Administrative Law - Japan Compliance

Slide summarising the 2011 Supreme Court LTCI decision: valid designation prevents clawback of care benefits despite initial flaws.

Supreme Court Clarifies LTCI Clawback: Valid Provider Designations Survive Initial Flaws (2011)

Japan Supreme Court (2011): Care benefits can’t be clawed back if the provider’s designation stays valid, despite flaws in its initial approval.

Slide summarizing the 2007 Supreme Court ruling that state, not employer, is liable for negligence at a delegated child‑welfare facility.

Case Summary

State vs. Employer Liability: Japan Supreme Court Clarifies Delegated Child Welfare Duties (2007)

Japan Supreme Court 2007: negligence at a private child welfare home performing public duties makes the prefecture liable, not the employer.

Slide summarizing the 2018 Supreme Court ruling: full clawback of unreported income under Japan’s Public Assistance Act, no basic deduction allowed.

Case Summary

Full Clawback for Hidden Earnings: Japan Supreme Court Interprets Public Assistance Act (2018)

Japan’s Supreme Court: welfare recipients who hide income must repay all unreported earnings under the Public Assistance Act—no basic deduction.

Summary slide illustrating the 2014 Supreme Court ruling that welfare benefits can be terminated only for breach of explicit written instructions.

Case Summary

Supreme Court Clarifies Welfare Termination Requires Explicit Written Instructions (Japan, Oct 23 2014)

Japan's Supreme Court (Oct 23 2014): welfare aid may end only for violating a clear written instruction, protecting recipients' rights.

Slide summarizing the 2004 Supreme Court decision allowing welfare recipients to keep education‑savings under Japan’s Public Assistance Act.

Case Summary

Japan's Supreme Court on Public Assistance and Savings: The Educational Insurance Case of March 16, 2004

Supreme Court: welfare recipients can save for kids' high‑school fees without aid cuts—landmark 2004 ruling on the Public Assistance Act.

Infographic summarising the 2014 Supreme Court ruling that foreign residents lack statutory welfare rights under Japan’s Public Assistance Act.

Case Summary

No Statutory Welfare Right for Foreign Residents: Japan Supreme Court Public Assistance Ruling (2014)

Japan's Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that foreign residents have no Public Assistance Act welfare right; aid depends on administrative discretion.

Summary slide illustrating the Supreme Court’s 1996 ruling that post‑symptom work and delayed treatment can establish work‑related causation in a teacher’s brain hemorrhage case.

Administrative Law

Teacher’s Brain Hemorrhage and Work Causation: Japan Supreme Court Rules (1996)

Can post‑onset work duties turn a pre‑existing brain hemorrhage into a compensable accident? Japan’s Supreme Court said “yes,” remanding a 1996 teacher case that reshaped causation tests under the Local Public Service Accident Compensation Act.

Slide summarizing the Supreme Court’s 1995 ruling on survivor claims for unpaid pension benefits under Japan’s National Pension Act

Case Summary

Japan Supreme Court Clarifies Survivor Claims to Unpaid Pensions (1995)

Japan’s Supreme Court (1995) ruled survivors must file a separate administrative claim for unpaid pension installments—no automatic succession to the deceased’s lawsuit. Learn the procedure and implications.

Infographic summarizing Japan’s 2008 Supreme Court ruling on the “first consultation date” and disability‑pension eligibility

Case Summary

Japan’s Supreme Court Defines “First Consultation Date” for Disability Basic Pension Eligibility (2008)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Oct 10 2008) ruled that the literal “first consultation date” (shoshinbi) — not the medical onset date — controls eligibility for the pre‑20 Disability Basic Pension. The Court favored textual certainty over disease‑specific flexibility, leaving legislative reform as the only remedy for students diagnosed

Diagram summarising Japan Supreme Court 2006 decision limiting correction rights over National Health Insurance receipts (Kyoto City case)

Case Summary

Supreme Court Narrows Correction Rights over Medical Receipts – Kyoto City Case (Japan, 2006)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Mar 10 2006) held that an insured person cannot compel Kyoto City to “correct” dental treatment details on National Health Insurance receipts because the city keeps those receipts solely as financial evidence, not as medical records. The ruling clarifies the narrow scope of data‑

Summary slide illustrating the 1978 Supreme Court ruling that medical‑fee reductions (‘genten’) are not administrative dispositions and must be contested in civil court.

