International Arbitration in JapanPurpose and Contents of the Booklet
The Booklet aims to describe the present situation of international
arbitration in Japan and to provide related information.

International Arbitration is the
Global Standard for Dispute Resolution
in International Transactions

We would be delighted if the Booklet could work for your better understandingof the present situation of international arbitration in Japan.

Japan International Dispute Resolution Center

Arbitration is a procedure where the disputing parties appoint
third party arbitrators and disputes are attempted to be resolved
through the decision of such arbitrators.
In comparison with litigation, arbitration has many advantages
such as the facileness of enforcement in foreign countries, it isundisclosed and corporate secrets are kept confidential, theparties may appoint specialized and neutral arbitrators, there is
generally no appeal so dispute resolution may be made promptly,
the use of courts in countries where trust in the judiciary is low
may be avoided.

INDEX
01

“International Arbitration” is the Global Standard for Dispute Resolution in International Transactions

04

Appeal of Japan as the Seat of Arbitration

06

Arbitration Related Legal System in Japan

08

Voices from the world

12

The Japan International Dispute Resolution Center

18

Japan Association of Arbitrators

19

The Japan Federation of Bar Associations

20

Arbitration Institutions in Japan21

The Japan Commercial Arbitration Association

22

The Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration Center

23

The International Arbitration Center in Tokyo

24

Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel

25

Japan Sports Arbitration Agency

26

The Japan Shipping Exchange, Inc.

27

ADR Centers of Bar Associations

28

Final Remarks

Due to such advantages, in cross-border transactions andinvestments, resolution of business disputes by international
arbitration is the global standard.

01

Litigation and Arbitration

General Flow of International Arbitration

Where a legal dispute occurs in transactions
with foreign companies, the main methods ofresolution of such dispute are “litigation” and“arbitration.” In litigation, the courts of a
specific country are used, and procedures andlanguage generally cannot be selected by theparties, and in addition there are such risks as
the judge being unfamiliar with the commercial
practices of the field or corporate secrets are
not kept confidential due to disclosure of theproceedings as a general rule. Furthermore,even if a judgment is won in Japan, compulsory
enforcement based upon such judgment in aforeign country may be difficult due to the lackof recognition system of foreign judgement.

The general flow of international arbitration is as follows.

As a dispute resolution method to avoid suchdisadvantages of litigation and a more promptand free method suited to international
business, “international arbitration” has beenused in the world since long past.

Occurrenceof a dispute

Submissionof the written
allegation andevidentiary
documents, etc.

Filing forarbitration

Holdingof the hearing

Appointmentof thearbitrators

Arbitral award

Preparationof the hearingschedule

Recognition
andenforcementof thearbitral award

Advantages of International Arbitration

Using International Arbitration

There are many advantages where dispute resolution is made through international arbitration. For instance,since the parties may appoint the arbitrators who are the decision-makers, high quality decisions may beobtained by appointing persons with specialized expertise as the decision-makers depending upon thecharacteristics of the dispute. In addition, arbitration typically concludes at the first instance, and since also
flexible measures may be taken such as setting the hearing dates consecutively and in concentration, prompt
dispute resolution may be realized. Furthermore, procedures are typically performed undisclosed, and thecontents of the decision may also be kept undisclosed.

An agreement between the parties (an arbitration agreement) is required to use international arbitration,
which is set forth in the contract as an “arbitration clause.” It is possible for the parties to commence
arbitration by making an arbitration agreement after the occurrence of a dispute even if an arbitration clauseis not set forth in the contract; however, it is desirable to set forth an “arbitration clause” in the contract inadvance because it may be difficult to obtain an arbitration agreement once after a dispute occurs.

