What is the "Value of Suit" in Japanese Litigation and Why Does It Matter for Court Fees?

Initiating or facing litigation in any jurisdiction involves a careful consideration of potential costs. In Japan, a fundamental concept that underpins several aspects of civil litigation, particularly the calculation of court filing fees and the determination of court jurisdiction, is the "value of suit," known in Japanese as "訴額" (so'gaku). Understanding how this value is assessed is crucial for any party contemplating legal action or finding themselves involved in a lawsuit in Japan.

The Concept of "So'gaku" (Value of Suit)

The "value of suit" (訴額) represents the monetary worth of the matter in dispute from the perspective of the claimant. It's not merely an arbitrary figure but is, in principle, tied to the economic interest the plaintiff is asserting through their legal claim. This valuation serves multiple practical purposes within the Japanese civil procedure system.

Primarily, the so'gaku is the basis upon which court filing fees are calculated. Secondly, it plays a critical role in determining which level of court—Summary Court (簡易裁判所 - kan'i saibansho) or District Court (地方裁判所 - chihō saibansho)—has subject-matter jurisdiction over the case. Thirdly, for certain types of legal professionals, specifically "certified judicial scriveners" (認定司法書士 - nintei shihō-shoshi), the so'gaku of a case dictates whether they are permitted to provide legal representation.

It's important to distinguish between two main applications of so'gaku:

1. Jurisdictional Value of Suit (管轄訴額 - kankatsu so'gaku): This value is used to determine the appropriate court of first instance.
2. Court Fee Value of Suit (手数料訴額 - tesūryō so'gaku): This value is specifically used as the basis for calculating the mandatory court filing fees.

While both are derived from the plaintiff's asserted interest, the precise rules for their calculation and their deemed values in certain situations can differ slightly, though the fundamental principles of valuation according to Articles 8 and 9 of the Code of Civil Procedure generally apply to both.

Determining Subject-Matter Jurisdiction: "Kankatsu So'gaku"

In Japan's two-tiered system of first instance courts for many civil matters, the jurisdictional so'gaku dictates where a case begins. Generally:

• Summary Courts (簡易裁判所 - Kan'i Saibansho): These courts handle claims where the value of suit does not exceed ¥1,400,000. They are designed for smaller, less complex disputes.
• District Courts (地方裁判所 - Chihō Saibansho): These courts have jurisdiction over claims exceeding ¥1,400,000. They also handle all real estate-related litigation, regardless of the so'gaku being below this monetary threshold, a specific rule designed to ensure that important property disputes are handled by District Courts.

The determination of the kankatsu so'gaku is a matter for the court to assess, based on the information provided in the plaintiff's complaint. While an exact calculation might not always be rigorously pursued if the claim clearly falls far above or below the threshold, its accurate assessment remains vital for procedural correctness and also because it often aligns with the tesūryō so'gaku, which directly impacts costs. The kankatsu so'gaku is determined at the time the lawsuit is filed, and subsequent fluctuations in the actual value of the disputed matter generally do not affect the initially established jurisdiction, a principle sometimes referred to as "value constancy" (価額一定の原則 - kakaku ittei no gensoku).

Calculating Court Fees: "Tesūryō So'gaku"

The more immediate financial concern for litigants is often the court filing fee (訴訟手数料 - soshō tesūryō). This fee is calculated based on the "court fee value of suit" (手数料訴額 - tesūryō so'gaku). The Civil Procedure Costs Act (民事訴訟費用等に関する法律 - Minji Soshō Hiyō tō ni Kansuru Hōritsu) and its appended tables provide the framework for this.

General Principles for Calculating "Tesūryō So'gaku":

• Monetary Claims (金銭請求 - kinsen seikyū): For claims seeking a specific sum of money, the tesūryō so'gaku is, straightforwardly, the amount claimed by the plaintiff. This is based on the nominal value of the currency.
• Non-Monetary Claims (Property-Related): For claims concerning property rights that are not direct demands for a sum of money (e.g., transfer of property, declaration of ownership), the value is determined by the objective market value of the property or right in question. For real estate, this is often based on the fixed asset valuation used for property tax purposes (固定資産税評価額 - koteishisanzei hyōkagaku), though specific adjustments, such as a temporary 50% reduction for land valuation, have been applied historically to account for discrepancies with actual market prices.
• Non-Property Claims (非財産権上の請求 - hi-zaisankenjō no seikyū): For claims that do not concern property rights (e.g., many family law matters, certain corporate governance disputes), the tesūryō so'gaku is deemed to be ¥1,600,000. This is a standardized figure used for fee calculation purposes when a precise economic valuation is inappropriate or impossible.
• Claims Where Value is "Extremely Difficult to Calculate" (算定が極めて困難 - santei ga kiwamete konnan): If a claim is property-related but assessing its monetary value is exceptionally challenging, the tesūryō so'gaku is also deemed to be ¥1,600,000. This provision acknowledges that not all economic interests can be easily quantified, yet a basis for fee calculation is still required. The threshold for "extremely difficult" is high, as courts are generally expected to exercise their discretion to determine a value where possible.

The Civil Procedure Costs Act, Article 4(1), stipulates that the tesūryō so'gaku is generally calculated in accordance with Articles 8(1) (plaintiff's asserted interest) and 9 (rules for joinder of claims, incidental claims, etc.) of the Code of Civil Procedure.

