## Facts

- Zavicha Blagojevic, a resident of France, brought a breach-of-contract damages action in France against Daiei K.K., a Japanese company.
- In the French action, Blagojevic served Daiei in Japan by mailing the summons and complaint to Daiei.
- The mailed documents were in French, and Blagojevic did not provide a Japanese translation.
- A French court entered judgment against Daiei.
- Blagojevic then sought to have the French judgment recognized and enforced in Japan.
- Daiei was in bankruptcy proceedings in Japan, and Ueno, Daiei’s bankruptcy trustee, filed a declaratory-judgment action in Japan against Blagojevic seeking a declaration that the French judgment was not enforceable in Japan.

## Issues

1. Whether a French judgment against a Japanese company can be recognized and enforced in Japan when service of process in the French action was made in Japan by mail with French-language documents and no Japanese translation.
2. Whether the absence of a Japanese translation (and the resulting lack of meaningful notice) prevents satisfaction of Japan’s requirements for recognition of foreign judgments, including the requirement of proper service or an equivalent opportunity to defend.

## Decision

- The Tokyo District Court granted Ueno’s request for declaratory relief and refused recognition/enforcement of the French judgment in Japan.
- The court concluded that service by mailing French-only legal documents to a Japanese defendant in Japan, without a Japanese translation, did not provide notice sufficient to allow the defendant a real opportunity to defend.
- Because this service defect meant the statutory conditions for recognizing a foreign judgment were not met, the court did not revisit the merits of the French breach-of-contract determination.

## Legal Principles

- A foreign judgment will be recognized in Japan only if specified conditions are satisfied (commonly described today in terms similar to Code of Civil Procedure art. 118), including that the losing party was properly served or otherwise had a fair opportunity to appear and defend.
- “Proper service” in the recognition setting requires notice that is practically adequate for defense, not merely a method accepted in the rendering state.
- Serving a Japanese defendant in Japan with court papers only in a foreign language, without translation into Japanese, can be treated as failing the notice/opportunity-to-defend requirement and therefore bars recognition.
- When a recognition prerequisite fails at this threshold stage, Japanese courts may deny recognition without examining the foreign court’s findings on the underlying dispute.

## Conclusion

In *Ueno v. Zavicha Blagojevic*, the Tokyo District Court refused to recognize a French damages judgment sought to be enforced against a Japanese bankrupt estate because the French proceedings had been initiated by mailing French-language process to Japan without a Japanese translation, which the court found insufficient to give the Japanese defendant meaningful notice and a fair chance to defend as required for recognition of foreign judgments in Japan.


Ueno v. Zavicha Blagojevic, 37 Kakyū Minshū (Nos. 9-12) 801 (1976)