Code of Civil Procedure

The parties may determine the court of jurisdiction by agreement, but only in the first instance.

An agreement as referred to in the preceding paragraph is not valid unless it is made regarding actions that are based on a specific legal relationship, and executed by means of a paper document.

If electronic or magnetic records in which the content of an agreement as referred to in paragraph (1) is recorded are used to execute that agreement, the agreement is deemed to have been executed by means of a paper document and the provisions of the preceding paragraph apply.

If a defendant presents an oral argument on the merits of the case or enters a statement in preparatory proceedings before the court of first instance without entering a defense of lack of jurisdiction, that court has jurisdiction.

The provisions of Article 4, paragraph (1); Article 5; Article 6, paragraph (2); Article 6-2; Article 7; and the preceding two Articles do not apply if exclusive jurisdiction over an action is provided for by law or regulation.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, if a court provided for in the first part of either of the items of Article 6, paragraph (1) is to have jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of Article 7 or the preceding two Articles over a prescribed IP action, that court has jurisdiction over the action, pursuant to the provisions of Article 7 or the preceding two Articles.

The court may conduct an examination of evidence sua sponte with regard to matters that concern jurisdiction.

Whether a court has jurisdiction is determined on the basis of the time at which an action is filed.

If the court finds that the whole or part of litigation is not subject to its jurisdiction, it transfers the litigation sua sponte to the court of jurisdiction.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, even if the litigation is subject to the jurisdiction of a summary court that is under its territorial jurisdiction, the district court, upon petition or sua sponte, may conduct the trial and reach a judicial decision itself for the whole or part of the litigation, if it finds this to be appropriate; provided, however, that this does not apply if the litigation is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of such a summary court (excluding exclusive jurisdiction determined by an agreement between the parties pursuant to the provisions of Article 11).

Even if the litigation is subject to its jurisdiction, the court of first instance, upon petition or sua sponte, may transfer the whole or part of the litigation to another court of jurisdiction if it finds this to be necessary in order to avoid a substantial delay in litigation or to ensure equity between the parties, in consideration of the domicile of each party and witnesses to be examined, the location of any object to be inspected that is to be used, and any other circumstances.

Even if the litigation is subject to its jurisdiction, a summary court, upon petition or sua sponte, may transfer the whole or part of litigation to the district court of jurisdiction in that locality, if it finds this to be appropriate.

If a party petitions and the adverse party consents, the court of first instance must transfer the whole or part of litigation to the district court or summary court under that petition, even if the litigation is subject to its jurisdiction; provided, however, that this does not apply if the transfer would substantially delay litigation proceedings or if the petition is filed after the defendant has presented an oral argument on the merits of the case or entered a statement in preparatory proceedings, and if the petition is not for a transfer from the summary court to the district court of jurisdiction in that locality.

At the petition of the defendant in litigation involving real property that is under the jurisdiction of the summary court, the summary court must transfer the whole or part of litigation to the district court of jurisdiction in that locality; provided, however, that this does not apply if the defendant has presented an oral argument on the merits of the case before filing that petition.

The provisions of the preceding three Articles do not apply if the litigation is subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the court before which it is pending (except exclusive jurisdiction determined by an agreement between the parties pursuant to the provisions of Article 11).

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, if litigation in a prescribed IP action is to be transferred to a court specified in either item of Article 6, paragraph (1) pursuant to the provisions of Article 17 or paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, the provisions of Article 17 or paragraph (1) of the preceding Article apply.

Even if the litigation in a prescribed IP action is under the exclusive jurisdiction of a court specified in either item of Article 6, paragraph (1) pursuant to the provisions of the same paragraph, the court, upon petition or sua sponte, may transfer the whole or part of litigation to the district court that has jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of Article 4, 5, or 11 or the district court that must accept litigation transferred to it pursuant to the provisions of Article 19, paragraph (1), if the court finds this to be necessary in order to avoid substantial harm or delay due to its lack of ability to try a specialized and technical matter that is to be tried through the litigation, or due to other circumstances.

At the filing an appeal to the court of second instance as mentioned in Article 6, paragraph (3), the Tokyo High Court, upon petition or sua sponte, may transfer the whole or part of litigation to the Osaka High Court, if it finds this to be necessary in order to avoid substantial harm or delay due to its lack of ability to try a specialized and technical matter that is to be tried by the court of second instance, or due to other circumstances.

An immediate appeal may be filed against a ruling to transfer litigation or a ruling to deny a petition for transfer.

A judicial decision for a transfer which has become final and binding is binding on the court that has accepted the transferred case.

The court that has accepted a transferred case may not further transfer the case to another court.

Once a judicial decision for a transfer becomes final and binding, the litigation is deemed to have been pending before the court to which it has been transferred since it was first brought to the initial court.

In the following cases, a judge is disqualified from performing the duties of a judge; provided, however, that in the case stated in item (vi), this does not preclude a judge from performing duties as a commissioned judge based on a commission from another court:

if the judge, or the judge's spouse or former spouse, is a party to the case, or is related to a party to the case as a joint obligee, joint obligor, or obligor for redemption;

if the judge is or was formerly the relative of a party to the case within the fourth degree of consanguinity or the third degree of affinity, or is or was formerly the cohabiting relative of a party to the case;

if the judge becomes a witness or expert in the case;

if a judge is or was formerly a party's representative or assistant in court in the case;

if the judge participated in granting an arbitral award in the case or participated in reaching the judicial decision in the prior instance against which an appeal has been entered.

If any of the grounds for disqualification prescribed in the preceding paragraph exist, the court, upon petition or sua sponte, reaches a judicial decision to disqualify.

If there are circumstances involving a judge which could prejudice the impartiality of a judicial decision, a party may challenge that judge.

Once a party has presented an oral argument or entered a statement in preparatory proceedings before a judge, the party may not challenge that judge; provided, however, that this does not apply if the party did not know of the existence of any grounds for challenge at that time or if the grounds for the challenge occur thereafter.

The judicial decision on the disqualification of or challenge against a judge who is a member of a judicial panel or against a single district court judge is reached in the form of a ruling by the court to which the judge belongs, and the judicial decision on the disqualification of or challenge against a summary court judge is reached in the form of a ruling by the district court of jurisdiction in that locality.

In the district court, the judicial decision referred to in the preceding paragraph is reached by a judicial panel.

A judge may not be involved in a judicial decision on that judge's own disqualification or on a challenge against that judge.

No appeal may be entered against a ruling finding grounds for disqualification or challenge.

An immediate appeal may be filed against a ruling finding there to be no grounds for disqualification or challenge.

If a petition to disqualify or challenge is filed, litigation proceedings must be stayed until the ruling on the petition becomes final and binding; provided, however, that this does not apply with respect to any act requiring urgency.

The provisions of this Section apply mutatis mutandis to court clerks. This being the case, the judicial decision is reached by the court to which the court clerk belongs.