can be perplexing or financially burdensome for tenants, particularly concerning non-refundable portions of security deposits ("shikibiki") and fees payable upon lease renewal ("kōshinryō"). In 2011, the Supreme Court

Judgment Date: November 27, 2006 A common and often contentious issue for students and universities in Japan (and elsewhere) is the refundability of pre-paid tuition and other fees when a student decides to withdraw their enrollment before the academic year officially commences. Can universities enforce "no-refund" clauses for

Judgment Date: April 30, 1998 Courier services (宅配便 - takuhai-bin) are an integral part of modern commerce and daily life, prized for their convenience and speed in delivering a vast number of small parcels at relatively low cost. To maintain these low costs and manage risks associated with high-volume operations,

Judgment Dates: October 25, 2011 (Supreme Court) and October 30, 2014 (Tokyo District Court) "Dating scams," known in Japan as デート商法 (dēto shōhō) or 恋人商法 (koibito shōhō), are a predatory sales tactic where a salesperson feigns romantic interest in a target to build trust and emotional dependency, ultimately

Judgment Date: March 30, 2010 Commodity futures trading is an inherently risky endeavor, with the potential for substantial profits or devastating losses based on volatile price movements. When consumers engage in such transactions, what level of disclosure can they expect from their brokers regarding potential future price changes? And if

Judgment Date: November 30, 1995 The common retail model of larger department stores or supermarkets hosting smaller, independently operated tenant shops within their premises offers convenience to shoppers but can also create ambiguity regarding who is responsible when things go wrong. A landmark decision by the Supreme Court of Japan&

Judgment Date: November 12, 1996 In modern commerce, it's not uncommon for parties to enter into multiple contracts that, while formally separate, are intended to achieve a single, overarching economic or personal objective. A critical legal question arises when one of these linked contracts is breached: can the

Judgment Date: October 28, 2014 When a pyramid scheme collapses, it often leaves a trail of financial devastation, with many participants losing their investments while a few early entrants might walk away with significant profits. A crucial legal question then arises: can a bankruptcy trustee, appointed to manage the affairs

Judgment Date: December 16, 2005 A common point of contention between landlords and tenants in Japan, as in many countries, revolves around the state of a rental property upon move-out and who bears the cost for repairs. Specifically, the issue of "normal wear and tear" versus actual "

Judgment Date: April 16, 2013 Accident insurance policies are designed to provide financial protection against unforeseen injuries caused by external events. But what happens when the immediate cause of harm involves bodily substances, such as when an individual fatally chokes on their own vomitus? Is such a tragic event considered

Judgment Date: December 9, 2003 In the aftermath of the devastating Great Hanshin-Awaji Earthquake of 1995, numerous legal battles ensued over insurance coverage. One such case, culminating in a Supreme Court judgment on December 9, 2003 (Heisei 14 (Ju) No. 218), addressed a critical question: if an insurance company fails

Judgment Dates: April 22, 2011 On April 22, 2011, the Second Petty Bench of the Supreme Court of Japan delivered two pivotal judgments concerning the liability of a credit cooperative that solicited capital contributions from individuals while concealing its dire financial situation. These cases collectively clarify the legal nature of

Judgment Date: November 18, 2004 In a significant ruling that underscores the importance of good faith and transparency in contractual dealings, particularly when a party is induced to alter its position based on specific undertakings, Japan's Supreme Court, First Petty Bench, delivered its judgment on November 18, 2004

When consumers suffer losses due to misleading or fraudulent advertising, the primary advertiser often bears direct responsibility. However, Japanese courts have also examined the potential liability of other parties involved in disseminating these advertisements, such as newspaper publishers, advertising agencies, and celebrity endorsers. Two key court decisions shed light on

Judgment Date: January 24, 2017 In a significant ruling for consumer protection in Japan, the Supreme Court's Third Petty Bench on January 24, 2017, delivered a judgment in the "Chlorella Flyer Distribution Injunction Request Case" (Heisei 28 (Ju) No. 1050). This case tackled a pivotal question:

Judgment Date: December 6, 2017 In a landmark decision with far-reaching implications for millions of television owners in Japan, the Grand Bench of the Supreme Court on December 6, 2017, ruled on the controversial issue of NHK (Nippon Hōsō Kyōkai - Japan Broadcasting Corporation) reception contracts. The case (Reception Contract