Personal Status Litigation Act

In personal status litigation in which the public prosecutor is named as the defendant, if the court finds it necessary to have a third party whose rights of inheritance are compromised as a result of the litigation (referred to below as an "interested party") intervene in the litigation, the court may issue a ruling to have the interested party intervene in the litigation in order for the interested party to assist the defendant.

Before issuing the ruling referred to in the preceding paragraph, the court must hear the opinions of the parties and of the interested party.

The provisions of Article 45, paragraph (2) of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to interested parties who, based on an application as referred to in Article 43, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure or based on a ruling as referred to in paragraph (1) of this Article, have intervened in personal status litigation in which the public prosecutor is named as the defendant.

The provisions of Article 40, paragraphs (1) through (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure (for paragraph (3) of that Article, this is limited to the part concerning the suspension of court proceedings) apply mutatis mutandis to interested parties referred to in the preceding paragraph.

The court may revoke an order under paragraph (1) of this Article.

In personal status litigation that has the public prosecutor as a party, the court costs that the public prosecutor would be required to bear if the circumstances were governed by the provisions of Articles 61 through 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure are to be borne by the national treasury.

The provisions of Articles 61 through 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure apply mutatis mutandis to the bearing of court costs if an interested party, based on an application as referred to in Article 43, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure or a ruling as referred to in paragraph (1) of the preceding Article, has intervened in personal status litigation in which the public prosecutor is named as the defendant.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 136 of the Code of Civil Procedure, both a claim relating to personal status litigation and a claim for damages arising from facts that constitute a cause of action associated with that claim may be filed in a single action. In that case, the family court that has jurisdiction over the claim relating to personal status litigation may itself conduct a trial and render a judgment in the litigation involving the claim for damages.

In addition to the cases provided for in the preceding paragraph, an action to claim damages arising from facts constituting a cause of action relating to personal status litigation may be filed with the family court before which that personal status litigation is already pending. In that case, the provisions of the second sentence of the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis.

The provisions of Article 8, paragraph (2) apply mutatis mutandis to both the personal status litigation case referred to in the preceding paragraph and the case involving the claim for damages referred to in that paragraph, in a situation as referred to in that paragraph.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 143, paragraphs (1) and (4) of the Code of Civil Procedure and of Article 146, paragraph (1) and Article 300 of that Code, in personal status litigation proceedings, a plaintiff may amend a claim or cause of action, and a defendant may file a counterclaim, until the conclusion of the oral arguments in the first or second instance.

If the Japanese courts would have no jurisdiction over the claim relating to personal status litigation resulting from the amendment of a claim, the plaintiff may amend a claim pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph only if in the resulting claim the plaintiff seeks to change the status of the same familial relationship as the one involved in the pre-amendment claim or seeks a declaratory judgment as to whether that familial relationship exists.

If the Japanese courts have no jurisdiction over a claim as set forth in one of the following items that is the subject of a counterclaim, the defendant may file a counterclaim under the provisions of paragraph (1) only in the case specified in that item:

a claim relating to personal status litigation: if the subject of the counterclaim is a claim through which the defendant seeks to change the status of the same familial relationship as the one involved in the claim relating to personal status litigation that is the subject of the principal action or a claim through which the defendant seeks a declaratory judgment as to whether that familial relationship exists; or

a claim for damages arising from facts constituting a cause of action relating to personal status litigation: if the relevant personal status litigation is already pending before a Japanese court.

The provisions of Article 157 of the Code of Civil Procedure and of Article 157-2, Article 159, paragraph (1), Article 207, paragraph (2), Article 208, Article 224, Article 229, paragraph (4), and Article 244 of that Code, as well as the part of the provisions of Article 179 of that Code concerning facts admitted by a party in court, do not apply to court proceedings in personal status litigation.

The provisions of Articles 266 through 267-2 of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to the subject matter of the action in personal status litigation.

In personal status litigation, the court may take facts which are not asserted by the parties into consideration and examine evidence on its own authority. In that case, the court must hear the opinions of the parties regarding the facts and the results of the examination of the evidence.

In personal status litigation, if the court will examine a party, the court may order the party to appear on a court date.

