In Japanese real estate law, a provisional registration (karitōki, 仮登記) serves as a vital placeholder, securing the priority for an anticipated final registration (hon-tōki, 本登記). While the karitōki itself has limited direct legal power, its true significance is realized when it is successfully converted into a hon-tōki. This conversion is not merely a procedural update; it triggers profound legal effects, fundamentally altering the rights holder's position, especially concerning third parties and any intervening claims that may have arisen.

This article examines the crucial legal effects that flow from completing a hon-tōki that is based on an earlier karitōki, focusing on how this final step perfects the underlying right and leverages the priority preserved by the provisional registration.

The Primary Effect: Acquisition of Full Third-Party Effect (対抗力 - Taikōryoku)

The most fundamental legal effect of completing a hon-tōki is that the registered right (be it ownership, a mortgage, a leasehold, etc.) acquires full third-party effect or perfection (taikōryoku) from the date and time the hon-tōki is officially recorded in the real estate register[cite: 203]. This is in line with the general principle of Japanese property law, as enshrined in Article 177 of the Civil Code, which states that changes in real rights concerning immovable property cannot be asserted against third parties unless duly registered.

Before the hon-tōki, the karitōki holder, as we've discussed previously, generally cannot directly assert their substantive right against third parties who might have conflicting claims. However, once the hon-tōki is made, the right holder is fully empowered to assert their now-perfected right against the world at large, effective from the moment of the hon-tōki.

The Power of Priority: Article 106 of the Real Estate Registration Act Unleashed

While the taikōryoku itself commences with the hon-tōki, the unique strength of a hon-tōki based on a karitōki lies in its priority ranking. Article 106 of the Real Estate Registration Act (不動産登記法第106条) dictates:

"Where a final registration (hon-tōki) is made based on a provisional registration (karitōki), the order of priority of said final registration shall be the order of priority of said provisional registration."

This "priority preservation effect" (jun'i hozenkō, 順位保全効) is the cornerstone of the karitōki system's protective function. It means that for the purpose of determining its rank against other registered rights on the same property, the hon-tōki is treated as if it had been registered at the time the initial karitōki was filed[cite: 203].

It's crucial to reiterate that this does not mean the taikōryoku itself becomes retroactive to the karitōki date[cite: 203]. The right becomes opposable to third parties only from the hon-tōki date. However, its ability to prevail over other rights is determined by the earlier karitōki priority.

Impact on Intervening Dispositions (中間処分 - Chūkan Shobun)

The most significant practical effect of a karitōki-based hon-tōki is its impact on "intervening dispositions" – these are registrations of conflicting or incompatible rights made by or in favor of third parties after the karitōki was recorded but before the karitōki holder managed to complete their hon-tōki.

Because the hon-tōki's priority is effectively "back-dated" to the time of the karitōki, it will rank higher than these intervening dispositions. Consequently, to the extent that these intervening rights are legally incompatible with the right now perfected by the hon-tōki, they are rendered ineffective against the hon-tōki holder[cite: 203, 204].

The specific outcome varies depending on the nature of the karitōki and the intervening rights:

1. For Ownership-Related Hon-tōki (Based on Ownership Karitōki):
This is where the effect is often most dramatic, governed by Article 109 of the Real Estate Registration Act.

• If a karitōki for ownership transfer (or a claim thereto) was made, and subsequently, a third party registered their own ownership transfer (a hon-tōki) from the same original obligor, or registered another conflicting right (like a mortgage), the following occurs when the initial karitōki holder applies for their hon-tōki:
  • The karitōki holder must generally submit either the written consent of the interested third party (whose right conflicts) or a court judgment opposable to that third party, affirming the priority of the karitōki-based right (Real Estate Registration Act, Art. 109, para. 1)[cite: 196].
  • Crucial Effect: Upon making the hon-tōki with this supporting documentation, the registrar is empowered to, ex officio (by their own authority), cancel the conflicting intervening registration(s) (Real Estate Registration Act, Art. 109, para. 2)[cite: 196, 212, 245]. This is a powerful effect of the hon-tōki procedure itself, actively clearing the register of subordinate conflicting titles.
• Example: Company A has an ownership transfer karitōki from Seller X. Seller X then sells and completes a hon-tōki to Company B. If Company A later obtains Company B's consent (or a judgment against B) and converts its karitōki to a hon-tōki, Company B's hon-tōki will be cancelled by the registrar, leaving Company A as the sole registered owner with priority dating back to its karitōki.