Flexibility

Facileness of Compulsory Enforcement

Specialization and Neutrality

Nondisclosure and Confidentiality

The parties may freely select theprocedures and language

The parties may appoint neutral
arbitrators with specialized expertise

Matters such as the seat of arbitration※, arbitration agency, and arbitration procedure rules to be used are
generally provided in an arbitration clause, and other than that, the language to be used and the number ofarbitrators may be provided. The major arbitration agencies in the world disclose model clauses. For
instance, the Japan Commercial Arbitration Association (JCAA) discloses the following model clause.

Compulsory enforcement in a foreign country based
upon the arbitral award is facile

Hearings are undisclosed as a general rule andcorporate secrets are kept confidential

Promptness

Procedures typically conclude at the first instanceFurthermore, there is the advantage that the enforcement of the arbitral award is facile worldwide due to theorganization of the multinational treaty: the “Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Awards (New York Convention)”※.
In light of these advantages, arbitration is heavily used worldwide for the resolution of international businessdisputes.
※The New York Convention is a treaty for the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards which was formulated by the United
Nations in 1958 and effectuated in 1959. There are currently more than 160 member countries. Japan has been a member country since
1961 and arbitral awards of Japan will be recognized and enforced in a member country of the said treaty,including U.S.,U.K. and China.

02

Insertion of anarbitration
clause in acontract

Model clause of JCAA
(in the case it is in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules)
All disputes, controversies or differences arising out of or in connection with this contract shall befinally settled by arbitration in accordance with the Commercial Arbitration Rules of The Japan
Commercial Arbitration Association. The place of the arbitration shall be [city and country].

※ “Seat of arbitration” is a legal concept which functions to determine such matters as which countryʼs court should be involved in thearbitration proedings (international jurisdiction), which countryʼs laws should be applicable to the procedures to be followed in relation to theprogression of the arbitration proceedings (governing law of arbitration procedures), and furthermore, is the arbitral award of a “foreigncountry” in relation to the New York Convention which is a treaty for the recognition and enforcement of “foreign arbitral awards.” Since it
is a legal concept, the “hearing venue”, which is the actual location where the hearing related to the arbitration proceedings are held, maydiffer from the “seat of arbitration”. On the other hand, even if the “hearing venue” is established in multiple countries due to the witnessesʼ
location or convenience of the parties, or even if the “hearing venue” does not physically exist due to all procedures being performed online,
one “seat of arbitration” as a legal concept must necessarily be selected in order to function as a criteria for the determination of the above.

03

Appeal of Japan as the Seat of Arbitration

1. Organization of aworld standard legal
arbitration system

2. Back up system

supported by the public
and private sectors

3. Cheap and sufficient
arbitration hearing
exclusive facilities

4. Safe and securecountry of Japan

While Japanʼs appeal as the seat of arbitration is expected to increase
further in the future due to the endeavors towards activation ofinternational arbitration under the coordination of the public andprivate sectors, even currently, Japan has the following appeal as theseat of arbitration or hearing venue.

World Standard Legal Arbitration System
First, a world standard arbitration system is organized in Japan. The“Arbitration Act” of Japan is based upon the “UNCITRAL Model Law
on International Arbitration” set forth by the “United Nations
Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)”, and Japan is
also a member of the “Convention on the Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (New York Convention)”
regarding the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.
Agency powers in international arbitration proceedings involving Japanas the seat of arbitration or the hearing venue are also widely open to
attorneys qualified in foreign countries with certain exceptions.
Furthermore, Japanese courts do not excessively interfere with
arbitration proceedings and take a cooperative stance towards therecognition and enforcement of arbitral awards.

Advanced Facilities exclusively for
Arbitration Hearing at a Reasonable Price
Second, it is possible to use advanced facilities exclusively forarbitration hearing at a reasonable price with sufficient equipment at areasonable price in Japan. As mentioned below, a facility exclusively
for arbitration hearing equipped with the latest equipment will open in
Toranomon, Tokyo in March 2020, which makes it possible to use afacility exclusively for arbitration hearing equipped with equipment
required for hearing proceedings in international arbitration at areasonable price, such as videoconference systems and simultaneousinterpretation systems.
As for the pilot project utilizing Osaka Nakanoshima Godo Chosha, it ispossible to perform hearing proceedings using the international
conference rooms, etc. in the said Godo Chosha.