Case Summary

Japan Supreme Court on Medical‑Fee Reductions (1978): Why ‘Genten’ Isn’t an Administrative Disposition

TL;DR The 1978 Supreme Court clarified that fee “reductions” (genten) imposed by the Social Insurance Medical Fee Payment Fund are not administrative dispositions. Providers therefore must sue in ordinary civil court—rather than file an administrative revocation suit—to recover any amounts they believe were wrongly withheld. Table of

Single‑slide summary illustrating how a non‑binding hospital‑opening recommendation became judicially reviewable after Japan’s Supreme Court’s 2005 ruling.

Case Summary

Challenging "Guidance": Japan's Supreme Court on the Reviewability of Hospital Opening Recommendations (2005)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court held in 2005 that a seemingly non‑binding recommendation under the Medical Care Act becomes a reviewable “administrative disposition” when it predictably leads to denial of national health‑insurance designation, effectively blocking a new hospital from operating. Table of Contents * Background: Health Planning, Recommendations,

Key points of the 2022 Supreme Court decision on revoking dependent status under Japan’s Health Insurance Act, including appeal routes and 60‑day filing deadline — one‑slide summary.

Case Summary

Dependent Status Disputes in Japan's Health Insurance: Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Routes (2022)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Dec 13 2022) held that a notice revoking a spouse’s dependent status under the Health Insurance Act is an appealable administrative disposition. Such disputes must first go through the special two‑tier social‑insurance appeal system, but strict 60‑day filing limits apply—

Summary slide: 2017 Supreme Court ruling on survivor pensions – age rule for widowers, Article 14 equality test, key holdings and implications

Case Summary

Japan Supreme Court 2017 Survivor‑Pension Case: Why Age Rules for Widowers Survived an Equality Challenge

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (Mar 21 2017) upheld a Local Government Officials Accident Compensation Act rule that denies survivor pensions to husbands under 55, finding the gender‑based age threshold “not irrational” given labour‑market disparities. The Court applied a deferential Horiki‑style review under Article 14, leaving

Infographic summarizing Japan’s 2007 Supreme Court ruling on student disability pensions

Case Summary

Student Disability Pension Gap: Why Japan’s Supreme Court Backed Voluntary Enrollment (2007)

TL;DR Japan’s Supreme Court (2007) upheld the constitutionality of the pre‑1989 National Pension framework that left some students disabled after age 20 without benefits. The Court applied an extremely deferential “markedly irrational” standard, ruled no violation of Articles 14 or 25 of the Constitution, and emphasized legislative

Slide summarising the 2012 Old Age Addition case: phased abolition, two-prong process review, Article 25 implications

Case Summary

Japan's Supreme Court Upholds Welfare Benefit Cut: The 2012 Old Age Addition Case

TL;DR: The 2012 Old Age Addition case upheld the phased abolition of an extra welfare payment for seniors, confirming broad ministerial discretion under the Public Assistance Act and Article 25. The Court set a two-prong “process review” test: (1) rationality of need/adequacy assessment and (2) fairness of transitional

Slide summarising the 1982 Horiki Litigation: legislative discretion, non-combination of benefits, Article 25 threshold ‘markedly lacking in rationality’

Case Summary

The Horiki Litigation: Legislative Discretion and Social Security Benefits in Japan

TL;DR: The 1982 Horiki Litigation reaffirmed broad legislative discretion under Article 25, upholding a statutory “non-combination clause” that barred simultaneous receipt of a Disability Welfare Pension and a Child Rearing Allowance. The Supreme Court set a high bar—“markedly lacking in rationality”—for striking down social-security legislation. Table of

Slide summarising the 1967 Asahi Litigation: Article 25 abstract right, ministerial discretion, non-inheritability of welfare claims

Case Summary

Asahi Litigation (1967): Supreme Court on Japan’s Constitutional Right to Welfare

TL;DR: The 1967 Asahi Litigation confirmed that Article 25 provides only an abstract constitutional right, upheld broad ministerial discretion over welfare standards, and ruled such entitlements are strictly personal and non-inheritable. Table of Contents 1. Background of the Case 2. The Supreme Court’s Judgment: Procedural Termination 3. Dissenting