When a new building is constructed in Japan, one of the first crucial legal steps is its initial "description registration" (表示登記 - hyōji tōki), often specifically referred to as a "title registration" (表題登記 - hyōdai tōki) in this context. This process officially records the building's existence, its physical characteristics (location, type, structure, floor area), and, importantly, identifies the "heading-section owner" (表題部所有者 - hyōdai-bu shoyūsha). This heading-section owner is typically the person who constructed or originally acquired the building. But what documentation does the Japanese legal system require to substantiate this initial claim of ownership for a brand-new structure being entered into the property register for the first time?

The Legal Foundation: The Real Property Registration Order and Procedure Rules

The requirement to provide evidence of ownership for an initial building description registration stems from the Real Property Registration Order (不動産登記令 - Fudōsan Tōkirei). The annexed table (別表 - Beppyō) to this Order, specifically item 12 when dealing with non-condominium buildings, lists "information evidencing that the person to become the heading-section owner has ownership" (表題部所有者となる者が所有権を有することを証する情報 - hyōdai-bu shoyūsha to naru mono ga shoyūken o yūsuru koto o shōsuru jōhō) as a mandatory attachment to the application.

To clarify what constitutes such acceptable information, Article 87, Paragraph 1 of the Real Property Registration Procedure Rules (不動産登記事務取扱手続準則 - Fudōsan Tōki Jimu Toriatsukai Tetsuzuki Junsoku, hereinafter "Junsoku") provides a detailed list. This rule is the primary guide for applicants and registrars in determining what types of documents can satisfy this evidentiary requirement.

Primary Documents: The "Gold Standard" from Construction Compliance

For newly constructed buildings, the most straightforward and commonly accepted proofs of ownership for the heading-section owner are documents directly tied to the lawful construction process under Japan's Building Standards Act (建築基準法 - Kenchiku Kijunhō).

1. Building Permit Confirmation Notice (建築確認通知書 - Kenchiku Kakunin Tsūchisho or 確認済証 - Kakunin-zumishō for the certificate itself):
   This document is issued by the relevant building official (建築主事 - kenchiku shuji) or a designated private inspection body before construction commences, as per Article 6 of the Building Standards Act[cite: 79]. It certifies that the building plans submitted by the applicant (the prospective owner) comply with the Building Standards Act and other relevant building codes and regulations. Its significance lies in officially linking the applicant to the planned construction from its very inception, evidencing their initiative and legal authorization to build.
2. Completion Inspection Certificate (検査済証 - Kensa-zumishō):
   Upon completion of the building, another inspection is carried out by the building official or designated body to ensure that the structure has been built in accordance with the approved plans and complies with all applicable laws. If successful, a Completion Inspection Certificate is issued under Article 7 of the Building Standards Act[cite: 79]. This certificate is crucial as it officially confirms the building's physical existence as a lawfully completed structure and reinforces the applicant's role in bringing it to fruition according to legal standards.

When both the Building Permit Confirmation Notice and the Completion Inspection Certificate are provided by the applicant named therein, they form a robust and officially endorsed chain of evidence. They demonstrate the applicant's involvement from the planning stages through to lawful completion, making a strong case for their status as the heading-section owner.

Alternative Proofs: When Primary Documents Are Not Fully Available

Recognizing that practical situations can prevent the submission of both primary construction compliance documents, the legal framework and longstanding administrative practice provide for alternatives. A key administrative directive from October 8, 1962 (Showa 37, Minji-Kō No. 2885) offered guidance on such scenarios, and its principles continue to resonate with the flexible approach enshrined in Junsoku Article 87(1)[cite: 79].

1. Lost Primary Documents: The Building Official's Substitute Certificate (建築主事の相当証明書 - Kenchiku Shuji no Sōtō Shōmeisho)
   If an applicant has lost either the Building Permit Confirmation Notice or the Completion Inspection Certificate, the 1962 directive indicated that a "suitable certificate from the building official" could serve as a substitute[cite: 79]. This "suitable certificate" would likely be an official extract or attestation from the local government's records, confirming that the original permit was indeed issued or that the completion inspection was successfully passed by the applicant. The ability to obtain such a substitute depends on the local government's record-keeping practices and the availability of historical data.
2. Completion Inspection Certificate Not Yet Issued: Contractor's or Landowner's Certificate
   It's common for there to be a short lag between the physical completion of a building and the formal issuance of the Completion Inspection Certificate. If an application for initial description registration is made during this interim period, the 1962 directive allowed, and current practice under Junsoku Article 87(1) supports, the use of a certificate from either:These documents act as credible interim proof of the applicant's role in the building's creation and their claim to be its initial owner, pending the final official certification[cite: 79].
   • The Building Contractor (建築請負人 - kenchiku ukeoinin): A formal statement from the main contractor attesting that they constructed the building for the applicant, detailing the work done and confirming its completion.
   • The Landowner (敷地所有者 - shikichi shoyūsha): If the applicant built on land owned by another party (with permission), a certificate from the landowner affirming that the applicant is the one who constructed the building on their property can be used.
3. Primary Building Standards Act Documents Never Issued or Inherently Unavailable:
   In some situations, the standard Building Permit Confirmation and Completion Inspection Certificates might not have been issued from the outset, or might be genuinely unobtainable. This could apply to certain very old buildings predating the current strictures of the Building Standards Act, or perhaps some minor structures that were, in the past, exempt from the full permitting and inspection process. In such cases, Junsoku Article 87(1), echoing the spirit of the 1962 directive, allows for a certificate from the building contractor or the landowner to serve as primary evidence of ownership for the heading-section registration[cite: 79]. The registrar would assess the credibility of such documents in the context of the building's age and type.

