2021

Business Summary

The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes,
Public Interest Incorporated Foundation

Business of the Center Legal consultations, mediation for amicable settlements anddeliberations for solving disputes resulting from automobile
accidents without charge
 Mediation for amicable settlements through face-to-face meetings
with attorneys in a fair and neutral manner Deliberations for arbitral recommendations by deliberation boards(a board comprising a scholar of the law, a former judge and an
experienced attorney) for further resolution of disputes
 Surveys of and research on compensation for damages caused byautomobile accidents

LeafletPosterPromotional Business Card2

Message from our President
As a pioneering ADR organization, the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes has, since
February 1974, when its predecessor, the Tribunal on Traffic Accidents, was established, provided, withoutcharge, legal consultations, mediation for amicable settlements and deliberations regarding compensation fordamages caused by automobile accidents in order to provide neutral, fair and prompt redress to traffic accident
victims.
From the establishment of our Center until the end of the last fiscal year, an accumulated total of
approximately 249,000 consultations (newly-accepted cases) had been accepted, approximately 171,000 ofwhich were settled amicably. Recent data show that settlements were reached in approximately 85% of all casesthat were completed through mediation for settlements and other similar proceedings.
Following the government’s Declaration of a State of Emergency aimed at preventing widespread infectionof the novel coronavirus (COVID-19), both mediation for settlements and deliberations at our Center weresuspended for some time, following which, a certain number of mediations were dealt with over the telephone
instead of face-to-face meetings with petitioners and counterparties visiting our Center’s offices. This situation
affected the number of consultations completed at our Center to a certain extent, and we have therefore felt theneed to respond to the change of circumstances affecting our activities by utilizing various means including digitaltechnology in view of the rapid advances in such technology.
The number of automobile accidents nationwide, both in terms of the number of occurrences and the number of
injuries, is decreasing on account of the increased use of driving assistance and safety features in automobiles,
etc., and therefore the number of cases handled by our Center is also decreasing accordingly. However, thesituation surrounding automobile accidents remains a matter of considerable concern, given the number ofdeaths and injuries. Furthermore, disputes regarding compensation for damages are becoming more complicated,partly due to changes in society with the advancing age of the population. Thus, I believe that the public’s
expectations of the role of our Center as an ADR organization that settles disputes between parties involved in
accidents is becoming noticeably heightened.
In light of these circumstances, our Center is endeavoring to promptly meet the real needs of users who seek
mediation to achieve an amicable settlement and to provide user-friendly and high-quality services by continuallyreviewing the entire operations of our business.
Our Center became a public interest incorporated foundation in April 2012. Since then, by positioning our disputesettlement services for automobile accidents as a business with the purpose of benefiting the public, our Centerhas actively promoted the use of such services and has been working hard to expand and improve points ofcontact for consultations, improve access for our users, and enhance public relations activities.
In addition, we are endeavoring to dispatch information for the purpose of ensuring that victims themselves
can feel at ease utilizing our Center, even if they do not have adequate knowledge of compensation issues andare not accustomed to negotiating disputes with counterparties. The Center has also been reviewing our PR
media from time to time, including its website and posters, and has continued to strengthen cooperation withlocal autonomous bodies and local public consultation centers for traffic accidents.
Our Center will continually renew its awareness of its social responsibility as a public interest corporation. We willcontinue to play an important role as an ADR organization, and provide neutral, fair and prompt redress withreference to court precedents to traffic accident victims through mediation for amicable settlements of, anddeliberations on, disputes regarding automobile accidents as a public benefit business. By this means, our Center
will endeavor to further contribute to the enhancement of public welfare.
I look forward to your continued support of our Center.

Ikufumi Niimi,
President(Professor Emeritus, Meiji University)
September, 2021

3

Table ofContents● Profile of the Center
１．Purpose of Establishment and Development ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・５
２．Key Features of the Foundation and Other Related Matters・・・・・・・・・・・５
３．Development of the Center ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・６● Consultation Services and Business Activities
１．Key Features of Consultation Services Provided by the Center・・・・・・・・・・７➊ Telephone Reservations (Application) ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・７➋ Legal Consultations, Mediation for Amicable Settlement・・・・・・・・・・・・７➌ Deliberation (Arbitral Recommendation) by the Deliberation Board・・・・・・・８
２．Business Activities ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・８➊ Legal Consultations, Mediation for Amicable Settlement・・・・・・・・・・・・８(1) Applications for Legal Consultations and Mediation for Amicable Settlement・・・・・・９(2) Number of Consultations at the Headquarters, Branches and Consultation Offices ・・１０
(3) Breakdown of the Number of Newly-accepted cases in Fiscal 2020 ・・・・・・・・１０(4) Results of Consultations Disposed ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１２➋ Deliberation・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１３➌ Promoting the Rationalization of Consultation Services ・・・・・・・・・・・１４
３．Research Activities・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１４
４．Other Business Activities ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１５５．User Opinions (Results of Questionnaires) ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１６● Organization of the Center ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１７● Councilors and Directors

・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１８● Financial Statement (Based on Fiscal 2020)・・・・・・・・・・・・・・１９● Terms of Use of the Center・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・２０● Personal Information Protection Policy ・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・２６● Flowchart of Legal Consultations, Mediation for Amicable Settlements andDeliberations・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・・２７

4

Profile of the Center

1

Purpose of Establishment and Development

Traffic accidents have become a serious social
problem. While it is true that the number of traffic
accidents and the number of those killed and injured
has decreased, the death toll still comes toapproximately 2,800 and some 369,000 people are
injured annually.
Victims of traffic accidents are eligible for acertain amount of compensation under various
insurance systems such as Compulsory Automobile
Liability Insurance. However, because many victims
do not have enough knowledge of insurance systems
and matters of compensation following traffic
accidents, or are not accustomed to suchnegotiations, some of them can neither negotiate asmooth settlement of such disputes nor obtain an
appropriate amount of compensation.
One reliable means of settling compensation is
to take the case to court. However, it is not that easy
to use such means, as judicial proceedings can becumbersome and protracted, or are feared to berather costly.

2

In order to respond to the circumstances outlined
above, the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic
Accident Disputes was initially established in 1974 as
the Tribunal on Traffic Accidents, which provided thefunction of settlement mediation in addition toconventional consultations. In 1978, in order toexpand its structure and strengthen its neutral andfair stance, it developed into the Japan Center for
Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Incorporated
Foundation under the control of the General
Administrative Agency of the Cabinet (now the
Cabinet Office). It subsequently transformed frombeing an incorporated foundation to a public interest
incorporated foundation on April 1, 2012.
To ensure that the interests of people involved intraffic accidents are protected in a fair manner and,similarly, that both appropriate resolution of disputes
relating to traffic accidents and the enhancement ofpublic welfare are ensured, the Center now conducts
its activities in 11 locations across the country.

Key Features of the Foundation and Other Related Matters

1

A public interest incorporated foundation (public interest corporation) based on the public interest
corporation system reform-related laws (the Act on Authorization of Public Interest Incorporated
Associations and Public Interest Incorporated Foundations, and other related acts)

2

Date of Establishment

3 The Center was established as an incorporated foundation in accordance with Article 34 of the Civil Code with the permission of
the General Administrative Agency of the Cabinet (now the Cabinet Office) on March 15, 1978.
･ Along with the enforcement of the new public interest corporation system, it was authorized by the Prime Minister as a public
interest incorporated foundation and became the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Public Interest
Incorporated Foundation on April 1, 2012.

Locations of Offices (see list of locations on back cover)Headquarters: Shinjuku Monolith Building, 25th Floor, 2-3-1, Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku Ward, Tokyo, Japan
Branches: Sapporo, Sendai, Nagoya, Osaka, Hiroshima, Takamatsu, and Fukuoka,
Consultation Offices: Saitama, Kanazawa, and Shizuoka

4

Basic Fund: 30 million yen.

