What is the 'Shubun' in a Japanese Civil Judgment and Why Is It Crucial for U.S. Businesses?

When a Japanese court issues a civil judgment (判決 - hanketsu), the entire document is a carefully constructed pronouncement detailing the culmination of legal proceedings. However, for the parties involved, and particularly for businesses seeking to understand their rights and obligations, one section stands above all others in terms of immediate legal impact: the Shubun (主文), or main text of the judgment. This article will delve into the nature and components of the Shubun, explaining why its precise wording is of paramount importance and what it signifies in the context of Japanese civil litigation.

The Shubun is the operative part of the judgment; it is the court's direct and binding order. While other sections of the judgment, such as "Facts" (事実 - jijitsu) and "Reasons" (理由 - riyū), provide the context, party allegations, and the court's detailed justification for its decision, it is the Shubun that dictates the enforceable outcome of the dispute. Its language is typically concise, formal, and devoid of the narrative or explanatory style found elsewhere in the judgment.

The Core Meaning and Legal Weight of the Shubun

Literally translating to "main text" or "principal disposition," the Shubun encapsulates the court's final decision on the claims presented. Its legal weight is immense because:

1. It is Legally Binding: The Shubun establishes the rights and obligations of the parties with the force of law (once the judgment becomes final and unappealable, or if subject to provisional execution).
2. It is Enforceable: This is the portion of the judgment that can be taken to enforcement authorities (e.g., for seizure of assets or compelling specific performance).
3. It Defines the Scope of Res Judicata: The matters definitively decided in the Shubun will generally have preclusive effect in subsequent litigation between the same parties.

Understanding the Shubun is therefore not merely an academic exercise; it is a practical necessity for any party involved in Japanese civil litigation, including U.S. businesses, to ascertain the precise legal consequences of the court's decision.

Key Elements Typically Contained Within the Shubun

The Shubun section of a Japanese civil judgment consistently includes several key elements, directly addressing the outcomes of the litigation:

1. The Court's Decision on the Primary Relief Sought: This is the resolution of the core dispute, whether it's a monetary claim, a request for specific action, or a declaration of a legal right.
2. The Order Concerning Litigation Costs (訴訟費用 - soshō hiyō): This part specifies which party (or parties, and in what proportion) is responsible for bearing the official costs incurred during the lawsuit.
3. The Declaration of Provisional Execution (仮執行の宣言 - kari shikkō no sengen): If granted by the court, this clause allows the winning party to enforce the judgment even before it becomes formally final and unappealable.

In certain specific types of cases, such as divorce proceedings, the Shubun may also include other statutorily mandated orders, like the designation of the parent with custodial rights.

Decoding the Shubun for Different Types of Claims: A Detailed Analysis

The exact phrasing of the Shubun varies significantly depending on the nature of the claim and the court's decision.

1. Dismissal of the Action (訴え却下 - uttae kyakka)

When a court dismisses an action on procedural grounds, rather than on the merits of the claim, the Shubun will reflect this. This occurs if essential procedural requirements are not met, such as a lack of jurisdiction, an improper party, or a failure to pay requisite court fees.

• Typical Phrasing: 「本件訴えを却下する。」 (Honken uttae o kyakka suru.) – "The present action is dismissed."
• Implications: A dismissal of the action often means the plaintiff may be able to refile the lawsuit once the procedural defect has been rectified. This is distinct from a rejection of the claim on its merits, which typically has a more final effect on the substance of the dispute.

2. Rejection of the Claim (請求棄却 - seikyū kikyaku)

If the court finds that the plaintiff's claim, after due consideration of the facts and law, is without substantive merit, the Shubun will order its rejection.

• Typical Phrasing: 「原告の請求を棄却する。」 (Genkoku no seikyū o kikyaku suru.) – "The plaintiff's claim is rejected."
• Variations:
  • If multiple claims were made and all are rejected: 「原告の請求をいずれも棄却する。」 (Genkoku no seikyū o izure mo kikyaku suru.) – "All of the plaintiff's claims are rejected."
  • If the plaintiff succeeds in part but fails in another: 「原告のその余の請求を棄却する。」 (Genkoku no sono yo no seikyū o kikyaku suru.) – "The remainder of the plaintiff's claim is rejected." This follows the part of the Shubun that grants the successful portion of the claim.
• Implications: A rejection of the claim on the merits generally prevents the plaintiff from re-litigating the same claim against the same defendant. This is akin to a "dismissal with prejudice" in U.S. legal terminology regarding its finality.

