①Labor tribunals render decisions based on the rights and interests of the parties found as a result of proceedings, and in light of the developments of the labor tribunal proceedings.

②Labor tribunals may through decisions establish the relationship of the parties' rights to one another, order the payment of monies, delivery of objects, or any other payment of economic benefit, and may specify other matters that are considered to be appropriate for the resolution of the civil dispute on labor relations.

③A labor tribunal decision must be rendered by preparing a written tribunal decision stating the main text of the decision and the gist of the grounds for that decision.

④The written tribunal decision referred to in the preceding paragraph must be served upon the relevant parties. The labor tribunal decision takes effect once it has been served upon the parties.

⑤Part I, Chapter V, Section 4 of the Code of Civil Procedure (excluding Article 100, paragraph (2); Article 104; and subsections (3) and (4)) apply mutatis mutandis to the service of a written tribunal decision under the preceding paragraph.

⑥If a labor tribunal finds it appropriate, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3), it may render a labor tribunal decision by making an oral announcement of the main text of the labor tribunal decision and the gist of the reasons for it on a date of labor tribunal proceedings on which all parties appear, in lieu of preparing a written tribunal decision. In this case, the labor tribunal decision takes effect when it has been announced.

⑦If a labor tribunal decision is made pursuant to the provisions of the first sentence of the preceding paragraph, the court must have the court clerk make a record of the main text of the decision, and the gist of the grounds for that decision in the record.

①A party may file an objection with the court against a labor tribunal decision within an inalterable period of two weeks from the day on which the party was served with the written tribunal decision under the provisions of paragraph (4) of the preceding Article, or the day on which the labor tribunal decision under the provisions of paragraph (6) of that Article was announced.

②If the court finds that the filing of an objection is defective, it must issue an order to dismiss the challenge.

③If a lawful objection has been filed, the labor tribunal decision ceases to be valid.

④If no lawful objection is filed, the labor tribunal decision has the same effect as a judicial settlement.

⑤In the case referred to in the preceding paragraph, each party is to bear, among the costs that the party incurred, those for which there are no provisions on the burden of costs in the labor tribunal decision.

①If a lawful objection is filed against a labor tribunal decision, an action on the claim made in the petition for labor tribunal proceedings is deemed to have been filed at the time that the petition for labor tribunal proceedings was filed with the district court in which the labor tribunal case was pending when the labor tribunal decision was made. In this case, if Japanese courts do not have jurisdiction over that claim pursuant to the provisions of Part I, Chapter II, Section 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the action that is deemed to have been filed is to be dismissed.

②A case for which an action is deemed to have been filed pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph (excluding cases where an action is to be dismissed pursuant to the provisions of the second sentence of that paragraph) is under the jurisdiction of the district court set forth in that paragraph.

③If it is deemed that an action has been filed pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), for the purpose of the application of the provisions of Articles 137 through 138, and Article 158 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the written petition set forth in Article 5, paragraph (2) is deemed to be a complaint.

①If a written tribunal decision is to be served pursuant to the provisions of Article 20, paragraph (4) and any of the following grounds exists, the court must issue an order to nullify the labor tribunal decision:

②The provisions of the preceding Article apply mutatis mutandis to cases where a labor tribunal decision is revoked pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph.

①If a labor tribunal finds that conducting proceedings is unsuitable for the prompt and fair resolution of a dispute due to the nature of the case, it may terminate the labor tribunal case.

②The provisions of Article 22 apply mutatis mutandis to cases where labor tribunal cases are closed pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph. In this case, the phrase "before which the labor tribunal case was pending when the labor tribunal decision was made" in paragraph (1) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "before which the labor tribunal case was pending when the labor tribunal case was terminated."

Petitions for labor tribunal proceedings may be withdrawn in all or part before a labor tribunal decision becomes final and binding.

If a labor tribunal case is terminated (excluding the cases prescribed in Article 18 and Article 21, paragraph (5)), and the court finds it necessary, it may, upon petition or by its own authority, issue an order to bear the costs for the case proceedings.

①The parties to a case and any third party that makes a prima facie showing of interest in the case may file a request with a court clerk to inspect or copy the labor tribunal case records, to issue an authenticated copy, transcript, or extract of those records, or to issue a certificate of information concerning the labor tribunal case.

②The provisions of Article 91, paragraphs (4) and (5) and Article 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure (excluding paragraphs (9) and (10)) apply mutatis mutandis to the records referred to in the preceding paragraph.

If an action is pending with regard to a case for which a petition for labor tribunal proceedings has been filed, the court in charge of the case may suspend court proceedings until the labor tribunal case has been terminated.

①An immediate appeal may be filed against an order made under the provisions of Article 25.

②An immediate appeal against an order made under the provisions of Article 6, Article 21, paragraph (2), Article 23, paragraph (1), and Article 25 has the effect of a stay of execution.