The provisions of Articles 192 through 194 of the Code of Civil Procedure apply mutatis mutandis if a party ordered to appear pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph does not appear without a legitimate reason.

The court may issue a ruling to conduct an examination concerning a particular matter in camera if a party to personal status litigation or their legal representative (collectively referred to below as a "party or representative" in this paragraph and the following paragraph) or a witness is to be examined regarding a matter that is the basis for the familial relationship status change or declaratory judgment as to whether a familial relationship exists that is the subject matter of the action being litigated, and that concerns a deep personal secret from the private life of the person subject to examination, if the court finds unanimously that the party, representative, or witness would be unable to enter a sufficient statement regarding the subject matter in open court because it is clear that doing so would substantially interfere with their life in the community, and that the court cannot make an appropriate judicial decision on the status change or declaratory judgment in question in the absence of the statement, based solely on the other evidence.

Before issuing the ruling referred to in the preceding paragraph, the court must listen to the opinions of each party or representative, and witness.

If a court conducts an examination concerning a particular matter in camera pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1), it must make an announcement to that effect along with the reasons for doing so before having the public leave the courtroom. Once the examination concerning the matter in question has ended, the court must allow the public to re-enter the courtroom.

In personal status litigation, the court or an authorized judge or commissioned judge may have the public prosecutor attend on a court date and state an opinion on the case if they find this to be necessary.

If the public prosecutor attends on a court date pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph, they may assert facts or offer evidence.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 115, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, a final and binding judgment in personal status litigation is effective against third parties.

Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding paragraph, if a claim has been filed to rescind a marriage due to violation of the provisions of Article 732 of the Civil Code, a final and binding judgment dismissing the claim with prejudice is effective against a spouse from an earlier marriage only if that spouse has intervened in the litigation involving that claim.

After a judgment on personal status litigation (excluding a judgment denying an action as not in accordance with the law; the same applies in the following paragraph) becomes final and binding, the plaintiff may not file a personal status action concerning the same familial relationship based on facts that the plaintiff could have asserted by amending the claim or the cause of action in that litigation.

After a judgment on personal status litigation becomes final and binding, the defendant may not file a personal status action concerning the same familial relationship based on facts that the defendant could have asserted by filing a counterclaim in that litigation.

If both of the parties to the familial relationship that an action related to personal status concerns are named as defendants pursuant to the provisions of Article 12, paragraph (2) and one of them dies, litigation proceeds with the other party as the defendant. The provisions of Article 124, paragraph (1), item (i) of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply in that case.

In a case as referred to in Article 12, paragraph (1) or (2), if all of the defendants die, the litigation proceeds with the public prosecutor as the defendant.

Except as otherwise provided, personal status litigation is terminated automatically if the plaintiff dies while it is pending.

Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (2) of the preceding Article, personal status litigation in which the subject matter is a divorce, rebuttal of the presumption of legitimacy (excluding cases where the father is the defendant), or the dissolution of an adoptive relationship is terminated by operation of law if the defendant dies while it is pending.

The court must notify that litigation has become pending before it to a party who has an interest in the action concerning personal status that has been filed and who is specified by the Rules of the Supreme Court as a person whom it is appropriate to notify, such as the child of the father in question in the event that an action for filiation has been filed after the father has died provided, however, that this is limited to cases in which the interested party's name and domicile or residence are found in the case record.

The provisions of Articles 3-2 through 3-10, Article 145, paragraph (3), and Article 146, paragraph (3) of the Code of Civil Procedure do not apply to a personal status action.

Notwithstanding the provisions of Article 12, paragraph (1) of the Civil Provisional Remedies Act (Act No. 91 of 1989), a case involving an order for provisional remedy in which personal status litigation constitutes the merits of the case falls under the jurisdiction of either the court with jurisdiction over the primary action or the family court that has jurisdiction in the locality of the property subject to provisional attachment or the subject matter in dispute.

If both a claim relating to personal status litigation and a claim for damages arising from facts that constitute a cause of action associated with that claim may be brought in a single action, a petition seeking an order for a provisional remedy in connection with that claim for damages may be filed with the family court that has jurisdiction in the locality of the property to be provisionally seized or the disputed subject matter.