3. Upholding of the Claim (請求認容 - seikyū nin'yō)

When the court finds in favor of the plaintiff, the Shubun will articulate the specific relief granted. The phrasing is highly dependent on the nature of the underlying claim.

a. Judgments for Performance (給付判決 - kyūfu hanketsu)

These judgments order the defendant to perform a specific act or make a payment.

• Monetary Payments (金員の支払を命ずる主文 - kin'en no shiharai o meizuru shubun)
  This is one of the most common forms of relief.
  • Core Phrasing: 「被告は、原告に対し、金○○円及びこれに対する平成○年○月○日から支払済みまで年△分の割合による金員を支払え。」 (Hikoku wa, genkoku ni taishi, kin marumaru en oyobi kore ni taisuru Heisei A nen B gatsu C nichi kara shiharaizumi made nen D bu no wariai ni yoru kin'en o shiharae.) – "The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff X yen, and monetary amounts thereon at the rate of Y% per annum from [specific date: Year A, Month B, Day C of the Heisei era] until full payment."
  • Key Details in Monetary Awards:
    • Principal Amount: The exact principal sum is clearly stated.
    • Start Date for Interest/Damages: The judgment must specify a concrete calendar date from which interest or delay damages accrue. It is insufficient to state, for example, "from the day after service of the complaint"; the actual date must be determined and inserted.
    • "Until Full Payment": The phrase 「支払済みまで」 (shiharaizumi made) is standard, ensuring interest accrues until the debt is settled.
    • Rounding: Any fractional yen amounts in the calculated award are typically rounded down to the nearest whole yen.
    • Multiple Defendants: Clarity regarding the nature of liability is crucial.
      • 「各自」 (kakuji) indicates several liability (each defendant responsible for their specified portion, or potentially the full amount if not further specified, though this phrasing can lead to interpretation that each pays half if two defendants are ordered to pay one sum ). For clarity when each is to pay the full amount independently (subject to overall satisfaction), "each" or similar wording is vital.
      • 「連帯して」 (rentai shite) clearly indicates joint and several liability. This phrasing is often preferred for its clarity, even in cases of fu shinsei rentai saimu (liability that functions like joint and several liability but arises from different causes of action, e.g., a contract breacher and a tortfeasor causing the same damage).
      • 「合同して」 (gōdō shite) is used for specific types of joint obligations found in commercial law, such as those under the Bills and Notes Act (e.g., liability of drawers and endorsers of a promissory note).
  • Practical Note: For U.S. businesses, understanding these nuances is vital for accurately assessing the value of a monetary award and the avenues for recovery, especially when multiple parties are involved.
• Performance in Exchange for Counter-Performance (引換給付の主文 - hikikae kyūfu no shubun)
  This applies when the defendant's obligation to perform is conditional upon the plaintiff fulfilling a counter-obligation, often seen when a defense of simultaneous performance is upheld.
  • Typical Phrasing: 「被告は、原告から金○○円の支払を受けるのと引換えに、原告に対し、別紙物件目録記載の建物を引き渡せ。」 (Hikoku wa, genkoku kara kin marumaru en no shiharai o ukeru no to hikikae ni, genkoku ni taishi, besshi bukken mokuroku kisai no tatemono o hikiwatase.) – "The defendant shall, in exchange for receiving payment of X yen from the plaintiff, deliver to the plaintiff the building described in the attached property schedule."
  • Important Consequence: In such cases, the Shubun will also typically include a clause rejecting "the remainder of the plaintiff's claim," as the original claim might have sought unconditional performance. This signifies that the plaintiff did not fully succeed on their initial terms.
• Orders Concerning Registration (登記に関する主文 - tōki ni kansuru shubun)
  These judgments are common in real estate disputes or matters involving other registrable rights (e.g., intellectual property).
  • Phrasing of the Order: The order is usually phrased as 「登記手続をせよ。」 (tōki tetsuzuki o seyo) – "complete the registration procedures". This is because the defendant’s obligation is to take the necessary steps for registration (an expression of intent); the actual act of recording the registration is performed by a government registrar.
  • Specificity Required:
    • Property Identification: The subject property must be unambiguously identified, often by reference to an "attached property schedule" (別紙物件目録 - besshi bukken mokuroku).
    • Type of Registration: The specific type of registration must be stated, e.g., "ownership transfer registration" (所有権移転登記 - shoyūken iten tōki) or "mortgage establishment registration" (抵当権設定登記 - teitōken settei tōki).
    • Cause for Registration (登記原因 - tōki gen'in): The legal basis for the registration (e.g., "sale and purchase on [date]," 「平成○年○月○日売買」) is typically included for transfer registrations. While the cause should be clear from the judgment (either in the Shubun or the "Reasons" section), it is common practice to state it in the Shubun for transfer registrations. For cancellation of registrations (抹消登記 - masshō tōki), the cause is often not stated in the Shubun. A "recovery of true registered title" (真正な登記名義の回復 - shinsei na tōki meigi no kaifuku) may be cited as a cause for what is effectively a transfer registration back to the rightful owner.
    • Cancellation Specifics: For a judgment ordering the cancellation of an existing registration, the targeted registration must be precisely identified by its details (e.g., name of registry, date of acceptance, acceptance number). The use of an "attached registration schedule" (登記目録 - tōki mokuroku) to list these details is considered desirable.
  • Accuracy is Paramount: Any discrepancy between the property description in the judgment and the official registry can impede the registration process. If the current status of the property differs from the registry, both might be mentioned, with one in parentheses for clarity.