Other Forms of Acceptable Ownership Information (Junsoku Article 87(1))

Beyond documents directly related to the construction process and its official approvals, Junsoku Article 87(1) lists several other types of information that can be accepted as proof of ownership for the heading-section owner[cite: 79]. These cater to a broader range of circumstances under which one might claim initial ownership of a building:

1. Contract for Disposal/Sale of a State-Owned Building (国有建物の払下げの契約書 - Kokuyū Tatemono no Haraisage no Keiyakusho):
   If the building was acquired directly from the national government (e.g., a former public building sold to a private entity), the official contract of sale or disposal serves as strong evidence of the applicant's acquisition of ownership[cite: 79].
2. Fixed Asset Tax Payment Certificate (固定資産税の納付証明書 - Kotei Shisanzei no Nōfu Shōmeisho):
   This document demonstrates who has been recognized by the local tax authorities as the person responsible for paying fixed asset tax on the building[cite: 79]. While primarily a fiscal document and not conclusive proof of legal title for subsequent transfers, it can be significant supporting evidence for an initial description registration. It implies a degree of de facto ownership recognized by municipal authorities, which can be particularly useful for older, existing but previously unregistered buildings. The weight given to this certificate might depend on how long the applicant has been registered as the taxpayer for that specific building.
3. "Other Information Sufficient to Prove the Applicant's Acquisition of Ownership" (その他申請人の所有権の取得を証するに足る情報 - Sonota Shinseinin no Shoyūken no Shutoku o Shōsuru ni Tariru Jōhō):
   This is a crucial catch-all provision within Junsoku Article 87(1) that allows the registrar a degree of flexibility to accept other forms of credible evidence tailored to specific, less common situations[cite: 79]. The overarching principle is that the information must be "sufficient to prove" the applicant's claim. While not exhaustively defined, examples based on general registration practice and legal commentary might include:
   • Inheritance Documents: If the original builder or owner passed away before the building could be registered, the heir(s) applying for the initial registration would typically submit documents such as the deceased's will, official family register excerpts showing the line of succession (戸籍謄本 - koseki tōhon), and potentially an agreement on division of inherited property (遺産分割協議書 - isan bunkatsu kyōgisho) if there are multiple heirs. These documents establish the applicant's succession to the original owner's rights regarding the building.
   • Court Judgments: A final and conclusive court judgment that explicitly confirms the applicant's ownership of the specific (though unregistered) building would generally be compelling evidence.
   • For Very Old Buildings: If a building is very old and predates many modern documentation standards, proving original ownership can be challenging. In such cases, depending on the registrar's assessment of the overall circumstances, historical documents (e.g., old private deeds, village records), attestations from long-standing neighborhood associations, or even credibly sworn affidavits from knowledgeable individuals might be considered, often in conjunction with other circumstantial evidence like long-term, undisputed possession and payment of taxes.
   • Sales Contracts for Existing Unregistered Buildings: If an applicant purchased an existing but unregistered building, the sales contract itself, coupled with robust evidence demonstrating the seller's original ownership (using one of the methods described above), could be accepted.

Special Consideration: Buildings on Co-owned Land

The 1962 administrative directive (Showa 37, Minji-Kō No. 2885) provided a practical clarification for situations where a building is constructed on land that is co-owned by multiple parties. If a landowner's certificate is being used as proof of the building's ownership for its initial description registration, the directive indicated that a certificate from just one of the land co-owners would generally suffice[cite: 79].

This pragmatic approach avoids the potential hurdle of requiring unanimous consent from all land co-owners merely to register the physical facts and initial owner of a building situated on that land. It recognizes that the building's ownership is distinct from the land's ownership. However, this pertains specifically to the building's description registration. It does not alter the underlying land rights, nor does it affect the rights or claims of the other land co-owners concerning the land itself or their potential rights concerning the building under different legal principles (e.g., rights of use, claims based on contribution to construction if applicable).

The Registrar's Role and Evidentiary Assessment

While Junsoku Article 87(1) and guiding precedents list various forms of acceptable evidence, the Legal Affairs Bureau registrar ultimately retains the authority to assess the sufficiency and credibility of the documents submitted in any given case. This is especially true for documents falling under the "other information sufficient to prove acquisition of ownership" category.

If the submitted information is ambiguous, conflicting, or raises doubts, the registrar has the power to request additional supporting documents or clarification. Furthermore, under Article 29 of the Real Property Registration Act, if the registrar deems it necessary for a display registration, they can conduct an official investigation (shokken chōsa), which might include site inspections or inquiries, to verify the facts presented, including aspects related to ownership.

Conclusion: Establishing the Initial Ownership Link

Proving ownership for the purpose of an initial building description registration (hyōdai tōki) in Japan is about credibly establishing the applicant's link to the building's creation or its lawful original acquisition. The system prioritizes official documents stemming from the Building Standards Act's construction and inspection processes as the primary evidence for newly built structures.

However, acknowledging the diverse circumstances under which buildings come into existence or are first brought onto the register, a range of alternative and supplementary proofs are recognized. These include certificates from building officials, contractors, or landowners, as well as documents related to government dispositions, tax payments, inheritance, or court adjudications. The long-standing guidance from the 1962 directive, particularly regarding substitutes for lost documents or scenarios like co-owned land, continues to inform the flexible yet rigorous approach seen in current rules like Junsoku Article 87(1).

The overarching goal is to ensure that when a building is first entered into the property register, the "heading-section owner" is identified based on reliable information, thereby laying a clear and trustworthy foundation for all subsequent rights and transactions associated with that building.