5

Financial resources to operate the Center are provided by domestic and foreign general insurancecompanies, the National Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural Cooperatives, the National
Federation of Workers and Consumers Kyosai (mutual aid) Cooperatives, the National Mutual
Insurance Federation of Truck Transport Co-operatives, the National Federation of Motor Insurance
Cooperatives and the National Federation of Fire Insurance Co-operatives for Small Business(hereafter referred to as ‘insurance companies, etc.’, refer to page 7 *)6

Number of Officers and Employees (as of August 1, 2021)･ Officers: President, 15 Directors and 2 Auditors･ Employees: 53･ Councilors: 19･ Jurors: 46,
Commissioned attorneys: 180

5

Profile of the Center

3
1974

1975

Development of the Center
January 16

Office of Tribunal on Traffic Accidents established (Shinjuku Ward, Tokyo)

February 27

Business operations start

February 10

Office of Nagoya Regional Tribunal on Traffic Accidents established(Nakamura Ward, Nagoya)
The above office reorganized as the Nagoya Branch in 1978

1978

March 15The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Incorporated
Foundation established(Authorizing authority: The Prime Minister’s Office (now the Cabinet Office))
Headquarters moved to Shinjuku Center Building, Shinjuku Ward, July 1981
Moved to Shinjuku Sumitomo Building in the same Ward, May 1999
Moved to Shinjuku Monolith Building in the same Ward, July 2012

March 23

Sapporo Branch Office opens (Chuo Ward, Sapporo)
Moved to Sapporo Bengoshi-Kaikan Building in the same Ward, July 2006

1979

December 16

Fukuoka Branch Office opens (Chuo Ward, Fukuoka)

May 25Hiroshima Branch Office opens (Naka Ward, Hiroshima)
Moved to NREG Hiroshima Tatemachi Building, January 1999

October 4

Osaka Branch Office opens (Chuo Ward, Osaka)
Moved to Kodera Plaza Building in the same Ward, February 2001

1980

June 13

Takamatsu Branch Office opens (Marunouchi, Takamatsu)
Moved to Kagawa-ken Bengoshi-Kaikan Building in Marunouchi, Takamatsu,
March 2003

November 10

Sendai Branch Office opens (Aoba Ward, Sendai)
Moved to Sendai Daiichi-Seimei Tower Building, May 20131982

October 1

Consultations for automobile physical damage liability cases start

2001

October 1

Saitama Consultation Office opens (Omiya Ward, Saitama)
Moved to Omiya Shimocho 1-Chome Building with larger office space in thesame Ward, November 2017

November 1

Kanazawa Consultation Office opens (Honmachi, Kanazawa)(Office space expanded in July 2018)2012

April 1The Center reorganized into a Public Interest Incorporated Foundation

2015

October 1

Shizuoka Consultation Office opens (Aoi Ward, Shizuoka)

6Consultation Services and Business Activities

1

Key Features of Consultation Services provided by the Center

Since its establishment, our organization has been
improved and enhanced. In addition to its
headquarters in Shinjuku, the Center now has
branches in Osaka, Nagoya, Fukuoka, Sapporo,
Sendai, Hiroshima, and Takamatsu, and consultation
offices in Saitama, Kanazawa and Shizuoka for the
purpose of prompt resolution of disputes (including,but not limited to, disputes concerning compensation
for damages) relating to traffic accidents (automobile
accidents). From a position of neutrality and fairness,
the Center provides free legal consultations withattorneys in charge of providing consultations andmediation for settlement and deliberation, with acentral focus on mediation for settlement.

For information on the flow of Legal Consultations, Mediation
for Amicable Settlement and Deliberation, refer to page 27.

➊ Telephone Reservations (Application)
First, the petitioner (i.e. the victim of an automobile
accident) makes a reservation by phone with respect
to a case that is intended to be mediated in order toreach a settlement. He or she then visits the Centeron the reserved consultation date and directly
consults with an attorney in charge of providing
consultations. Consultations over the telephone are

not provided. Before using our services, every
petitioner is required to read the Center’s Terms ofUse (refer to pages 20-25), in which matters that apetitioner needs to know and to comply with areprescribed. Each application for use of the Center’s
services must be made on condition that thepetitioner complies with the Terms of Use.

➋ Legal Consultations, Mediation for Amicable Settlement
precedents, precedent arbitral recommendations andthe result of considerations of the Nationwide Joint
Meetings held by the commissioned attorneys andthe jurors of the Center, etc. If the parties reachagreement through mediation, an out-of-court
settlement document or an instrument of discharge isdrawn up in the presence of the attorney in charge,
whereby the insurance company, etc., arranges
payment for claims for damages.
If the attorney in charge decides that themediation is unsuccessful, either of the parties may
file a petition to initiate the procedure for deliberation.
If the insurance company, etc., requests a transition
to judicial proceedings during this period, theprocedure of mediation is suspended and theCenter’s Committee for Judging Adequacy ofTransition to Judicial Proceedings discusses theissue and determines whether such a request is
acceptable. If the Center determines that it isreasonable to solve the dispute through litigation, forexample, in cases where there is no evidential
material to show the circumstances of the accident,
or cases where there is insufficient material to show
reasonable and probable causation between theaccident and the injury, etc., the proceedings held at
the Center are terminated. Conversely, the insurancecompany, etc., is required to file a lawsuit without
delay.

As a general guide, the time for each consultation isabout one hour. During a legal consultation(1), theattorney in charge of providing the consultation(hereafter, ‘attorney in charge’) interviews thepetitioner, sorts out problems concerning their inquiry
or questions, or offers advice on resolution of the
dispute.
(1) Because the Center only accepts cases that are intended for
mediation aimed at reaching the settlement of a dispute, legal
consultations alone are not accepted. Therefore, few cases
are concluded after only the initial legal consultation is overand, in principle, the petitioner requests further mediation
aimed at a settlement. Legal consultation here is not a legal
consultation in a general sense.

When the petitioner requests an attorney in charge tomediate with the aim of reaching an amicablesettlement (hereafter, ‘mediation’), the Center asks
the counterparty, or the insurance company, etc.*,that has a contract with the counterparty, to visit theCenter and mediation then commences with theattendance of the parties. The insurance company,
etc., is required to attend the settlement procedure
conducted at the Center. The victim of the accident
him or herself, or his or her legal representative, andthose who are permitted by the attorney in charge canattend the legal consultation and the mediation.
Once materials related to compensation fordamages have been prepared, a proposal for
mediation is presented. As far as cases where asettlement has been reached are concerned, it iscommon for those regarding accidents that resulted
in injury or death to reach a settlement after three orfour sessions, while cases regarding accidents
causing physical damage normally reach asettlement after about two sessions.
Mediation is conducted with reference to court* The ‘insurance company, etc.’ means an insurance company affiliated to theGeneral Insurance Association of Japan or the Foreign Non-Life Insurance
Association of Japan, the National Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural
Cooperatives, the National Federation of Workers and Consumers Kyosai
Cooperatives, the National Mutual Insurance Federation of Truck Transport Cooperatives, the National Federation of Motor Insurance Cooperatives, or the
National Federation of Fire Insurance Co-operatives for Small Business, thathave agreed to respect the arbitral recommendations provided by the Center.

7

Consultation Services and Business Activities➌ Deliberation (Arbitral Recommendation) by the Deliberation Board
If mediation for the settlement of a case isunsuccessful and a petition to initiate the procedurefor deliberation is filed, the attorney in charge explains
the key issues as well as the claims stated by bothparties relating to the dispute together with therelevant materials to the Deliberation Board, in
advance. If the case is accepted as a case fordeliberation, the date for deliberation is thendetermined.
At meetings of the Deliberation Board,deliberation is conducted by three jurors consisting of
one scholar of the law, one former judge and one
experienced attorney. Only the two parties or theattorneys representing each party and those who arepermitted by the Board can attend the Board meetings.
During the deliberation, the jurors request thateach party provide an explanation of the facts relating
to the dispute and listen to each party’s opinion and,2

as a result of the deliberation by the Board, an arbitral
recommendation is made.
The petitioner, who has the right to claim
damages, informs the Center of his or her agreement
or disagreement with the recommendation. If thepetitioner gives his or her agreement, a settlement canbe reached. If the petitioner disagrees with therecommendation, the proceedings at the Center are
terminated.
If the petitioner consents to the recommendation,
the insurance company, etc., that has a contract withthe counterparty is required to respect the result of therecommendation. Therefore, in accordance with therecommendation, the attorney in charge prepares an
out-of-court settlement document or an instrument ofdischarge, on the basis of which the insurancecompany, etc., arranges for payment for claims fordamages.

Business Activities

In fiscal 1974, the first year the Center was
established, there were 658 newly-accepted
consultations (hereafter referred to as ‘the number of
newly-accepted cases’). There was also a cumulative
total of 990 further consultations (in addition to theinitial consultations) where those who had received
an initial consultation visited the Center again(hereafter referred to as ‘the number of revisits’).
Thereafter, the number of consultations increased
every year following the increase in the number oftraffic accidents.
Meanwhile, the waiting period for a consultation
also increased accordingly. Because of this situation,
the Center placed emphasis on providing an
explanation of the procedures involved during theacceptance phase in order to promptly meet theneeds of users who could commence the procedurefor initiating mediation for settlement. As a result, thenumber of newly-accepted cases in fiscal 2004 wasless than the previous fiscal year for the first time.
However, from fiscal 2006, there was a tendency forthe number to increase again. In fiscal 2009 inparticular, there was a significant increase of morethan 10% over the previous year. The increase shownin fiscal 2010 was slight due to a rebound, but the
number thereafter marked a slight decrease fromfiscal 2011 through fiscal 2013. Although a slightincrease was seen again in fiscal 2014, the tendency
for the number of cases to decrease continued fromfiscal 2015 on. (Fig. 1)➊ Legal Consultations, Mediation for Amicable Settlement
Following an application from the victim of an
automobile accident, the Center provides services
concerning free legal consultations with attorneys incharge and mediation aimed at a settlement between
the parties from a neutral and fair stance. The
purpose of this is to promptly resolve disputes relating
to automobile accidents, including, but not limited to,disputes concerning compensation for damages.
The transition in the number of consultations
since the establishment of the Center is as shown in
Fig.1. During the last 47 years, over 249,000 newlyaccepted applications for legal consultations andmediation have been accepted, of which settlements
have been reached in approximately 171,000 cases.