b. Declaratory Judgments (確認判決 - kakunin hanketsu)

These judgments aim to officially confirm the existence or non-existence of a particular right or legal relationship.

• Typical Phrasing: The Shubun for a declaratory judgment characteristically ends with the verb 「確認する。」 (kakunin suru) – "[the right/legal relationship] is confirmed". It is not an order to the defendant to confirm something, but rather a declaration by the court itself.
• Content and Specificity:
  • The right or legal relationship being confirmed must be clearly identified. For example: 「原告が、別紙物件目録記載の建物につき、所有権を有することを確認する。」 (Genkoku ga, besshi bukken mokuroku kisai no tatemono ni tsuki, shoyūken o yūsuru koto o kakunin suru.) – "It is confirmed that the plaintiff possesses ownership rights to the building described in the attached property schedule."
  • If there are multiple plaintiffs or defendants, the Shubun must specify between which parties the declaration is made to avoid ambiguity regarding the scope of res judicata. For instance: 「原告Xと被告Y₁との間において、…確認する。」 (Genkoku Ekkusu to hikoku Wai Wan to no aida ni oite, ... kakunin suru.) – "It is confirmed between Plaintiff X and Defendant Y1 that..."
  • It can also confirm the non-existence of an obligation, e.g., 「原被告間の平成○年○月○日の消費貸借契約に基づく原告の被告に対する元金○○円の返還債務が存在しないことを確認する。」 (Gen hikokkan no Heisei A nen B gatsu C nichi no shōhi taishaku keiyaku ni motozuku genkoku no hikoku ni taisuru gankin marumaru en no henkan saimu ga sonzai shinai koto o kakunin suru.) – "It is confirmed that the plaintiff's obligation to repay the principal amount of X yen to the defendant arising from the loan agreement dated [date] between the plaintiff and defendant does not exist."
• Provisional Execution: Declaratory judgments are generally not subject to provisional execution, as they declare a status rather than order a performance.

c. Formative Judgments (形成判決 - keisei hanketsu)

Formative judgments (also known as constitutive judgments) directly create, modify, or extinguish a legal right or relationship by the power of the judgment itself.

• Typical Phrasing: The Shubun clearly states the legal transformation. Examples include:
  • Divorce: 「原告と被告とを離婚する。」 (Genkoku to hikoku to o rikon suru.) – "The plaintiff and the defendant are divorced."
  • Rescission of a fraudulent act: 「被告が平成○年○月○日Aとの間でした別紙物件目録記載の土地についての贈与契約を取り消す。」 (Hikoku ga Heisei A nen B gatsu C nichi Ei to no aida de shita besshi bukken mokuroku kisai no tochi ni tsuite no zōyo keiyaku o torikesu.) – "The gift agreement concerning the land described in the attached property schedule, made between the defendant and A on [date], is rescinded."
  • Action to oppose execution: 「被告から原告に対する○○地方裁判所平成○年(ワ)第○号○○請求事件の判決に基づく強制執行を許さない。」 (Hikoku kara genkoku ni taisuru Marumaru Chihō Saibansho Heisei A nen (Wa) dai B gō marumaru seikyū jiken no hanketsu ni motozuku kyōsei shikkō o yurusanai.) – "Compulsory execution based on the judgment in Case No. (Wa) B of Heisei A of the [Court Name] [Claim Name] Case, sought by the defendant against the plaintiff, is not permitted."
• Provisional Execution: Like declaratory judgments, formative judgments are generally not subject to provisional execution, with some specific statutory exceptions.