System for Promoting International Arbitration
Supported by the Public and Private Sectors
Third, various training seminars related to international arbitration areconvened by JIDRC and other arbitration related organizations, andthe development of personnel with sufficient abilities in effectively andefficiently processing international arbitration proceedings in the
English language is being speedily promoted. Without saying, there
are no obstructions to foreign arbitrators and arbitration agents fromperforming activities in arbitration proceedings involving Japan as theseat of arbitration or hearing venue.
This means that satisfactory activities of arbitrators and arbitration
agents required for the smooth procession of international arbitration
proceedings can be very much expected in arbitration proceedings
involving Japan as the seat of arbitration or arbitration location.
04

Safety and Splendid Tourism Resources
Fourth, it should be emphasized that Japan is a convenient country in various terms as well as asafe and secure place. There are many direct air flights with various countries worldwide andtransportation from the airport to the center of cities is facile. Tokyo and Osaka, the locations of
the Tokyo and Osaka facilities of JIDRC, have sufficient organized infrastructures as large urban
cities, with multitudes of excellent hotels and restaurants in the vicinity of these facilities.
It should particularly be noted that Japan, being a safe country, is a place where one may staysafe, secure and sound during the hearing period. Of course, there is no difficulty in visiting
splendid tourism locations if there is room in time during the period of stay.

Use of the Facility exclusively for Arbitration Hearing“Japan International Dispute Resolution Center (Osaka) (JIDRC-Osaka)”, which was established in
Nakanoshima, Osaka as the first international arbitration and ADR exclusive hearing facility inJapan, may be used, in principle, on weekdays: Morning Set: from 9:00am to 1:30 pm, and/or
Afternoon Set: from 1:30 pm to 6:00pm. The service charges per four and half hours for the useof the facilities are: Main room: 50,000 JPY, Medium room: 10,000 JPY and Small room: 5,000
JPY. It is easily accessible to Kansai International Airport and Osaka International Airport.
On the other hand, “Japan International Dispute Resolution Center (Tokyo) (JIDRC-Tokyo)”, which
was established in Toranomon, Tokyo as a top level international arbitration and ADR exclusive
facility in the world, may be used, in principle, everyday: Morning Set: from 9:00am to 1:00 pm,
Afternoon Set: from 1:00 pm to 5:00pm and/or Evening Set: from 5:00pm to 9:00pm. The
charges per four hours for the use of the facilities are: Main room: 50,000 JPY, Medium room:
25,000 JPY and/or Small room: 20,000 JPY. It is directly accessible to Narita International
Airport and Haneda International Airport by limousine bus, etc. and will be also directly
connected to a newly constructed underground station.
05