8Consultation Services and Business Activities

Fig. 1Developments in the Number of Consultations (Number of Newly-Accepted Cases
and Number of Revisits) and the Number of Settlements Reached

30,000(cases)Number of Consultations
Number of Newly-Accepted Cases

Number of Revisits
Number of Settlements Reached

25,00020,00016,14515,00010,40010,000

5,745
5,000

0

4,856

1974

1979

1984

1989

1994

1999

2004

2009

2014

2020
(Fis cal Year)

1 Applications for Legal Consultations and Mediation for Amicable Settlement
In fiscal 2020, there were 5,745 newly-accepted
cases that were processed as cases of mediation
aimed at reaching an amicable settlement, or as
similar cases following an application for a
consultation from the victim of an automobile accident(a decrease of 616 from the previous fiscal year).
Additionally, there were 10,400 revisits (a decrease of
Fig. 2

98 from the previous fiscal year), giving a combined
total of newly-accepted cases and revisits of 16,145
consultations, (a decrease of 1,597 from the previous
fiscal year).
A total of 4,856 amicable settlements werereached (a decrease of 807 from the previous fiscal
year). (Fig. 2)

Developments in the Number of Consultations during the Last 5 Years

25,000(cases)

20,000

Number of Consultations
Number of Newly-Accepted Cases

19,980

Number of Revisits
Number of Settlements Reached19,62018,247

17,742
16,14515,00012,551

12,395

11,567

11,381

10,40010,000
7,429
6,506

7,225

6,680

6,304

5,837

6,361

5,663

5,000

0

Fiscal 2016

Fiscal 2017

Fiscal 2018

Consultation Services and Business Activities

9

Fiscal 2019

5,745
4,856

Fiscal 2020

0

Fiscal 2016

Fiscal 2017

Fiscal 2018

Fiscal 2019

Fiscal 2020

Consultation Services and Business Activities

2

Number of Consultations at the Headquarters, Branches and Consultation Offices

In addition to the headquarters located in Tokyo, theCenter has branches in Osaka, Nagoya, Fukuoka,
Sapporo, Sendai, Hiroshima and Takamatsu (each ofwhich is the seat of a high court), and consultation
offices in Saitama, Kanazawa and Shizuoka, whichmeans that the Center has opened points of contact for

consultation in 11 locations. Of the newly-accepted
cases processed at such places in fiscal 2020, 71.9%of the total were processed at the headquarters(including the Saitama Consultation Office), and the
Osaka, Nagoya and Fukuoka branches, all of which
are located in metropolitan areas. (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3 Number of Consultations at the Headquarters, Branches, etc. (Fiscal 2020)
5,000(cases)Number of Consultations

4,369

Number of Revisits

Number of Newly Accepted Cases

4,000

3,000

3,021

2,832

2,084

1,911

2,000
1,537

1,553

1,383

3

937

862

1,000

0

1,286

661

Headquarters

421

521

625

472

240

SapporoSendai

Nagoya

Osaka

1,055

861
563
288

Hiroshima

Takamatsu

Fukuoka

618

627

403

298

184

926

652

241

Saitama

103 138

Kanazawa

383

235

Shizuoka

Breakdown of the Number of Newly-Accepted Cases in Fiscal 2020

10 of Accidents according to whether an Accident
a. Number of Newly-Accepted Cases (Classification
caused Injury/Death, or Physical Damage)In fiscal 2020, there were 5,745 newly-accepted
cases, of which 4,468 cases (77.8%) were related toaccidents causing injury or death, while the remaining

Table 1

1,277 cases (22.2%) were related to accidents
causing physical damage. (Table 1)

Number of Newly-Accepted Cases (Fiscal 2020)（Unit: cases, (%) )Breakdown Items Headquarters Sapporo Sendai Nagoya Osaka Hiroshima Takamatsu Fukuoka Saitama Kanazawa Shizuoka

Total

Number of Newly Accepted Cases

1,537

240

521

625

937

184

298

403

627

138

235

5,745

Portion of the
Total related to
Accidents causing
Injury or Death

1,180

181

391

469

731

135

240

328

537

92

184

4,468

(Ratio)Portion of the
Total related to
Accidents causing
Phy sical Damage(Ratio)(76.8) (75.4) (75.0) (75.0) (78.0) (73.4) (80.5) (81.4) (85.6) (66.7) (78.3) (77.8)
357

59

130

156

206

49

58

75

90

46

51

1,277

(23.2) (24.6) (25.0) (25.0) (22.0) (26.6) (19.5) (18.6) (14.4) (33.3) (21.7) (22.2)

10

Consultation Services and Business Activities
b. Breakdown of Consultations in the Proceedings of Mediation for Amicable Settlements, and Other Related
Procedures
Of the 5,745 consultations, for which new visitors
made requests at the Center (newly-accepted cases),
5,743 cases were processed through mediation(99.97%), while the remaining 2 cases (0.03%) were
not subsequently processed through mediation. Thisis because the Center is based on the premise oftreating cases through the procedure of mediation
aimed at an amicable settlement.
If we look at the cases processed throughmediation by dividing them between accidents
causing injury or death and accidents causing

physical damage, we find that, in cases resulting ininjury or death, 96.5% are related to the amount ofdamages, 2.9% to permanent disability, and 0.6% tocomparative negligence.
In cases of physical damage, 59.3% are related
to comparative negligence, 34.8% to the amount ofdamages, 4.0% to value appraisal, and 1.9% tocompensation for damages caused by businessvehicles being unusable or car rental expenses. (Fig
4)

Fig. 4 Portion of Consultations processed throughMediation for Settlement (Fiscal 2020)
Cases not processed
through Mediationfor Settlement,
2 cases,(0.03%)

Total
5,745cases,

Cases processed throughMediation for Settlement,
5,743cases,(99.97%)

Breakdown of Requests for Mediation for Settlement
Accidents causing Injury or Death
96.5%

Amount of Damages
Permanent Disability

2.9%

Comparative Negligence

0.6%
0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Accidents causing Physical Damage
59.3%

Comparative Negligence

34.8%

Amount of Damages
Value Appraisal

4.0%

Damages caused by Unusability ofBusiness Vehicles or Car Rental Expenses

1.9%

0%

20%

12
11

40%

60%

80%

100%

Consultation Services and Business Activities

c. Number of Visits Required until Settlements Reached
In fiscal 2020, 4,856 amicable settlements werereached. The number of times users visited theCenter for consultation until settlements werereached and the respective number of cases aredescribed in the following table. In summary, there
were 3,433 cases involving one to three visits, whichmeans settlements were reached after three visits inapproximately 71% of the cases. In approximately
93% of the cases, settlements were reached after fivevisits. Looking at the transition over the last five years,
we can find a steady trend in speeding up the process
to reach a settlement. (Table 2)

Table 2 Number of Visits until Settlements were Reached (Last 5 Years)
Number of Cases (accumulated ratios are shown in parenthesis
under each number of cases)
Numberof Visits

Once
Twice
3 times
4 times
5 times
6 times
7 timesor moreFiscal 2016

Fiscal 2017

Fiscal 2018

Fiscal 2019

Fiscal 2020

535
(8.2%)
2,975(45.7%)
4,812(74.0%)
5,673(87.2%)
6,054(93.1%)
6,264(96.3%)
6,506(100%)

545(8.6%)
2,848(45.2%)
4,659(73.9%)
5,417(85.9%)
5,840(92.6%)
6,052(96.0%)
6,304(100%)

514(8.8%)
2,604(44.6%)
4,284(73.4%)
5,033(86.2%)
5,415(92.8%)
5,627(96.4%)
5,837(100%)

522(9.2%)
2,588(45.7%)
4,175(73.7%)
4,891(86.4%)
5,246(92.6%)
5,461(96.4%)
5,663(100%)

466(9.6%)
2,071(42.6%)
3,433(70.7%)
4,131(85.1%)
4,492(92.5%)
4,690(96.6%)
4,856(100%)

Note: Number of cases and the ratio show n in the Table above represent the accumulated
total number of cases and the accumulated ratios in the respective fiscal year.