Use of Attached Schedules and Diagrams (別紙目録・図面の利用 - Besshi Mokuroku, Zumen no Riyō)

To maintain the conciseness of the Shubun while ensuring necessary detail, particularly for property descriptions or lists of items, Japanese judgments frequently utilize attachments.

• Types of Attachments: These include property schedules (物件目録 - bukken mokuroku), registration schedules (登記目録 - tōki mokuroku), and diagrams/drawings (図面 - zumen).
• Integral Part of Shubun: When referenced, these attachments become an inseparable part of the Shubun itself. Therefore, their accuracy and clarity are as critical as the main text. The judgment will contain phrasing like, "The defendant shall... the land described in the attached property schedule 1..." (被告は、原告に対し、別紙物件目録記載1の土地を...).
• Self-Contained Nature: The Shubun, along with its explicit attachments, must be self-contained. It is not permissible to refer to other documents within the broader case file (e.g., an evidence exhibit like an inspection record or a diagram attached to a pleading) directly in the Shubun to specify an object of the order. If such details are necessary for the order, they must be incorporated into a formal attachment to the judgment.

The Shubun on Litigation Costs (訴訟費用に関する主文 - Soshō Hiyō ni Kansuru Shubun)

The allocation of litigation costs is a mandatory component of the final judgment's Shubun.

• Content: The Shubun typically determines only who bears the litigation costs and in what proportion, not the precise monetary amount. The actual calculation and fixing of the recoverable costs occur in a separate, subsequent court procedure known as the "procedure for fixing the amount of court costs" (訴訟費用額確定手続 - soshō hiyōgaku kakutei tetsuzuki).
• Placement: This order is usually placed after the main decision on the claim(s) but before any declaration of provisional execution.
• General Principles of Allocation:
  • Losing Party Pays: The fundamental rule (under Article 61 of the Code of Civil Procedure) is that the losing party bears the litigation costs. So, a typical phrase is: 「訴訟費用は被告（又は原告）の負担とする。」 (Soshō hiyō wa hikoku (mata wa genkoku) no futan to suru.) – "The litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant (or plaintiff)."
  • Partial Success/Loss (Article 64, Code of Civil Procedure): When a party is partially successful, the court will apportion the costs. This is often done by dividing the costs into fractions, e.g., 「訴訟費用は、これを5分し、その2を原告の負担とし、その余は被告の負担とする。」 (Soshō hiyō wa, kore o go-bun shi, sono ni o genkoku no futan to shi, sono yo wa hikoku no futan to suru.) – "The litigation costs shall be divided into five parts, two of which shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the remainder by the defendant." While the apportionment often reflects the ratio of success, it is not rigidly bound by it and considers various case circumstances.
  • Minor Loss: If one party's loss is very minor, the court may still order that party (or the substantially losing party) to bear all or most of the costs, as an exception to strict apportionment (proviso to Article 64, Code of Civil Procedure).
• Multiple Parties (共同訴訟 - kyōdō soshō):
  • If all parties on one side (e.g., all co-defendants) lose, the Shubun might state: 「訴訟費用は被告らの負担とする。」 (Soshō hiyō wa hikokura no futan to suru.) – "The litigation costs shall be borne by the defendants." This generally implies equal sharing among them, unless the court orders joint and several liability for costs (連帯負担 - rentai futan), which it can do, for example, if their underlying liability was joint and several (Article 65, paragraph 1, Code of Civil Procedure).
  • More complex scenarios, such as when one co-defendant wins while another loses, or when the plaintiff wins against some defendants but not others, require careful phrasing in the Shubun to ensure a fair and clear allocation of costs incurred by and between the various parties. The guiding principle is to allocate costs based on the outcome between opposing pairs of litigants.
• Counterclaims (反訴 - hanso):
  When a counterclaim is filed, the court usually determines the cost allocation for both the main claim and the counterclaim together in a consolidated manner, rather than separately itemizing costs for each, unless absolutely necessary. For instance: 「訴訟費用は、本訴反訴を通じ、…」 (Soshō hiyō wa, honso hanso o tsūji,...) – "The litigation costs, for both the main claim and the counterclaim, shall be..."

