## Facts

- Takano, a university graduate, was hired by Mitsubishi Resin on a three-month trial (probationary) employment arrangement with the expectation of regular employment if the trial was successful.
- During hiring, Takano completed a personal-history form and participated in interviews; the company investigated applicants’ political and campus activities.
- Takano did not disclose prior involvement in student political activities and demonstrations and was alleged to have made false entries or concealed material facts.
- During the trial period, Mitsubishi learned of Takano’s past student activism, including conduct the company characterized as unlawful or disruptive.
- At the end of the trial period, Mitsubishi refused to convert Takano to regular employment, effectively terminating the relationship, citing (i) misrepresentation/concealment and (ii) concerns about his suitability based on prior political conduct.
- Takano sued, asserting that the refusal was substantially based on his political beliefs and activities, violating constitutional protections for freedom of thought and equality.

## Issues

1. Whether constitutional guarantees of freedom of thought and equality directly restrict a private employer’s hiring and retention decisions.
2. Whether an employer’s refusal to convert a probationary employee to regular employment, based on concealed past political activities and alleged misrepresentations, is invalid under private-law limits such as public policy or abuse of rights.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Japan (Grand Bench) reversed the lower courts and dismissed Takano’s claim.
- The Court held that constitutional rights principally operate vertically against the state and do not, as such, directly bind private employers in private employment decisions.
- Applying private-law analysis, the Court held the non-conversion at the end of the trial period was valid and not an unlawful or abusive exercise of the employer’s discretion on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Fundamental-rights provisions in the constitution generally do not apply directly to regulate purely private relationships; they primarily constrain state action.
- Constitutional values may be considered indirectly when interpreting and applying private-law doctrines (e.g., public policy and abuse of rights), but they do not automatically invalidate private conduct.
- A probationary employment relationship permits broader employer discretion to refuse final regular employment than would apply to dismissal of a regular employee, subject to limits against arbitrariness and abuse.
- An employer may treat material misrepresentation or concealment in hiring as a legitimate basis to deny regular employment because trust and truthful disclosure are relevant to assessing suitability.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld an employer’s refusal to convert a probationary worker to regular status where the decision rested on perceived suitability concerns and alleged concealment, while rejecting direct constitutional constraints on private employment decisions and limiting constitutional influence to indirect application through private-law doctrines.


Mitsubishi Resin, Inc. v. Takano, 27 Minshū 11, 1536 (Sup. Ct. Japan 1973)