4

Results of Consultation Cases Disposed
Fig. 5 Results of Consultations
Disposed (Fiscal 2020)

There were 5,532 cases that were completed after
legal consultations with attorneys in charge,
mediation and deliberations (completed cases) in
fiscal 2020.
Settlements were reached in 4,856 (87.8%) ofsuch completed cases. However, 498 cases (9.0%)
were, for some reason, withdrawn or determined to
be unsuccessful in mediating a settlement, 20 cases(0.3%) were closed after calculating the amount ofdamages and providing instructions on procedures tosettle the dispute with the counterparty, and 3 cases(0.1%) were closed after providing instructions on
judicial procedures or introducing the victim to bar
associations or other related organizations. The
remaining 155 cases (2.8%) were other consultations,etc.
The 4,856 cases that were settled amicably
include 462 cases (8.4%) that were settled following
arbitral recommendations determined through thedeliberation procedure. (Fig. 5)

Providing instructions
on judicial procedures
or introducing Bar
Associations or otherrelated organizations,
3 cases, (0.1%)

Calculating the amount ofdamages and providing
instructions on procedures tosettle the dispute with thecounterparty,
20 cases, (0.3%)

Total
5,532 cases
Settlements reached,
4,856 cases,(87.8%)

13
12

Unsuccessful inmediation forsettlement /dissent /withdrawn, etc.,
498 cases,(9.0%)

Other
consultations,etc.,
155 cases,(2.8%)

Consultation Services and Business Activities➋ Deliberation
When mediation for a settlement by an attorney incharge is unsuccessful, any one of the parties can filea petition for the deliberation procedure provided by
the Center. However, if the case is deemed
inappropriate, it will not proceed any further. With
respect to an accident causing physical damage, theDeliberation Board may impose certain conditions (2)for resolution of the case. If the parties do not consent
to such conditions, deliberation and an arbitral
recommendation cannot be made in some cases.

former judge and an experienced attorney.
There were 575 cases referred to thedeliberation procedure in fiscal 2020. (Fig. 6)
Looking at the results of deliberation in fiscal
2020 (Table 3), of these 575 cases, 462 (80.3%) weresettled amicably through the deliberation procedure,
38 (6.6%) resulted in disagreement with the arbitral
recommendation or were either withdrawn orotherwise finished, while 75 (13.1%) remained
pending.
Deliberation Boards have been established at
the headquarters and the seven branches.
Deliberations on cases at the Saitama Consultation
Office, which has no Board, are conducted at theheadquarters, while deliberations on cases at the
Kanazawa Consultation Office and the Shizuoka
Consultation Office, which also have no Boards, areconducted at the Nagoya Branch.

(2) One example of such conditions is when two cars collide witheach other causing physical damage to both of them and bothparties are negligent. Filing a petition for the deliberation
procedure is subject to both owners (those who have the righttodamages)

givingtheirconsent

tothearbitralrecommendation on the damage suffered by each of them.

Deliberation is conducted at a meeting of the
Deliberation Board consisting of a legal scholar, aFig. 6 Number of Deliberations over the Last 5 Years(Number of Deliberations, Number of Settlements Reached)(cases)

1000
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0

Number of Deliberations

700

595

Fiscal 2016

682

672
576

568

Fiscal 2017

Fiscal 2018

Number of Settlements Reached

612

575

509

462

Fiscal 2019

Fiscal 2020

Table 3 Number of Deliberations held at the Headquarters and Branches (Fiscal 2020)
Sapporo Sendai(Unit: Cases)

Nagoya Osaka Hiroshima Takamatsu Fukuoka

Total

Headquar ter s

Number of Deliberations

227(36)27

64

69(6)(12)

136

16

16

20

575

Number of Settlements
Reached185(33)24

49

60(4)(11)

100

15

14

15

462

Number of Cases Resulting in
Disagreement with Arbitral
Recommendations

6 (1)

1

0

6(0)(1)

14

0

0

0

27

Number of Cases Pendingin Deliberations

30(0)

2

15

3(2)(0)

17

1

2

5

75

Number of Cases
Withdraw n / Finished

6 (2)

0

0

0 (0) 0

5

0

0

0

11

Breakdown of Results ofDeliberation

Beakdown Items

Notes 1 The numbers described in parenthesis under the Headquarters column refer to the number of cases at Saitama Consultation Office. Those in parenthesis under thecolumn for the Nagoya Branch refer to the number of cases at the Kanazawa Consultation Office (left) and the Shizuoka Consultation Office (right), respectively.
2 The number of Deliberations is broken down into the Number of Settlements Reached, the Number of Cases Resulting in Disagreement with the Arbitral
Recommendations, the Number of Cases Pending in Deliberations and the Number of Cases Withdrawn / Finished.

14
13

Consultation Services and Business Activities➌ Promoting the Rationalization of Consultation Services
In order to shorten the waiting period for consultations,and to standardize and accelerate the processing ofcases, the Center is continually engaged in afundamental review of the entire operation of its
business, revising existing rules and laying downnecessary provisions such as those related topersonal
information
protection
andtheestablishment of a Grievance Committee.
The Center is also working on clarifying thecoverage of legal consultations, mediation anddeliberations, and their related work-flow. It is also
working on preparing its business-related rules as awhole in such a way as to establish Terms of Use,
which prescribe what petitioners need to know before
using the Center and what matters they need tocomply with.
In addition, the Center is engaged in introducing
and improving its Consultation Services Management
System covering the entire operation of its business,
including business operations and processing ofcases concerning legal consultations, mediation anddeliberations.

3

The Center will continue to appropriately operate
its business by means of the aforementioned
preparation of its business-related rules and byadoption of the Consultation Services Management
System.

Research Activities
and utilizes the results for consultation, mediation anddeliberations.

As a part of our business activities regarding researchon compensation for damages caused by automobile
accidents, the Center conducts the following activities➊➊ Compilation of a Database using a Retrieval
System for Introducing New Judicial Precedents
The Center is working on collecting new precedents
from the major district courts pertaining tocompensation for damages caused by automobile
accidents (approximately 900 cases per year). It hassummarized approximately 560 of these each year,
and has compiled them into a database on theCenter’s own accord, which it utilizes for
consultations, mediation and deliberations.
By the end of fiscal 2020, 17,760 cases had beenentered into the database.

➋ Compilation of a Database using a Retrieval System
for Previous Arbitration Recommendations
The Center is working on compiling a database ofcases in which the Center’s Deliberation Boards
conducted
deliberation
andpronounced
recommendations for arbitration on the Center’s own
accord, and utilizes this for consultations, mediationand deliberations.
By the end of fiscal 2020, 4,481 cases had beenentered into the database.

15
14

Consultation Services and Business Activities➌ Reconstruction and reinforcement of a Database using a Retrieval System for
Introducing New Judicial Precedents and Previous Arbitration Recommendations
The Center reinforced the database using a retrieval
system for Introducing New Judicial Precedents andPrevious Arbitration Recommendations by adding
new functions such as displaying cases of consensus
decisions made by three judges and searching casesby adding a new classification of Accidents in a
Parking Lot as well as reconstructing its operating
system as the system reached its renewal deadline,
etc., in fiscal 2020.

➍ Publication of Casebooks Outlining Arbitral Recommendations of Deliberations
on Traffic Accidents
The Center is working on publishing a series ofcasebooks entitled ‘Casebooks Outlining Arbitration
Recommendations on Traffic Accidents’. These
contain the main arbitration recommendations theCenter’s Deliberation Boards have made. The
casebooks are distributed to administrative agencies
and other relevant bodies, etc., for use as referencematerials. They are also made available to the public.
In fiscal 2020, the Center published its ‘Casebook
Outlining Arbitral Recommendations on Traffic
Accidents No. 38’, containing 80 of the main
arbitration recommendations the Deliberation Boards
pronounced in fiscal 2019.

4

Other Business Activities

Every year, the Center performs activities, mainly instudy meetings, training seminars, conferences, etc.,
in order to further enhance the capability of jurors andattorneys in charge to perform their services, and topromote collaboration with relevant organizations asfollows:➊ Case Study Meetings with Judges in Divisions for Traffic Accidents
Discussions on and studies of traffic accidents and other related matters are conducted regularly. (These areheld at the headquarters and major branches.)➋ Joint Case Study Meetings with Consultation Attorneys Belonging to the Nichibenren(Japan Federation of Bar Associations) Traffic Accident Consultation Center
Case Study meetings are held to exchange information on the respective consultation services and to enhance
the qualifications of attorneys in charge. (These are conducted at the headquarters.)➌ Participation in Medical Seminars or Other Related Seminars
Jurors and attorneys in charge at the headquarters, branches, etc., participate in medical seminars held by
relevant bodies and endeavor to improve medical knowledge related to traffic accidents.

➍ Joint Meetings of Jurors and Commissioned Attorneys across the Country
The Center holds meetings at which jurors and commissioned attorneys across the country gather to discuss
issues regarding management of the Center’s organization, legal issues regarding the operation of its business,
etc., and to conduct case studies and other related matters.

16
15

Situation of Consultation Services and Business Activities

5

User Opinions (Results of Questionnaires)

Every year, the Center conducts a survey in the formof a questionnaire on the Center’s services, etc., which
is given to those who have had their disputes settled
through mediation and deliberation procedures. The
Center uses the results of the survey as a reference toimprove its operations. In fiscal 2020, 983 respondents
replied.

Based on the results of the survey, the Center
understands that users of its mediation anddeliberation procedures generally gave its operations
high ratings, as shown below. However, consideringthat there are still a few people who do not evaluate
the Center very highly, the Center will continue to makeevery effort to improve.

Mediations, etc., held at the Center are provided mainly
through face-to-face meetings with attorneys in charge.
The Center asked questions about the attorneys’
responses to the users of its mediation and deliberation
procedures and the results achieved during their
meetings with them.

① Did the attorney act in a consideratemanner towards you?
Unknown

No
3.1%

1.8%

Yes
95.1%

① Firstly, with regard to the question, “Did the attorney
act in a considerate manner towards you?”, 95.1%of the respondents answered “Yes".

② Did you understand the attorney's
Unknown
explanation very well?

② Secondly, in answer to the question, “Did you
understand the attorney’s explanation very well?”,the aggregate percentage of “I understood very well”
and “I mostly understood” was 96.8%.

1.2%

No
2.0%

Mostlyunderstood
24.4%
Understoodvery well
72.4%③ Are you satisfied with the amountof settlement money?