The Shubun on Provisional Execution (仮執行の宣言 - Kari Shikkō no Sengen)

This declaration is a powerful tool, allowing the prevailing party to enforce the judgment before it becomes final and unappealable (i.e., even if an appeal is filed and pending).

• Purpose and Applicability: It is primarily relevant for claims concerning property rights (財産権上の請求 - zaisankenjō no seikyū), most commonly monetary claims.
• Discretionary vs. Mandatory Granting:
  • Generally Discretionary: The court may grant provisional execution "if it deems it necessary" (必要があると認めるときは - hitsuyō ga aru to mitomeru toki wa), balancing the potential harm to the plaintiff from delayed enforcement against the potential harm to the defendant if the judgment is overturned on appeal and execution has already occurred. In practice, for straightforward monetary claims, it is often requested and granted.
  • Mandatory in Certain Cases: Some laws mandate provisional execution for specific types of judgments (e.g., certain judgments on bills of exchange or promissory notes under the former Bill and Check Litigation Procedure Act; current relevance may be tied to specific provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, such as Article 259, paragraph 2, for undisputed monetary claims or claims based on certain instruments).
• Security (担保 - tanpo):
  • The court has the discretion to order provisional execution with or without requiring the enforcing party to provide security (a deposit of money or suitable securities). The purpose of this security is to cover potential damages the defendant might suffer if the provisional execution is later found to have been unjustified (e.g., if the judgment is reversed on appeal).
  • If security is required, the amount is determined by the court based on the anticipated damages.
  • Phrasing (with security): 「この判決は、原告が金○○万円の担保を供するときは、仮に執行することができる。」 (Kono hanketsu wa, genkoku ga kin marumaru man'en no tanpo o kyōsuru toki wa, kari ni shikkō suru koto ga dekiru.) – "This judgment may be provisionally executed if the plaintiff provides security of X million yen."
  • Phrasing (without security): 「この判決は、仮に執行することができる。」 (Kono hanketsu wa, kari ni shikkō suru koto ga dekiru.) – "This judgment may be provisionally executed."
• Judgments Typically Not Subject to Provisional Execution:
  • Declaratory judgments.
  • Formative judgments (with limited statutory exceptions).
  • Judgments ordering an expression of intent (e.g., an order to complete registration procedures), because the confirmed judgment itself can substitute for the party's expression of intent for certain procedures.
  • However, the portion of any judgment ordering the payment of litigation costs can be made provisionally executable.
• Clarity on Scope: If provisional execution is granted for only part of the judgment, the Shubun must clearly specify which part(s). For example: 「この判決は、第1項に限り、仮に執行することができる。」 (Kono hanketsu wa, dai ikkō ni kagiri, kari ni shikkō suru koto ga dekiru.) – "This judgment, limited to paragraph 1, may be provisionally executed."
• Declaration to Avert Provisional Execution (仮執行免脱の宣言 - kari shikkō mentatsu no sengen):
  A defendant facing a judgment with a provisional execution clause can, by their own application or by the court's discretion, be granted a declaration allowing them to avert (or stay) this provisional execution, if they provide security. This security is to cover the plaintiff's damages from the delay in execution if the plaintiff ultimately prevails.
  • Phrasing: 「ただし、被告が金○○万円の担保を供するときは、その仮執行を免れることができる。」 (Tadashi, hikoku ga kin marumaru man'en no tanpo o kyōsuru toki wa, sono kari shikkō o manukareru koto ga dekiru.) – "However, the defendant may avert its provisional execution if the defendant provides security of X million yen." This clause follows the main provisional execution declaration.

Conclusion: Why the Shubun Demands Scrutiny

The Shubun is the distilled essence of a Japanese civil judgment – it is the court's command, the statement of resolved rights and newly imposed obligations. Its every word and phrase carries significant legal weight, dictating the practical outcome of the litigation and the avenues for future action, including enforcement or appeal.

For U.S. businesses operating in or with Japan, or those involved in cross-border disputes that culminate in a Japanese judgment, a meticulous understanding of the Shubun is indispensable. It provides the definitive answer to "who won, what did they win, and what happens next?" Analyzing its components – from the disposition of the claim to orders on costs and provisional execution – allows for an accurate assessment of the legal landscape post-judgment. Given the nuances of Japanese legal terminology and procedural implications, seeking experienced Japanese legal counsel for a thorough interpretation of the Shubun and the judgment as a whole remains a critical step for any foreign entity.