## Facts

- Kansai Iron Works Ltd., a Japanese manufacturer, produced a large mechanical metal press that ultimately was sold for use in Washington State.
- A worker was seriously injured while operating the press and brought a product-liability action in Washington state court against entities in the distribution chain, including Marubeni America Co. and Kansai.
- In the Washington action, Marubeni filed a crossclaim seeking indemnification from Kansai and later obtained a final Washington judgment awarding indemnity to Marubeni (final on Oct. 17, 1974).
- While the Washington litigation was pending, Kansai filed a separate action in Japan seeking a declaratory judgment that it owed no indemnity to Marubeni.
- The Japanese court in that earlier declaratory action entered a final judgment for Kansai (final on Oct. 14, 1974), determining Kansai had no indemnity obligation to Marubeni; Marubeni did not appeal.
- After obtaining the Washington indemnity judgment, Marubeni brought an execution action in the Osaka District Court seeking recognition and enforcement of the Washington judgment against Kansai’s assets in Japan.
- The Washington indemnity judgment and the prior final Japanese declaratory judgment directly conflicted on the same indemnity relationship between the same parties.

## Issues

1. Whether a Washington state court indemnity judgment could be recognized and enforced in Japan when a prior final Japanese judgment between the same parties had determined the opposite result on the same indemnity obligation.
2. Whether recognizing and enforcing the Washington judgment would violate Japan’s “public order or good morals” condition for recognition of foreign judgments.
3. Whether enforcement that would negate the res judicata effect of a prior final Japanese judgment is barred as a matter of public order.

## Decision

- The Osaka District Court dismissed Marubeni’s execution action and refused to issue an execution judgment.
- The court held the Washington indemnity judgment was not eligible for recognition/enforcement because enforcement would violate the public-order requirement for foreign judgments.
- The court gave controlling effect to the prior final Japanese declaratory judgment determining Kansai owed no indemnity to Marubeni.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign civil judgment may be denied recognition/enforcement when it fails statutory recognition conditions, including a requirement that recognition not offend domestic public order.
- Enforcing a foreign judgment that directly conflicts with a prior final domestic judgment between the same parties on the same legal relationship can be treated as contrary to public order.
- Protection of the binding effect (res judicata) of final domestic judgments may justify refusing recognition of a later, inconsistent foreign judgment, even absent defects in foreign jurisdiction, notice, or reciprocity.

## Conclusion

The court refused to enforce the Washington indemnity judgment because doing so would contradict and effectively nullify a prior final Japanese judgment between the same parties on the same indemnity obligation, which the court treated as a violation of Japan’s public-order limitation on recognizing foreign judgments.


Marubeni Am. Co. v. Kansai Iron Works Ltd., Hanrei Taimuzu (No. 361) 127 (Osaka Dist. Ct. 1977)