③ In answer to the question, “Are you satisfied withthe amount of settlement money?”, a total of 90.9%
replied either “Reasonable” or “Acceptable”.

Unknown
2.4%

Dissatisfied
6.7%

Reasonable
Acceptable 50.3%
40.6%④ Finally, as for the question, “Would you recommend
the Center to someone involved in a traffic accident
and who faces difficulty in solving liability issues?”,
96.4% of respondents answered, “Yes, I would.”④ Would you recommend the Centerto someone involved in a traffic
accident and who faces difficulty
in solving liability issues?
UnknownNo
2.4%

The Center has received various opinions from ourusers and we will continue to endeavor to improve its
operations by making the best use of their opinions
both positive and critical.

1.2%

Yes
96.4%

17
16

Organization of the Center(As of 1 August 2021)(Chief of)
Sapporo Branch
Secretariat of the
Branch◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 5◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 25◆Staff Members: 3(Chief of)
Sendai Branch
Secretariat of the
Branch◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 5◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 12◆Staff Members: 4(Chief of)
Nagoya Branch
Secretariat of the
BranchBoard ofCouncilors◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 6◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations:18◆Staff Members: 5♦Councilors:19

Auditors◆Auditors: 2(Chief of)
Osaka Branch
Secretariat of the
BranchBoard of Directors
President◆President◆Directors: 14◆Managing Director (Full-time)◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch) 7◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations:26◆Staff Members: 6

Headquarters(Full-time Director)
Secretariat of the
Headquarters◆ Jurors (four of whom concurrently serve as
Directors): 10◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 37◆ Staff Members (Chief of the Secretariat
concurrently serves as Managing Director): 17(Head of) Saitama
Consultation OfficeSecretariat of theConsultation Office◆ Commissioned Attorneys in Charge ofProviding Consultations (of whom one
concurrently serves as Head of theConsultation Office: 20 ◆Staff Members: 3(Head of) Kanazawa
Consultation OfficeSecretariat of theConsultation Office◆ Commissioned Attorneys in Charge ofProviding Consultations (of whom one
concurrently serves as Head of theConsultation Office): 5 ◆Staff Members: 2(Chief of)Hiroshima Branch
Secretariat of the
Branch◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 4◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 12◆Staff Members: 3(Chief of)
Takamatsu Branch
Secretariat of the
Branch◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 4◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 4◆Staff Members: 3(Chief of)
Fukuoka Branch
Secretariat of the
Branch◆Jurors (of whom one concurrently serves as Chiefof the Branch): 5◆Commissioned Attorneys in Charge of Providing
Consultations: 13◆Staff Members: 4(Head of) Shizuoka
Consultation OfficeSecretariat of theConsultation Office◆ Commissioned Attorneys in Charge ofProviding Consultations (of whom one
concurrently serves as Head of theConsultation Office) : 8 ◆Staff Members: 3
Note: The Headquarters and 7 Branches have Deliberation Boards. Each Board consists of a legal scholar, a former judge and an
experienced attorney, making a total of 3 jurors.

18
17

Councilors and Directors●Councilors: (as of August 1, 2021) (Honorific titles omitted)
Toyohiro Nomura(President, Japan Energy Law Institute)

Kiyoe Kado

(Professor Emeritus, Rikkyo University)

Shōichi Ogano(Professor, College of Law, Chuo University)

Toshiyuki Satō(President, Japan Traffic Safety Education Association)

Kenji Ōyama

(Former Executive Director, Japan Traffic Safety
Association)(Former Executive Director, Japan Automobile Federation)

Masakazu Kume

Chikara Kawakita (Former Vice President, General Insurance Rating
Organization of Japan)
Jin-ichi Sakamoto (Managing Director, General Insurance Association ofJapan)
Yuzuru Onishi(General Manager, Automobile Department, National
Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural Cooperatives)
Takeshi Hamada (Managing Executive Officer, National Federation ofWorkers and Consumers Kyosai Cooperatives)

Shunsuke Marushima (Director, Japan Legal Support
Center)(Professor Emeritus, Kyushu
Naoyuki Isogawa
University)(Professor Emeritus, Hiroshima
Shigeru Toriyabe
University)
Kazuyuki Yoshinaga(Professor, Graduate School ofLaw, Tohoku University)
Akifumi Imamura(Attorney)
Rumiko Hasegawa(Attorney)

Atsuko Hara

(Attorney)

Tomoko Matoba(Attorney)

Teruki Yamashita(Attorney)●Directors: (as of August 1, 2021) (Honorific titles omitted)
President

Ikufumi Niimi(Attorney, Professor Emeritus, Meiji University)

Director

Michitarō Urakawa(Attorney, Professor Emeritus, Waseda University)

DirectorShin-ichirō Hayakawa (Professor, School of Law, Senshu University)

Director

Toshifumi Shibata(Attorney, Former Chief Judge, Tokyo High Court)

Director

Shintarō Katō

(Attorney, Former Chief Judge, Tokyo High Court)

Director

Takeji Yamamoto(Attorney)

DirectorShin-ichirō Tōyama

(Attorney)

Director

Nobuhisa Yasui(Attorney)

Director

Takeaki Noda

(Chief of Nagoya Branch, Former President, Nagoya District Court)

Director

Hiroshi Yamazaki(Chief of Sapporo Branch, Attorney)

Director

Yukio Yamaguchi(Chief of Fukuoka Branch, Attorney, Former President, Fukuoka District Court)

Director

Hidenobu Konishi(Chief of Hiroshima Branch, Attorney, Former President, Hiroshima District Court)

Director

Jun Miura(Chief of Osaka Branch, Attorney, Former Chief Judge, Osaka High Court)

Director

Haruo Yanase(Chief of Takamatsu Branch, Attorney)

Director

Kōichi Tamura(Chief of Sendai Branch, Attorney, Former President, Takamatsu High Court)

Managing Director Atsuhiro Takeuchi(Chief of Secretariat of Headquarters (Full-time))

Auditor

Masayuki Yoshikawa(Certified Public Accountant)

Auditor

Wataru Maekawa(Attorney)

1918

Financial Statement (Based on Fiscal 2020)
1. Balance Sheet (Outline)

2. Statement of Activities Summary(Outline)(unit: 1,000yen)

Account(unit: 1,000yen)

AmountAccount

ⅠAssets

Ⅰ Changes in unrestricted net assets

1. Current assets

1. Operating activities

Cash and deposits

484,288

Accounts receivable2

Prepaid expenses

13,484

Advance payments

178

Total current assets

Amount(1) Revenues and gains from operating activities
Income from basic fund3

Income from restricted assets

29

Donations

497,952

Miscellaneous revenue
Total revenues and gains from operating activities

2. Non-current assets

1,023,900
6
1,023,938

Assets for basic funds

30,000Restricted assets

267,824

Other non-current assets

241,462

Expenses for business activities

917,160

539,286

General and administrative expenses

56,582

1,037,238

Total expenses and losses from operating activities

973,742

Total changes in operating activities for the year

50,196

Total non-current assets
Total assets(2) Expenses and losses from operating activities

Ⅱ Liabilities
1. Current liabilities

2. Non-operating activities

Lease obligation

5,689(1) Revenues from non-operating activities

Accounts payable

43,789Total revenues from non-operating activities

Accrued expenses

6,282

0

66

(2) Expenses and losses from non-operating activities

Deposits received

4,872

Loss on disposal of office equipment

Accrued bonuses

18,048Loss on disposal of software

78,746

Total expenses and losses form non-operating activities

359

Total changes in non-operating activities for the year△359

Accrued taxes

Total current liabilities
2. Non-current liabilities

0359

Lease obligation

7,976

Total changes in unrestricted net assets for the year

49,837Long-term accounts payable

1,750

Unrestricted net assets at beginning of year

638,995

Accrued retirement benefits

229,934

Unrestricted net assets at end of year

688,832

Total non-current liabilities

239,660

Total liabilities

318,406
Ⅱ Changes in restricted net assets

Ⅲ Net assets
1. Restricted net assets(Allocated to assets for basic fund)
2. Unrestricted net assets(Allocated to restricted assets)
Total net assets

Total liabilities and net assets

Income from basic fund3

30,000Transfer to unrestricted net assets△3(30,000)

Total changes in restricted net assets for the year0688,832

Restricted net assets at beginning of year

30,000(36,140)

Restricted net assets at end of year

30,000718,832

1,037,238

Ⅲ Net assets at end of year20
19

718,832

Terms of Use of the Center
Tentative Translation: This is not an officially-authorized translation and is provided for reference only.
Only the original Japanese version is legally valid.
The following terms define what persons who use legal consultations, and procedures for mediation for amicablesettlement and deliberations provided by the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Public
Interest Incorporated Foundation are asked to familiarize themselves and comply with. As it is a precondition forusers to comply with the Terms, please be sure to read them before applying to the Center and then submit thenecessary application forms.
The handling of personal information is stipulated in Article 11. This is important. Please be sure to read theprovisions carefully.
If anything is unclear in these terms, please contact the headquarters, the branch or the consultation officewhere you have made a reservation to make an application for the use of ADR services provided by the Center.

