## Facts

- United Netherlands Navigation Co. (United) was a Dutch shipping company with no offices or permanent property in Japan.
- United owned and operated the *Sinoutakerk*.
- The *Sinoutakerk* collided with a yacht in Japanese waters, resulting in the death of Shigeo Yasutomi.
- Yasutomi’s family sued United in Japan for damages, alleging the collision was caused by the gross negligence of the *Sinoutakerk*’s captain.
- To secure satisfaction of any judgment, the family sought a provisional attachment of the *Servaaskerk* (also spelled *Servaaskert*), another vessel owned by United.
- The *Servaaskerk* was stationed at a Japanese port and was described as playing a role in the events surrounding the accident.
- United moved to dismiss the action on the ground that Japanese courts lacked jurisdiction over a foreign corporation without a business presence or permanent assets in Japan.

## Issues

1. Whether a Japanese court may exercise jurisdiction over a foreign shipowner with no offices or permanent property in Japan for a wrongful-death tort claim arising from a collision in Japanese waters.
2. Whether the presence of the defendant’s vessel (*Servaaskerk*) in a Japanese port, and the plaintiffs’ request for provisional attachment of that vessel, may be used to secure a possible money judgment and be considered in the jurisdictional analysis.
3. Whether the court may maintain or grant provisional attachment in Japan while proceeding with the merits of a tort action against a foreign defendant that contests jurisdiction.

## Decision

- The court rejected United’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
- The court permitted the case to proceed in Japan based on the connection between the dispute and Japan, including that the collision occurred in Japanese waters.
- The court allowed provisional attachment of United’s ship in Japan (*Servaaskerk*) as security for the plaintiffs’ damages claim.

## Legal Principles

- A tort occurring within Japan (including in Japanese waters) can provide a sufficient territorial connection for Japanese courts to hear a civil damages claim against a foreign defendant.
- A foreign defendant’s ship present in a Japanese port may be subject to provisional attachment to secure satisfaction of a potential money judgment.
- The absence of a local office or permanently located property does not, by itself, prevent Japanese courts from exercising jurisdiction where the alleged wrongful act occurred in Japan and effective judicial relief is feasible.
- In maritime tort disputes, provisional attachment of a vessel in port serves a security function by reducing the risk that a judgment will be ineffective because the defendant’s assets can leave the forum.

## Conclusion

In *Yasutomi v. United Netherlands Navigation Co.*, the court allowed a wrongful-death action arising from a ship collision in Japanese waters to proceed in Japan against a Dutch shipowner with no Japanese offices or permanent property, and it authorized provisional attachment of the owner’s other vessel present in a Japanese port to secure payment of any damages judgment.


Yasutomi v. United Netherlands Navigation Co., 17 Kakyū Minshū (Nos. 9-10) 874 (1966)