The Civil Execution Act (Japan)

Introduction

The Civil Execution Act (Minji Shikkō Hō, Act No. 4 of 1979, effective 1 October 1980) is Japan’s comprehensive statute governing the enforcement of civil judgments and other enforceable instruments. It replaced the execution provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure (1890), which had remained largely unchanged since the Meiji era. The Act was a landmark in Japanese procedural law, consolidating and rationalising the enforcement system into a single legislative instrument.

The Act has been amended on several important occasions. The 2003 reform introduced the indirect enforcement system (astreinte), improved the compulsory auction procedure, and strengthened creditor protections. The 2012 reform enhanced the protection of debtors in wage garnishment and implemented the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction in the enforcement context. The Act operates alongside the Bankruptcy Act (Hasan Hō, 2004) and the Civil Rehabilitation Act (Minji Saisei Hō, 2004), which provide alternative frameworks for the collective satisfaction of creditors’ claims.

Structure

The Civil Execution Act is divided into four chapters:

• Chapter 1 — General Provisions (Articles 1–24): scope, definitions, enforcement courts, enforcement officers, the requirements for enforcement.
• Chapter 2 — Execution for the Satisfaction of Monetary Claims (Articles 25–118): seizure, conversion, and distribution.
• Chapter 3 — Execution for the Satisfaction of Non-Monetary Claims (Articles 119–173): specific performance, eviction, indirect enforcement.
• Chapter 4 — Provisional Remedies (Articles 174–204): provisional attachment (kari sashiosae) and provisional disposition (kari shobun).

General Principles

Enforceable Instruments. The Act applies to final judgments, settlement deeds recorded in court, conciliation deeds, and notarised deeds of obligation that are declared enforceable. The creditor must obtain a certificate of enforceability (shikkō tatemae), confirming that the judgment is final and that the debtor’s obligation has become enforceable.

Enforcement Court and Enforcement Officer. The enforcement court (shikkō saibansho) is the District Court for the district in which the enforcement is to be carried out. The court issues seizure orders, resolves disputes, and distributes proceeds. The enforcement officer (shikkō kan) is a court official who performs the physical acts of enforcement: seizing movables, evicting debtors, and conducting auctions of movable property.

Stay of Enforcement. The debtor may apply for a stay of enforcement pending appeal or on grounds of the judgment’s nullity. The court may grant a stay on condition that the debtor posts security (Article 14 CEA).

Execution for Monetary Claims

Seizure. The creditor applies to the enforcement court for a seizure order (sashiosae). The application must identify the enforceable instrument, the specific assets to be seized, and the amount of the claim. The court issues the order without hearing the debtor in ordinary cases.

Real Property. The seizure order is registered in the Real Property Registry. An appraiser values the property. The court sets a minimum sale price and schedules a compulsory auction (kyōsei kyōbaku). Bidders post a deposit, and the highest bidder acquires the property free of encumbrances (except certain preferred claims, such as property taxes).

Movables. The enforcement officer physically seizes the debtor’s movable assets. Certain assets are exempt from seizure under Article 131 CEA: basic clothing, bedding, household furniture, kitchen utensils, and tools of trade necessary for the debtor’s livelihood.

Claims (Garnishment). The enforcement court orders the garnishee (e.g., a bank or employer) to refrain from paying the debtor. The garnishee must pay the garnished amount directly to the enforcement court or the creditor. Wage garnishment is limited to 25% of the debtor’s net monthly wages (Article 153 CEA). The 2012 reform raised the protected minimum and introduced a more generous exemption for low-wage earners.

Conversion. Real property is sold by compulsory auction under the supervision of the enforcement court. The court may also authorise a private sale (tokubetsu uriwatashi) where it is likely to realise a higher price. Movables are sold by the enforcement officer at auction or by private sale.

Distribution. Proceeds are distributed among creditors in order of priority. Secured creditors (mortgagees, pledgees) take priority over general unsecured creditors. The priority of competing security interests is determined by the order of registration. Unsecured creditors share pari passu in the residual proceeds.

Execution for Non-Monetary Claims

Indirect Enforcement (Astreinte). Article 172 CEA empowers the court to order the debtor to pay a monetary amount for each period of non-performance. The amount is fixed by the court and must be proportionate to the harm caused by the delay and the debtor’s capacity to pay. The indirect enforcement system, introduced in the 2003 reform, is the functional equivalent of the French astreinte.

Eviction. The enforcement officer may evict the debtor and any occupants from real property and deliver vacant possession to the creditor (Articles 168–171 CEA). The officer may use reasonable force and may call on the assistance of the police.

Specific Performance. If the obligation is to deliver a specific asset, the enforcement officer may seize the asset and deliver it to the creditor. If the obligation is to perform an act, the court may authorise the creditor to have the act performed at the debtor’s expense (Article 171 CEA). Acts that are personal to the debtor (e.g., an obligation to paint a portrait) can be enforced only through indirect compulsion.

Return of Children. The 2012 amendments introduced specific provisions for the enforcement of orders for the return of children under the Hague Convention. The enforcement court may order the person withholding the child to surrender the child, and the enforcement officer may take the child into custody and deliver the child to the applicant.

Provisional Remedies

The Civil Execution Act and the Civil Provisional Remedies Act (Minji Hozen Hō, Act No. 6 of 1989) govern provisional relief.

Provisional Attachment (Kari Sashiosae). The creditor may obtain an order freezing the debtor’s assets pending judgment. The creditor must show a prima facie case and the risk that the debtor will dissipate assets. The order is executed by the same methods as a final judgment.

Provisional Disposition (Kari Shobun). The creditor may obtain an order preserving a disputed right or maintaining the status quo. Common forms of provisional disposition include orders restraining the debtor from disposing of specific property, orders for the provisional registration of a right, and orders appointing a provisional administrator.

Both provisional remedies require the applicant to post security. The amount of security is fixed by the court and is designed to compensate the debtor for any loss caused by a wrongful provisional measure.

The Civil Execution Act in Operation

The CEA is generally regarded as efficient and reliable. The time from application to sale in a real-property enforcement is typically six to twelve months. The cost of enforcement is borne by the debtor and is recovered from the proceeds of sale.

The Act maintains a careful balance between the creditor’s interest in prompt enforcement and the debtor’s interest in procedural protection and minimum living standards. The exemption rules, the wage garnishment limits, and the court’s power to stay enforcement on equitable grounds ensure that the enforcement system is not used oppressively.

The relationship between the CEA and Japan’s insolvency framework is carefully coordinated. If a debtor becomes bankrupt, enforcement proceedings are automatically stayed. The debtor may also obtain a stay by filing for civil rehabilitation or corporate reorganisation, giving the debtor an opportunity to restructure its debts while the enforcement is suspended.