The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes,
Public Interest Incorporated Foundation
Terms of Use(Business of the Center)
1(1) The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Public Interest Incorporated Foundation(hereafter referred to as ‘the Center’) defines its main business as the provision of legal consultations,mediation for amicable settlements and deliberations (hereafter referred to as ‘these procedures’) in orderto solve disputes pertaining to damages caused by automobile accidents.
(2) The following disputes are not covered under these procedures.
① Liability disputes that arise from accidents between cyclists and pedestrians, or among cyclists.
② Disputes that are related to payments of claims for coverage by insurance companies or mutual aid
cooperatives with which the victims themselves have made contracts such as payments for passengers’
personal accident coverage or personal accident compensation coverage.
(3) The following cases are not dealt with under these procedures. However, if either the perpetrator, or the
insurance company or the cooperative (hereafter the insurance company or the cooperative is referred toas ‘the insurance company, etc.’) agrees with these procedures, the Center may proceed with theseprocedures.
① Where the perpetrator who caused an accident has not taken out voluntary automobile insurance ormutual aid.
② Where the voluntary automobile insurance (or mutual aid) that the perpetrator who caused an accident
has taken out does not provide the victim’s right to make a claim against the insurance company, etc.,
directly in its policy.
③ Where the voluntary automobile mutual aid that the perpetrator who caused an accident has taken out
is from any organization other than the following:- The National Mutual Insurance Federation of Agricultural Cooperatives,- The National Federation of Workers and Consumers Kyosai Insurance Cooperatives,- The National Mutual Insurance Federation of Truck Transport Co-operatives,- The National Federation of Motor Insurance Cooperatives, or- The National Federation of Fire Insurance Co-operatives for Small Business.
(Application for use of the Center’s procedures)
2(1) A victim of a traffic accident (hereafter referred to as ‘the petitioner’) who intends to use these proceduresis required to submit an application form, provided by the Center, for his or her own liability damages
dispute arising from an automobile accident. The petitioner may apply orally to use these procedures only
if there is a special reason such as the applicant has difficulty in filling in the application form.
(2) Applications must be made either at the Center’s headquarters, one of the branch offices, or one of theconsultation offices according to the location of the petitioner’s residence, or of the accident, as shown in
the Annexed List of Locations, except where the location for the application has been agreed upon, in
advance, by both the victim and the perpetrator or his or her insurance company, etc., (hereafter theperpetrator, or his or her insurance company, etc., is referred to as ‘the counterparty’). However, thisprovision does not apply when the Center determines that there are avoidable circumstances for thepetitioner to apply to the headquarters, one of the branch offices, or one of the consultation offices thatdiffer from the ones described in the Annexed List.

21
20

Terms of Use of the Center(3) If an application for the use of these procedures has been made to a different office, contrary to (2) above,
and which is then identified in the course of proceeding with mediation for an amicable settlement, thecase may be transferred to either the headquarters, one of the branch offices, or one of the consultation
offices described in the Annexed List.
(4) The petitioner must submit, as instructed by the Center, basic materials regarding his or her particular case,such as the Certificate of Traffic Accident, a rough sketch of the circumstances under which the accident
occurred, and a medical certificate, etc., either when submitting their application form or by the date theCenter designates.
(Cases where the Center will not engage in mediation)
3 The Center will not engage in mediation for amicable settlements in the following cases.
① The case has already been filed for action or is being conciliated in court at the time a reservation formediation was accepted by the Center. The Center will still engage in mediation even if thecounterparties have filed for action or a conciliation request in court after the Center has accepted
reservations for mediation.
② The case is undergoing procedures at any other alternative dispute resolution organizations such as
the Nichibenren Traffic Accident Consultation Center or the Sonpo ADR Center (General Insurance
Consultation and ADR Center).
③ The case has ultimately been resolved between the petitioner and the counterparty (hereafter thepetitioner and the counterparty are referred to as ‘the parties’) outside of the Center by such means asa final judgment resulting from filing an action or the completion of an amicable settlement by procedureof conciliation in court.
④ The case is deemed to be an application for mediation despite having an unjustifiable purpose such asa fraudulent claim.
⑤ The petitioner is deemed not to have a legitimate right to or authority regarding the claim.
⑥ The conduct of the claim is suspected of being against Article 72 of the Attorney Act.
⑦ It becomes difficult for the Center to proceed with mediation due to a violation of the Terms of Use by
the parties.
⑧ The claim is the same case for which mediation procedures have been terminated based on Article 23.
⑨ It is deemed to be inappropriate for the Center to proceed with mediation due to reasons other than anyof the above.
(Costs)4 The Center offers these procedures free of charge.
However, any costs incurred in preparing any necessary materials to help solve disputes such as theCertificate of Traffic Accident, medical certificates, etc., fees for transportation to and from the Center, andcommunication fees (telephone, fax, etc.) or similar, shall be borne by the parties themselves.
(Consultants in charge and Jurors)
5 Mediation at the Center is provided by commissioned attorneys who are neutral and fair (hereafter referred
to as ‘consultants in charge’). Deliberations at the Center are provided by deliberation boards consisting of
neutral and fair jurors selected from a number of experienced academics and attorneys (hereafter referred toas ‘deliberation boards’).
Consultants in charge and jurors conduct such procedures by positioning themselves not as
representatives of the parties but as third parties who are fair and neutral.
(Change of consultant)
6 If a consultant in charge has a special relationship with the parties, any one of the parties can ask the Centerto change the consultant. (This does not apply where one of the parties only disagrees with or cannot get on
well with the consultant.) In such cases, the Center will determine the relationship between the consultant
and the party concerned. If the Center judges the request reasonable, the Center will arrange for anotherconsultant in charge.
(Advancing mediation procedures)
7(1) Mediation at the Center will be carried out within a time frame of about one hour per session. The consultant
in charge will make every effort to settle the case promptly.
(2) The parties are required to follow all instructions given by the consultant in charge and staff members of
the Center regarding the procedures for mediating an amicable settlement, aiming to settle each individual
case fairly and appropriately.
(3) When the parties receive instructions from the consultant in charge during the course of mediation, they

22
21

Terms of Use of the Center

are required to promptly submit any materials that form the basis of their petition regarding their individualcase.
If no materials are submitted and the consultant in charge judges that it is impossible to calculate theproper amount of damages, the procedure for mediating an amicable settlement may be terminated.
(Responsibilities and obligations of the parties)
8 The parties are obliged to comply with the Terms of Use and must not act in a manner resembling any of thefollowing:① Insisting on false facts when the parties use mediation provided by the Center② Defaming, slandering or taking intimidating action towards the counterparty of an individual case, theconsultant in charge and/or staff members of the Center.
③ Taking any other actions that might prevent the Center from conducting its business in a smooth andfair manner as described in Annex 1.
(Handling of materials, etc.)
9 Copies of originals may, in principle, be acceptable as materials that the parties need to submit to the Center.
In principle, materials submitted to the Center by the parties will not be returned.
(Involvement of a third party)
10 The parties cannot allow any person other than their representative attorney to become involved by asking athird party to participate in or accompany them during procedures for mediating amicable settlements.
However, such may not apply if the consultant in charge considers there to be special circumstances in thecase and the party submits any necessary documents, including Power of Attorney, as instructed by theCenter.
(Handling of personal information)
11(1) The purpose of using personal information pertaining to the parties that the Center obtains (hereafterreferred to as ‘personal information’), and the method of obtaining and providing such information to a third
party are as follows:① Purpose of use
The purpose of using personal information at the Center is limited to whatever is necessary to conduct
legal consultations, mediation for amicable settlements, and deliberations relating to damages resulting
from automobile accidents, and to carry out its related business procedures smoothly.
② How the information is obtained
The Center obtains personal information with the consent of the party who owns the information.
③ How the information is provided to a third party
The Center may possibly provide a third party, other than the Center itself (such as the perpetrator or
the insurance company, etc., that form the counterparty, medical institutions, or automobile appraisers,etc.) with personal information which the Center obtains in order to enable the Center to conduct its
business or where it is required based on related laws and regulations.
When the counterparty provides the Center with any related materials such as a medical certificate
and/or a document stating the physician’s professional opinion, etc., the party is required to obtain theconsent of the petitioner him or herself in advance.
(2) If consent relating to items ② and ③ of paragraph (1) cannot be obtained, there are cases where theprocedures may sometimes come to an end.
(Presenting the parties with a proposal for settlement)
12 The consultant in charge sorts out the allegations the parties have made and then makes every effort topresent the parties with a settlement proposal promptly.
(Suspension of mediating an amicable settlement)
13 The consultant in charge may suspend mediation even after the consultant has started such a procedurewhen any one of the following facts for such suspension has been revealed. If the procedure for mediation
has been suspended, the consultant in charge will notify the parties of the effect in writing.
① The petitioner is undergoing treatment.
② Procedures for the approval of permanent disability grade that the petitioner has applied for are inprocess.
③ Procedures to protest against the approval of permanent disability grade filed by the petitioner are inprocess.
④ Procedures for filing by the petitioner with the Dispute Settlement Organization for Compulsory