The provisions of Part I, Chapter VIII of the Code of Civil Procedure (excluding Article 133-2, paragraphs (5) and (6) and Article 133-3, paragraph (2)) apply mutatis mutandis to petitions and other statements in labor tribunal proceedings. In this case, the term "party" in Article 133, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "party or intervenor (meaning a person who has participated in the labor tribunal proceedings pursuant to the provisions of Article 11 of the Civil Mediation Act (Act No. 222 of 1951) as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 29, paragraph (2) of the Labor Tribunal Act; the same applies in Article 133-4, paragraphs (1), (2) and (7))"; in paragraph (3) of that Article, the term "case record, etc. (meaning a case record or the record of a case in which there has been a petition for a disposition as referred to in Article 132-4, paragraph (1); the same applies in this Chapter)" is deemed to be replaced with "labor tribunal case records", and the phrase "inspection, etc. of a case record, etc. (meaning inspection, etc. of a case record, inspection, etc. of a non-electronic or magnetic record of a disposition on the collection of evidence, or inspection, etc. of an electronic or magnetic record of a disposition on the collection of evidence; the same applies in this Chapter) with regard to" is deemed to be replaced with "inspection or copying of, or the issuance of a transcript or extract of"; the phrase "inspection, etc. of a case record, etc. relating to" in Article 133-2, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "inspection or copying of, or the issuance of a transcript or extract of"; the phrase "in a case record, etc." in paragraph (2) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "in the labor tribunal case records"; the phrase "inspection, etc. of a case record, etc. relating to" in that paragraph and paragraph (3) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "inspection or copying of, the issuance of an authenticated copy, transcript or extract of, or the reproduction of"; in Article 133-3, paragraph (1) of that Act, the phrase "document or electronic or magnetic record in which ... is stated or recorded" is deemed to be replaced with "document in which ... is stated", the phrase "that document or electronic or magnetic record" is deemed to be replaced with "that document", and the phrase "or electronic or magnetic record, or any other similar document or electronic or magnetic record, inspection, etc. of a case record, etc. relating to" is deemed to be replaced with "or any other similar document, inspection or copying of, or the issuance of a transcript or extract of"; the phrase "person ... the case record, etc." in Article 133-4, paragraph (1) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "party or intervenor, or a third party that makes a prima facie showing of interest, ... the labor tribunal case records"; in paragraph (2) of that Article, the term "party" is deemed to be replaced with "party or intervenor", the phrase "where the case record, etc. is kept" is deemed to be replaced with "where the labor tribunal case records are kept", and the phrase "inspection, etc. of a case record, etc." is deemed to be replaced with "inspection or copying, the issuance of an authenticated copy, transcript or extract, or the reproduction"; and the term "party" in paragraph (7) of that Article is deemed to be replaced with "party or intervenor".

①Except as otherwise provided, with regard to labor tribunal cases, the provisions of Part II of the Non-Contentious Case Procedures Act (excluding Article 12 of that Act (including the cases where applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Articles 14 and 15 of that Act), and Articles 27, 40, 42-2, 52, 53, and 65 of that Act) apply mutatis mutandis. In this case, the term "paragraph (2)" in Article 43, paragraph (4) of that Act is deemed to be replaced with "Article 5, paragraph (3) of the Labor Tribunal Act".

②The provisions of Articles 11, 12, 16, and 36 of the Civil Mediation Act (Act No. 222 of 1951) apply mutatis mutandis to labor tribunal cases. In this case: in Article 11 of that Act, the terms "of mediation," "mediation committee," and "mediation proceedings" are deemed to be respectively replaced with "of labor tribunal proceedings," "labor tribunal," and "labor tribunal proceedings"; in Article 12, paragraph (1) of that Act, the terms "mediation committee," "for mediation," and "measure prior to mediation" are deemed to be respectively replaced with "labor tribunal," "for mediation or labor tribunal decision," and "measure prior to mediation or labor tribunal decision"; and in Article 36, paragraph (1) of that Act, the term "the preceding two Articles" is deemed to be replaced with "Articles 31 and 32 of the Labor Tribunal Act (Act No. 45 of 2004)."

In addition to what is provided for in this Act, necessary particulars concerning labor tribunal proceedings are prescribed by the Rules of the Supreme Court.

If a person who has been summoned to appear by the labor tribunal judge in relation to a case does not appear without justifiable grounds, the court will fine that person with a civil fine of not more than 50,000 yen.

If a party to the case does not comply with the measure ordered under the provisions of Article 12 of the Civil Mediation Act as applied mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 29, paragraph (2), without justifiable grounds, the court will fine that person with a civil fine of not more than 100,000 yen.

If a labor tribunal member or a person who was a labor tribunal member divulges any information with respect to the proceedings of deliberations, the opinions of the labor tribunal judge and labor tribunal members, or the number minority or majority opinions without justifiable grounds, that member or person will be fined not more than 300,000 yen.

If a labor tribunal member or a person who was a labor tribunal member divulges any individual's confidential information obtained in the course of their duties without justifiable grounds, that member or person will be sentenced to imprisonment for not more than one year or fined not more than 500,000 yen.