Code of Civil Procedure

If the defendant presents an oral argument on the merits of the case or enters a statement in preparatory proceedings without entering the affirmative defense that the Japanese courts lack jurisdiction, the courts have jurisdiction.

Even when the Japanese courts have jurisdiction over an action (unless an action is filed based on an agreement that only permits an action to be filed with the Japanese courts), the court may deny the whole or part of an action if it finds that there are special circumstances because of which, if the Japanese courts were to conduct a trial and reach a judicial decision in the action, it would be inequitable to either party or prevent a fair and speedy trial, in consideration of the nature of the case, the degree of burden that the defendant would have to bear in responding to the action, the location of evidence, and other circumstances.

The provisions of Articles 3-2 through 3-4 and Articles 3-6 through the preceding Article do not apply if laws or regulations provide for the exclusive jurisdiction of the Japanese courts over the action in question.

A court may conduct an examination of the evidence sua sponte with regard to matters that concern the jurisdiction of the Japanese courts.

Whether the Japanese courts have jurisdiction is determined on the basis of the time at which an action is filed.

An action is subject to the jurisdiction of the court of jurisdiction in the locality that constitutes the general venue for an action against the defendant.

The general venue for an action against a natural person is determined by the person's domicile; by the person's residence, if the person is not domiciled in Japan or is of domicile unknown; or by the person's last domicile in Japan, if the person does not have a residence in Japan or is of residence unknown.

If there is no general venue pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph for an action against an ambassador, minister, or any other Japanese national in a foreign country who enjoys immunity from the jurisdiction of that country, the general venue for an action against that person is deemed to be the general venue in the locality specified by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

The general venue for an action against a corporation or any other association or foundation is determined by the location of its principal office or business office; or by the domicile of its representative or any other principal person in charge of its business, if it has no business office or other office.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, the general venue for an action against a foreign association or foundation is determined by the location of its principal office or business office in Japan; or by the domicile of its representative or any other principal person in charge of its business in Japan, if it has no business office or other office in Japan.

The general venue for an action against the State is determined by the location of the government agency that represents the State in the litigation.

In an action involving a patent right, utility model right, a layout-design exploitation right for an integrated circuit, or an author's right to a work of computer programming (referred to below as a "prescribed IP action"), if a court listed in the first portion of either of the following items would have jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of the preceding two Articles, the action is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the court specified in the latter portion of that item:

a district court located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Tokyo High Court, the Nagoya High Court, the Sendai High Court, or the Sapporo High Court:the Tokyo District Court;

a district court located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Osaka High Court, the Hiroshima High Court, the Fukuoka High Court, or the Takamatsu High Court:the Osaka District Court.

In a prescribed IP action, if a summary court located within the territorial jurisdiction of a court listed in the first portion of one of the items of the preceding paragraph would have jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of the preceding two Articles, the action may also be filed with the court specified in the latter portion of that item.

An appeal to the court of second instance against a final judgment that the court specified in paragraph (1), item (ii) has entered as the court of first instance in a prescribed IP action, is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Tokyo High Court; provided, however, that this does not apply to an appeal to the court of second instance against a final judgment in an action if litigation has been transferred pursuant to the provisions of Article 20-2, paragraph (1).

With regard to an action involving design rights, trademark rights, author's rights (excluding author's rights to a work of computer programming), publishing rights, neighboring rights, or breeder's rights, or an action for infringement of a business interest due to unfair competition (meaning unfair competition as prescribed in Article 2, paragraph (1) of the Unfair Competition Prevention Act (Act No. 47 of 1993) or unfair competition as prescribed in Article 2, paragraph (3) of the Act for the Prevention of Unfair Competition Involving Genetic Resources from Livestock (Act No. 22 of 2020)), if a court listed in the first portion of either of the following items has jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 or Article 5, the action may also be filed with the court specified in the latter portion of that item:

a court stated in paragraph (1), item (i) of the preceding Article (other than the Tokyo District Court):the Tokyo District Court;

a court stated in paragraph (1), item (ii) of the preceding Article (other than the Osaka District Court):the Osaka District Court.

If multiple claims are involved in a single action, the action may be filed with a court that, pursuant to the provisions of Article 4 through the preceding Article (excluding Article 6, paragraph (3)), has jurisdiction over one of those claims; provided, however, that with regard to an action brought by two or more persons or an action brought against two or more persons, this applies only in the case specified in the first sentence of Article 38.

If jurisdiction is determined by the value of the subject matter of litigation pursuant to the Court Act (Act No. 59 of 1947), the value is calculated on the basis of the interest alleged in the action.

If it is impossible or extremely difficult to calculate the value referred to in the preceding paragraph, the value is deemed to exceed 1,400,000 yen.

If multiple claims are involved in a single action, the total value of the claims is the value of the subject matter of litigation; provided, however, that this does not apply to each claim if the interest alleged in the action is common to all claims.

If a claim upon the fruits of something or a claim for damages, penalties, or expenses is an incidental subject matter of litigation, its value is not included in the calculation of the value of the subject matter of the litigation.

If the court of jurisdiction is unable to exercise its jurisdiction by law or in fact, the immediate superior court issues a ruling designating the court of jurisdiction, upon petition.

If the court of jurisdiction cannot be determined due to ill-defined territorial jurisdictions among the courts, the immediate superior court common to the relevant courts issues a ruling designating the court of jurisdiction, upon petition.

No appeal may be entered against the ruling stated in the preceding two paragraphs.

With regard to an action over which the Japanese courts have jurisdiction pursuant to the provisions of the preceding Section, if the court of jurisdiction is not determined pursuant to other provisions of this Code or provisions of other laws and regulations, the action is under the jurisdiction of the court of jurisdiction in the locality specified by the Rules of the Supreme Court.