23
22

Terms of Use of the Center
Automobile Liability Insurance and Mutual Aid Claims for mediating settlement of a dispute regarding
the approval of permanent disability grade are in process.
⑤ Cases where the petitioner has notified the consultant in charge of his or her intention to exercise theirright to any of the above applications or filings described in ② to ④ above.
⑥ Circumstances other than the above where it is deemed difficult for the consultant in charge to proceedwith mediation.
(Disposition of cases suspended for a long period)
14 The consultant in charge may cease mediation for a case which has been suspended pursuant to theprovisions in the preceding Article, if the conditions under which the mediation has been suspended have notbeen cleared up even 6 months after such notification under the preceding Article was released. However,such action may not be applied to cases where there are legitimate reasons why the situation has not been
resolved.
(Termination of mediation)
15 Mediation shall be terminated in the following cases:① When an amicable settlement has been attained.
② When the consultant in charge judges that there is no expectation for the case to be settled amicably,
and mediation ends unsuccessfully.
③ When the petitioner withdraws his or her case for an amicable settlement.
④ When the insurance company, etc., requests that the dispute be solved through judicial proceedings (arequest for the case to be transferred to litigation) and then the Center approves such a request for thecase to be transferred to and settled by litigation.
⑤ When it becomes clear that the case is applicable to any item under Article 3.
⑥ When the consultant in charge ceases mediation based on Article 14.
⑦ When it is recognized that the petitioner does not wish to visit the Center again to attend meetings forwhich the day of the next meeting has not been determined.
(Petition for deliberation of the case)16(1) In the case of Article 15, item ②, the consultant in charge shall inform the parties that mediation has ended
unsuccessfully.
(2) Any of the parties may make a petition for their case to be deliberated within 14 days after receiving noticeof paragraph (1). However, if the counterparty applies for deliberation, he or she must obtain the consent
of the petitioner.
(3) In the case of an application for deliberation concerning physical damage, there may be some cases where
it is required that the letter of consent accepting the deliberation board’s arbitral recommendation besubmitted by the petitioner in advance.
(Circulation of the case to the deliberation board)
17 When the parties apply for deliberation based on paragraph (2) of Article 16, the consultant in chargeorganizes points of dispute between the parties which have become clear during mediation, and thenproceeds with the relevant procedures for filing the case for deliberation to the board.
(Provisions for mediation correspondingly applied to deliberations)
18 Article 6, paragraphs (2) and (3) of Article 7, Article 8 and Article 10 are applied in similar fashion to proceduresfor deliberation.
(Deliberation and issuing arbitral recommendations)
19(1) Deliberation boards listen to explanations and respective petitions regarding individual cases fromconsultants in charge and the parties themselves, and then make arbitral recommendations. The parties
can provide such necessary explanations and state their own petitions by attending meetings of thedeliberation board.
(2) Deliberation boards may determine that a case is unsuitable for deliberation without taking the steps
outlined in paragraph (1) and refrain from deliberating and issuing arbitral recommendations in thefollowing cases.
① The case is deemed applicable to any item under Article 3.
② The case does not satisfy certain conditions* in deliberating physical damage disputes which thedeliberation board considers necessary for settlement of the case.
* The following is an example applicable to such conditions.

24
23

Terms of Use of the Center
Where both parties suffer physical damage as a result of a collision between two cars and bothparties are at fault, it becomes a precondition for the deliberation board to deliberate and makean arbitral recommendation that both owners of the vehicles (the claimants for damages) consent
to accepting the arbitral recommendation on damage to each of the parties.
③ Other cases which are recognized as being unsuitable for deliberation.
）（Withdrawal of a petition for deliberation）
20 The parties may withdraw their petitions for deliberation at any time.
However, if the counterparty withdraws his or her petition for deliberation, he or she needs to obtain theconsent of the petitioner.
(Response to an arbitral recommendation and retraction of consent)
21(1) The petitioner is required to respond to the Center as to whether he or she agrees or disagrees with thearbitral recommendation within 14 days of the day that he or she was notified of such recommendation. If
there is no response from the petitioner after this period, he or she will be regarded as disagreeing withthe arbitral recommendation.
(2) Even if the petitioner agrees with the arbitral recommendation, he or she may be regarded as withdrawing
his or her agreement if he or she does not agree to drawing up an out-of-court settlement or an instrumentof discharge.
(Binding power of an arbitral recommendation)
22 In principle, the petitioner is not bound by an arbitral recommendation. However, the insurance companies,
etc., which have made agreements with the Center are obliged to respect arbitral recommendations.
(Termination of the procedures)
23 These procedures shall be terminated in the following cases, with the result that the relationship between theparties and the Center is also terminated.
① Where mediation for an amicable settlement has been terminated based on Article 15.
However, this will not apply to cases where the petition has been made based on Paragraph (2) ofArticle 16.
② Where the case has been determined unsuitable for deliberation by the deliberation board based on
Paragraph (2) of Article 19.
③ Where the petition for deliberation has been withdrawn based on Article 20.
④ Where the petitioner has answered that he or she disagrees with the arbitral recommendation basedon Paragraph (1) of Article 21 (this includes where the petitioner is regarded as disagreeing with thearbitral recommendation because the time allowed for the answer has expired), and the petitioner isregarded as withdrawing his or her agreement with the arbitral recommendation based on Paragraph(2) of the same Article.
⑤ Where the case has been settled amicably between the parties based on the arbitral recommendationof the deliberation board.
⑥ Where the parties have not followed the provisions stated in Terms of Use, or where the consultant incharge or the deliberation board has recognized that termination of these procedures is appropriate
following Paragraph (3) of Article 7, Article 8, or Paragraph (2) of Article 11.
(Cases where a second application is not acceptable)
24 In individual cases for which procedures have been terminated based on Article 23, a second application will
not be accepted. However, this will not apply to cases where conciliation at the court has failed to reachsettlement among the cases applicable to Item ① of Article 3, and where the procedures have failed to reacha settlement at some other alternative dispute resolution organizations based on Item ② of the same Article.
(Management of prescription)
25 The right to claim damages is subject to extinctive prescription. Use of these procedures at the Center shallnot cause the suspension of the running of prescriptions.
In order to suspend the running of prescriptions, the petitioner is required to take legal procedures to nullify
the commencement of the prescription by him or herself.
(Revision of the Terms)
26 These Terms of Use may be revised without prior notification. Any revised Terms shall be applied toprocedures being dealt with at time of the revision.
Revised on October 1st, 2015.

25
24

Terms of Use of the Center<Annexed List>
Annexed List of Locations described in Paragraph (2) of Article 2 (Application foruse of the Center’s procedures) of the Terms of Use
Applications for the use of services provided by the Center can be accepted either at the headquarters, one ofbranch offices or one of the consultation offices depending on the location of the petitioner’s residence or of theaccident.
Offices accepting applications

Location of the petitioner’s residence or of the accident

Sapporo Branch Office

Hokkaido

Sendai Branch Office
Tokyo Headquarters
Saitama Consultation OfficeMiyagi Prefecture, Aomori Prefecture, Iwate Prefecture, Akita
Prefecture, Yamagata Prefecture and Fukushima Prefecture.
Tokyo, Kanagawa Prefecture, Chiba Prefecture,
Yamanashi Prefecture, Ibaraki Prefecture, Saitama Prefecture,
Gunma Prefecture, Tochigi Prefecture, Nagano Prefecture andNiigata Prefecture.

Nagoya Branch Office

Aichi Prefecture, Gifu Prefecture and Mie Prefecture.

Shizuoka Consultation Office

Shizuoka Prefecture

Kanazawa Consultation OfficeOsaka Branch Office
Hiroshima Branch OfficeTakamatsu Branch Office
Fukuoka Branch Office

Ishikawa Prefecture, Toyama Prefecture and Fukui Prefecture.
Osaka, Hyogo Prefecture, Kyoto, Shiga Prefecture,
Nara Prefecture and Wakayama Prefecture.
Hiroshima Prefecture, Okayama Prefecture,
Yamaguchi Prefecture, Tottori Prefecture and Shimane Prefecture.
Kagawa Prefecture, Ehime Prefecture, Tokushima Prefecture andKochi Prefecture.
Fukuoka Prefecture, Saga Prefecture, Nagasaki Prefecture,
Kumamoto Prefecture, Oita Prefecture, Miyazaki Prefecture,
Kagoshima Prefecture and Okinawa Prefecture.

<Annex 1>
The following points, 1 to 9, are actions that might interfere with the Center conducting its business in a smoothand fair manner based on Item ③ of Article 8 (Responsibilities and obligations of the parties) of the Terms ofUse.
1 Obstructing the procedures by infringing upon the provisions of Paragraph (2) or (3) of Article 7 (Advancing
mediation procedures).
2 Not attending meetings on the day(s) designated by the Center, or not responding to a request to attend ameeting without a legitimate reason.
3 Contacting staff members, consultants in charge and jurors without obtaining their prior consent by telephone,or persistently demanding to have a meeting.
4 Making an application for the use of the Center’s procedures, or attempting to receive such procedures by
misrepresenting the victim him or herself or the status of the victim’s family, etc., or pretending to be the victim
him or herself.
5 Unacceptable behavior towards other users such as shouting, behaving violently, drinking or smoking within
the Center’s premises, including the waiting or consultation rooms.
6 Bringing hazardous materials including knives, firearms and volatile fuels into the Center.
7 Recording or photographing the content of such procedures relating to individual cases.
8 Publishing the content of the procedures for individual cases on the Internet or other means without priorpermission of the Center.
9 Performing other similar acts which the Center considers equivalent to the above.