A notable special rule exists under Article 4(3) of the Civil Procedure Costs Act: if a non-property claim is joined with a property claim arising from the same factual grounds (e.g., a divorce claim joined with a claim for solatium arising from the facts leading to the divorce), the so'gaku for fee purposes will be the higher of the two individually calculated values, rather than a simple aggregation.

The Actual Court Fee Calculation:

Once the tesūryō so'gaku is determined, the actual court filing fee is calculated based on a progressive tiered schedule. This schedule is provided in the appendix to the Civil Procedure Costs Act. While the specific bands and rates can be amended, the general structure involves charging a certain amount for each increment of the so'gaku, with the percentage rate typically decreasing as the so'gaku increases. For example (illustrative general structure, not current rates):

• For so'gaku up to ¥1,000,000: ¥1,000 for every ¥100,000 or fraction thereof.
• For so'gaku exceeding ¥1,000,000 but not exceeding ¥5,000,000: An additional ¥1,000 for every ¥200,000 or fraction thereof over ¥1,000,000.
• And so on, with different increments and fee amounts for higher so'gaku bands.

This system ensures that higher value disputes contribute more in absolute terms to court operational costs, but the marginal rate decreases.

Payment and Review of Court Fees

Court fees in Japan are typically paid by affixing revenue stamps (収入印紙 - shūnyū inshi) to the original complaint (訴状 - sojō) or other application documents submitted to the court. If the fee amount is very large (e.g., exceeding ¥1,000,000), cash payment may be permitted under specific Supreme Court rules.

Upon submission of a complaint, the court clerk (裁判所書記官 - saibansho shokikan) and subsequently the presiding judge (裁判長 - saibanchō) will review the document to ensure it meets all formal requirements, including the proper calculation and payment of court fees. If the fee is found to be insufficient, the court will issue an order for correction (補正命令 - hosei meirei), requiring the plaintiff to pay the outstanding amount within a specified period. Failure to comply with this order can lead to the presiding judge dismissing the complaint by order (訴状却下命令 - sojō kyakka meirei). This dismissal occurs before the complaint is served on the defendant. The plaintiff can file an immediate appeal (即時抗告 - sokuji kōkoku) against such a dismissal order.

The authority to definitively determine the so'gaku, and thus the correct fee amount, rests with the presiding judge or the court itself, especially if there's a dispute or ambiguity. If an overpayment of fees occurs, the party who overpaid can apply to the court for a refund of the excess amount.

Broader Context: Court Costs vs. Party Costs and the "Loser-Pays" Principle

It is essential to differentiate between "court costs" (訴訟費用 - soshō hiyō) in the strict sense and broader "party costs" (当事者費用 - tōjisha hiyō).

• Court Costs (Soshō Hiyō): These are the official costs mandated by law for utilizing the court system. They primarily consist of:
  • Court filing fees (手数料 - tesūryō).
  • Other expenses directly incurred by the court for the litigation process, such as fees and travel for witnesses and expert witnesses, translation fees, and costs for serving documents. These are usually paid from funds advanced by the parties.
• Party Costs (Tōjisha Hiyō): These are expenses incurred by a party in pursuing or defending their case, which are not directly paid to or by the court as part of its official functions. Examples include:
  • Costs for preparing documents (e.g., complaint, briefs).
  • Travel expenses for the party and their representatives to attend court hearings.
  • Crucially, attorney's fees (弁護士費用 - bengoshi hiyō).

Japan follows a "loser-pays" principle (敗訴者負担主義 - haisosha futan shugi) for court costs (soshō hiyō) as stipulated in Article 61 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This means that the unsuccessful party is generally ordered to bear the court costs incurred by the successful party. However, a very significant point for those familiar with, for example, the "American Rule" (where each party typically bears its own attorney fees) and some aspects of the "English Rule" (where the loser often pays the winner's attorney fees), is that in Japan, attorney's fees are generally not included within the scope of recoverable "court costs" under this loser-pays principle.

While a successful litigant might recover their filing fees and certain other direct litigation expenses from the losing party, they typically cannot recover the fees they paid to their own lawyer as part of the "court costs" judgment. The main exception is in tort cases, where reasonable attorney fees may be claimed as a component of the damages suffered due to the tort itself, if a causal link is established.

The Constitutional Right to Access Courts

The system of court fees, and by extension the calculation of so'gaku, operates within the framework of the constitutional right to access the courts, guaranteed by Article 32 of the Constitution of Japan. This right implies a corresponding duty on the state to provide a system for the protection of private rights. Therefore, court fees should not be so prohibitively high or their calculation so arbitrary as to effectively deny citizens this fundamental right. The fees are intended as a contribution to the operational costs of the judicial system by its users, but they must remain proportionate to the economic value of the dispute and the service provided by the courts.

Conclusion

The "value of suit" or so'gaku is a foundational element in the Japanese civil litigation system. It directly influences the initial costs of filing a lawsuit through the calculation of court fees and determines the path of the litigation by assigning it to the appropriate court based on subject-matter jurisdiction. While the principles may seem complex, particularly with deemed values for non-property claims or those difficult to quantify, they aim to provide a structured and reasonably predictable framework for assessing these preliminary but critical aspects of engaging with the Japanese legal process. A clear understanding of how so'gaku is likely to be assessed for a particular claim is an indispensable first step in litigation strategy and cost management in Japan.