## Facts

- A Japanese husband and a wife residing in Germany married in Germany and had a daughter.
- After the relationship deteriorated, the husband returned to Japan and took the child with him.
- The wife filed for divorce in Germany.
- In the German action, the husband was served by public notice (edictal service) under German procedure, and he did not appear.
- A German default judgment granted the divorce and awarded parental authority over the child to the wife.
- The husband then filed a divorce action in Japan seeking divorce and a parental authority determination under Japanese law.
- The wife argued the Japanese court should reject or dismiss the husband’s action because the German judgment should be recognized and treated as binding, including on parental authority.
- A Japanese trial court effectively accepted the German judgment’s effect and dismissed the husband’s action.
- An intermediate appellate court reversed, holding the German default judgment was not recognizable in Japan because the service method did not satisfy Japanese recognition requirements.
- The wife appealed to Japan’s Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether a foreign default divorce judgment may be recognized in Japan when the defendant was served solely by public notice under foreign procedure.
2. Whether such service fails Japanese requirements that the defendant be properly served or otherwise given a fair opportunity to be heard, and/or violates Japanese public policy concerning procedural fairness.
3. If the foreign judgment is not recognizable, whether Japanese courts may proceed to adjudicate divorce and parental authority between the parties notwithstanding the prior foreign decree.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court dismissed the wife’s appeal and affirmed the intermediate appellate court.
- The Court held the German default judgment was not recognizable in Japan because service by public notice did not satisfy Japanese requirements for recognition of foreign judgments, including adequate notice and a meaningful opportunity to participate.
- Because the German decree was not recognized, it did not preclude the husband’s Japanese divorce and parental authority proceedings, which could continue on the merits.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign judgment is recognized in Japan only if statutory conditions are satisfied, including that the losing party was properly served (or otherwise received notice) in a manner compatible with Japanese standards of procedural fairness.
- Formal validity of service under the foreign forum’s law is not sufficient if the method does not provide a realistic opportunity to appear and defend as required by Japanese recognition standards.
- Service solely by public notice, where it does not meet Japanese expectations for proper notice to a nonappearing defendant, defeats recognition of a foreign default judgment.
- Nonrecognition of the foreign judgment eliminates any binding effect in Japan on the parties’ marital status and related parental authority determinations, allowing Japanese courts to decide those matters under Japanese law.

## Conclusion

Japan’s Supreme Court refused to recognize a German default divorce and parental authority judgment because edictal service, though permitted abroad, did not satisfy Japan’s recognition requirements for proper notice and a fair opportunity to be heard; therefore, Japanese courts could proceed with the domestic divorce and parental authority case.


Kōno v. Kōno, 50 Minshū (No. 7) 1451 (Sup. Ct. Japan 1996)