26
25

Personal Information Protection Policy
Tentative Translation: This is not an officially-authorized translation and is provided for reference only.
Only the original Japanese version is legally valid.

Personal Information Protection Policy
The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Public Interest Incorporated Foundation (hereafterreferred to as ‘the Center’) ensures that it thoroughly protects personal information by clearly defining its PersonalProtection Policy, and makes every effort to properly manage and use personal information retained by the Centerby rigorously educating its jurors, commissioned attorneys and staff members so as to ensure they handle
personal information in the correct manner. The Center also endeavors to properly respond to changes insituations pertaining to the handling of personal information.
1. Acquisition of personal information
The Center acquires personal information to the extent it is necessary for it to conduct its business andsmoothly perform administrative work as listed under Purpose of Use described in 2 below.
2. Purpose of use of personal information
The Center handles personal information it acquires to the extent it is necessary for it to conduct its businessand perform administrative work related to legal consultations, mediation for amicable settlements (hereafter,‘mediation’) and deliberations regarding liability damages caused by automobile accidents. If the Centerchanges the purpose of its use of such personal information, it will inform the owners themselves of thepersonal information, in principle, in writing, etc., with regard to the content of any such change, or publish
such changes on its website.
3. Provision of personal information to a third party
The Center will not provide personal information to a third party without the consent of its owner, except in thefollowing cases.
(1) Where it is based on relevant laws and regulations.
(2) Where it is necessary for the protection of the life, body or property of an individual, and it is also difficult
to obtain the consent of the owner him or herself of the personal information.
(3) Where it is especially necessary for improving public health or promoting the sound growth of children
and it is also difficult to obtain the consent of the owner him or herself of the personal information.
(4) Where it is necessary for cooperating with a state organ, a local government, or an individual or a business
operator entrusted by any such organ or body in executing its work as prescribed by laws and regulations
and where obtaining the consent of the owner him or herself of the personal information is likely to impede
the execution of its work.
(5) Where the Center provides personal information to insurance companies, mutual aid cooperatives,
medical institutions or automobile appraisers to the extent it is necessary for it to conduct its business.
4. Measures taken to protect personal information
The Center endeavors to protect and take other security measures to prevent unauthorized computer access,loss, destruction, falsification and leakage of personal information which it deals with. Where the Center
outsources the handling of personal information to external organizations such as information processing
providers, etc., the Center also endeavors to similarly protect and take security measures with regard to
personal information.
5. Notification of the purpose of the utilization, disclosure, correction, discontinuance of utilization anddeletion, etc., of personal information based on the Act on the Protection of Personal Information
Details regarding requests for the above are described in ‘Procedures for requests for notification of the
purpose of utilization, disclosure, correction, discontinuance of utilization and deletion, etc., of personal
information retained by the Center’.
If anything is unclear, please contact the personal information consultation desk below.
The Center processes such requests after confirming the claimant is the owner him or herself of the personal
information.
If there is a request for correction of personal information, the Center will correct any information that isfound to be inaccurate after conducting necessary research.
6. Points of contact
Points of contact regarding the above matters comprise the headquarters, one of the branch offices or one of
the consultation offices of the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes, Public Interest
Incorporated Foundation that retain the relevant person’s personal information.
Headquarters Business Department, The Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes,
Public Interest Incorporated Foundation Tel. No.: 03-3346-1756(Telephone numbers of individual branch offices and consultation offices can be found in the list of
locations on the back cover.)Rules relating to the Center’s personal information protection are as outlined below and are published on
the Center’s website.
(1) Personal Information Protection Policy(2) Personal Information Protection Rules(3) Procedures for requests for notification of the purpose of the utilization, disclosure, correction,
discontinuance of utilization and deletion, etc., of personal information retained by the Center

27
26

Flowchart of Legal Consultations,Mediation for Amicable Settlements and Deliberations
Procedures for legal consultations, mediation for amicable settlements and deliberations provided by
the Center are as follows.
(Some aspects of how these procedures are handled may differ slightly among the organization’s headquarters,
its branches and consultation offices.)

Petitioner (Victim)
Reservation for application for the use of theCenter’s procedures by phone.

Acceptance of the reservation.
(Date for the petitioner to visit the Center
determined)
An application form and Terms of Use aresent to the petitioner.

［Initial Consultation］
The petitioner visits the Center.
(Acceptance of application)
An application form and other documents
submitted to the Center.
Face-to-face consultation provided by anattorney in charge of providing consultations.
(Date of next meeting determined)

Informing thecounterparty of thedate of consultation(Request for attendance)

Procedures end after
providing legal
consultation alone.

Mediation is
unsuccessful. (The parties
disagree with thesettlement proposal.)Request formediation

A petition for the case to
be deliberated is filed.
(If the parties wish thecase to be deliberated.)［Mediation for an amicable settlement］
With both the petitioner and the counterparty
in attendance, mediation for settlement isprovided by an attorney in charge ofproviding consultations.

The case is transferred todeliberation. (If accepted.)
The parties are notified ofthe date of thedeliberation meeting.

Mediation terminatedas a result of
the Center’s approval
for the case to betransferred tolitigation.

Settlement proposal presented
to both parties.

Deliberations are madeand an arbitral
recommendation isdelivered with both thepetitioner and theinsurance company, etc.,
in attendance.

Both parties consent to the settlement
proposal.
(The case is closed as a result of anamicable settlement having been reached.)(Out-of-court settlement document /instrument of discharge prepared.)

The case is closed as thepetitioner agrees with thearbitral recommendation.
(Out-of-court settlement
document / instrument ofdischarge prepared.)Transferring the case todeliberation rejected.
Case closed.

The case is closed as thepetitioner rejects thearbitral recommendation.
(Termination ofproceedings)（Resolution throughlitigation or other means）

Note 1. ‘Petitioner’ means the victim of an automobile accident.
2. ‘Counterparty’ means the perpetrator, or the insurance company or the mutual aid corporative with which theperpetrator has made a contract for automobile insurance or automobile mutual aid.
3. If the case relates to physical damage alone and not to bodily injury, the procedure for mediation for an amicablesettlement will, in principle, start from the initial meeting in order to reach a prompt settlement.

28
27

List of locations of the Japan Center for Settlement of Traffic Accident Disputes
Tokyo
Headquarters

25th F., Shinjuku Monolith Building, 2-3-1, Nishishinjuku,
Shinjuku Ward, Tokyo, 〒163-0925

TEL. 03-3346-1756
FAX. 03-3346-8714

SapporoBranch

4th F., Sapporo Bengoshi-Kaikan Building, Kita-1-Jo Nishi-10Chome, Chuo Ward, Sapporo City, 〒060-0001

TEL. 011-281-3241
FAX. 011-261-4361

Sendai
Branch11th F., Sendai Daiichi-Seimei Tower Building, 4-6-1,
Ichibancho, Aoba Ward, Sendai City, 〒980-0811

TEL. 022-263-7231
FAX. 022-268-1504

NagoyaBranch24th F., Sumitomo-Seimei Nagoya Building, 2-14-19,
Meiekiminami, Nakamura Ward, Nagoya City, 〒450-0003

TEL. 052-581-9491
FAX. 052-581-9493

Osaka
BranchSouth Side of 4th F., Kodera-Plaza Building, 2-5-23,
Kitahama, Chuo Ward, Osaka City, 〒541-0041

TEL. 06-6227-0277
FAX. 06-6227-9882

Hiroshima
Branch5th F., NREG Hiroshima-Tatemachi Building, 1-20, Tatemachi,
Naka Ward, Hiroshima City, 〒730-0032

TEL. 082-249-5421
FAX: 082-245-7981

Takamatsu
Branch3th F., Kagawa-ken Bengoshi-Kaikan Building, 2-22,
Marunouchi, Takamatsu City, 〒760-0033

TEL. 087-822-5005
FAX. 087-823-1972

Fukuoka
Branch10th F., Fukuoka-Tenjin Fukoku-Seimei Building, 1-9-17,
Tenjin, Chuo Ward, Fukuoka City, 〒810-0001

TEL. 092-721-0881
FAX. 092-716-1889

Saitama
Consultation Office

7th F., Omiya-Shimocho 1-Chome Building, 1-8-1, Shimocho,
Omiya Ward, Saitama City, 〒330-0844

TEL. 048-650-5271
FAX. 048-650-5272

Kanazawa
Consultation Office

12th F., Kanazawa Fukoku-Seimei Ekimae Building, 2-11-7,
Honmachi, Kanazawa City, 〒920-0853

TEL. 076-234-6650
FAX. 076-234-6651

Shizuoka
Consultation Office

4th F., Taiju-Seimei Sizuoka-Ekimae Building, 11-7,
Kuroganecho, Aoi Ward, Shizuoka City, 〒420-0851

TEL. 054-255-5528
FAX. 054-255-5529

The Center’s Website (Japanese only)

http://www.jcstad.or.jp/
Printed: March, 2022

29