2. For Non-Ownership Hon-tōki (e.g., Mortgage, Lease based on Karitōki):
While Article 109's specific ex-officio cancellation mechanism is primarily for ownership-related karitōki, the principle of preserved priority under Article 106 still has a decisive effect:

• Example (Mortgage): Company L has a karitōki for a first-ranking mortgage from Owner O. Owner O then grants a second mortgage to Company M, which Company M registers as a hon-tōki. Subsequently, Company L converts its mortgage karitōki into a hon-tōki. Company L's mortgage hon-tōki, taking priority from its karitōki date, will be the senior mortgage, and Company M's mortgage will be subordinate[cite: 204]. If Company L forecloses, its claim will be satisfied before Company M's.
• Example (Mortgage Karitōki vs. Subsequent Sale): Company L has a mortgage karitōki from Owner O. Owner O then sells the property to Purchaser P, who obtains a hon-tōki for ownership. When Company L later completes its hon-tōki for the mortgage, Purchaser P holds the property, but it is now definitively subject to Company L's prior-ranking perfected mortgage[cite: 204]. P acquired title burdened by the potential perfected mortgage signaled by the karitōki.

3. Effect on Karitōki for Alteration of Rights:
If a karitōki was made for the alteration of an existing right (e.g., changing the interest rate of a mortgage), and this karitōki for alteration was itself made by an ancillary registration (fuki-tōki, 付記登記) with the consent of any interested third parties, then the hon-tōki of this alteration will make the altered terms effective with the priority of the original main right being altered[cite: 204]. This means the change is treated as if it were part of the original right from its inception, for priority purposes. If the alteration karitōki was made as a new main registration (due to lack of consent from interested parties), its hon-tōki will establish the altered terms with priority only from the date of that alteration karitōki.

4. Effect on Karitōki for Extinction (Erasure) of Rights:
If a karitōki was made for the future extinction of a registered right (e.g., a karitōki to erase a mortgage upon full payment), completing the hon-tōki for this extinction (i.e., the actual erasure registration) will make the erasure effective with the priority of the extinction karitōki[cite: 204]. This can be crucial if, for example, after the karitōki for extinction was made but before the actual erasure, the holder of the right to be extinguished attempted to create new subordinate rights (e.g., a second mortgage based on a first mortgage that was already subject to an extinction karitōki). The hon-tōki of the extinction would defeat such subsequently created, incompatible rights. The PDF notes that when making a hon-tōki for erasure, the consent of interested third parties (including those whose rights were registered after the erasure karitōki) is generally required, but these later parties would typically be unable to refuse consent if the erasure is substantively justified.

Clarifying the Nature of "Retroactivity": Priority vs. Substantive Effect

It is paramount to distinguish that the "relation-back" effect applies to priority ranking, not to the substantive legal effects of the right, such as taikōryoku or the entitlements of ownership (like receiving rent).

• The priority of the hon-tōki is determined as of the karitōki date.
• The third-party effect (taikōryoku) of the right perfected by the hon-tōki commences only from the actual date the hon-tōki is made[cite: 203].

This distinction means, for instance, that a karitōki holder for ownership who later obtains hon-tōki cannot claim rents that accrued to an intervening (subsequently defeated) owner during the period when only the karitōki existed. The right to claim rents as owner (opposable to third parties like tenants) only begins with the hon-tōki. This principle has been affirmed in judicial precedents and legal commentary.

The Hon-tōki as the Crystallization of the Karitōki's Potential

Think of the karitōki as representing a secured potential. The hon-tōki is the event that crystallizes this potential into a fully realized and enforceable legal reality. The legal effects that truly matter in asserting rights against the world flow directly from the hon-tōki, but the strength of that hon-tōki's position in the hierarchy of registered rights is decisively determined by the earlier karitōki.

Practical Consequences for Businesses

The legal effects of a karitōki-based hon-tōki translate into significant practical advantages:

• Certainty of Title or Right: Achieving hon-tōki provides the legal certainty required for further dealings with the property, such as subsequent sales, securing further financing against it, or proceeding with development plans.
• Full Enforceability: The perfected right can now be directly and fully enforced against any third party, without the limitations that constrained the karitōki holder.
• Clearing the Path (for Ownership): For ownership-related karitōki, the procedure under Article 109 (requiring third-party consent or judgment for hon-tōki, leading to ex officio cancellation of conflicting rights) provides a formal mechanism to clarify title by removing incompatible intervening registrations from the public record. This results in a cleaner and more definitive title for the hon-tōki holder.

Conclusion: The Culmination of Provisional Protection

The legal effect of a final registration (hon-tōki) based on an earlier provisional registration (karitōki) is transformative. It perfects the underlying real property right, granting it full third-party effect (taikōryoku) from the moment the hon-tōki is recorded. Critically, through the mechanism of Article 106 of the Real Estate Registration Act, this perfected right asserts itself with the priority secured by the earlier karitōki. This priority preservation is the essence of the karitōki system, allowing the hon-tōki holder to overcome conflicting rights that may have been registered during the interim period. It is this powerful combination—achieving current perfection while leveraging past priority—that makes the karitōki to hon-tōki pathway an indispensable strategy for securing real estate interests in the Japanese legal environment.