Arbitration Related
Legal System in Japan
Arbitration Act（Act No. 138 of 2003）
The core of the legal arbitration system in Japan is the“Arbitration Act” enacted in 2003. Since this Act isenacted based upon the “UNCITRAL Model Law onInternational Commercial Arbitration (Model Law)”
prepared by the “United Nations Commission on
International Trade Law (UNCITRAL)” which plays animportant role to coordinate the contents of laws related
to international commercial trade in various countries
worldwide, it can be said that a world standard legal
arbitration system is adopted in Japan.
However, while the application scope of the Model Law islimited to international commercial disputes, theArbitration Act of Japan is not limited to international
disputes or commercial disputes, and is widely applicable
to “civil disputes which have already occurred or civil
disputes related to certain legal relationships (whether or
not based upon contract) occurring in the future.”
Furthermore, as a general rule, it is applicable toarbitration proceedings where the seat of arbitration is inJapan.
As a premise for performing arbitration proceedings, anarbitration agreement “in writing” between the parties isrequired to exist. However, electromagnetic records arealso deemed to be “in writing.” Furthermore, the decisionof the validity of the arbitration agreement can be madeseparately from the validity of the contract in which such
arbitration agreement is inserted. Furthermore, theexistence of a valid arbitration agreement is the basis
granting decision-making power to the arbitral tribunal(mentioned below), but regardless of this, it is possible foran arbitral tribunal to render a decision on the existence ofa valid arbitration agreement.
Since the Arbitration Act of Japan widely recognizes “party
autonomy” similarly as the Model Law, where a party proceedswith arbitration proceedings designating an arbitration agency,
arbitration proceedings are actually proceeded in accordancewith the arbitration rules of such arbitration agency(designated by the party). However, if there is no suchdesignation, arbitration proceedings are proceeded inaccordance with the following arbitration provisions.
In specific, firstly, arbitral tribunals which render decisions
for disputes are constituted by three arbitrators as thedefault. Each party appoints one arbitrator each, and thetwo arbitrators who are appointed from each party in thismanner appoint the third arbitrator. Arbitrators are
required to be fair and independent, and the obligation todisclose facts likely to cause doubt to the arbitratorʼs own
fairness or independence is imposed during the processionof the arbitration proceedings.

(governing law) is determined by the agreement of theparties, but where there is no such agreement, the arbitral
tribunal applies the laws and regulations which should bedirectly applied to the case from among the laws andregulations of the country most closely related to the civil
dispute submitted to the arbitration proceedings.
Thirdly, it is possible for any of the parties to file a motion
for rescission of an arbitral award towards the court after
the rendering of an arbitral award, but the grounds forrescission are extremely limited (during the period till
2019, there has been no arbitral award for which
rescission has become determinative as a result of being
disputed up to the supreme court). Furthermore, there isno difficulty in the enforcement of arbitral awards by the
court, and arbitral awards are enforced so long as therequirements similar to the approval requirements of the
New York Convention (mentioned above) are met.

Legal System for ArbitrationCounsels and Arbitrators
In Japan, agency rights at the Japanese courts are limited
to lawyers granted with Japanese qualifications by the
Lawyer Act; however, with respect to international
arbitration proceedings involving Japan as the seat ofarbitration or the hearing location, agency rights are widely
open to lawyers granted with foreign qualifications※.
Furthermore, with respect to arbitration cases performed
pursuant to appropriate proceedings in accordance with
the Arbitration Act, etc. in general, persons other thanlawyers such as persons with foreign lawyer qualifications
are also able to perform activities as arbitrators, andpersons other than lawyers perform activities asarbitrators also as a matter of fact.
※ In Japan, the “Act on Special Measures concerning theHandling of Legal Services by Foreign Lawyers” (Act No. 66
of 1986) sets forth the handling of legal services within Japanby persons with foreign lawyer qualifications.
Under the said Act, persons with foreign lawyer qualifications
falling under (i) or (ii) below are able to represent
proceedings of international arbitration cases in Japan.
(i) Persons with qualifications as a “registered foreign lawyer”
approved by the Minister of Justice or registered in theregistry of the Japan Federation of Bar Associations.
(ii) Persons with foreign lawyer qualifications other than (i)who engage in business performing legal services in aforeign country based upon such qualification and who
have been requested or who have accepted such
arbitration case in such foreign country.

Secondly, the law applicable to the resolution of disputes
06

07

Voices from the world

I was impressed by the JIDRC leadershipʼs dedication,commitment and enthusiasm when we organized aconference at the Embassy of Japan in Berlin together
with the Japanese Ministry of Justice last year. The event
was a great success thanks to the high-ranking Japanesedelegation formed by the JIDRC. The JIDRC will be key
to Japan becoming an attractive seat for European parties
looking towards Asia for their arbitrations. I wish the
JIDRC the best of success in raising awareness,
attractiveness and international arbitrations in Japan!
Francesca Mazza,
Secretary General of German Institution of Arbitration (DIS)

I am delighted to have this opportunity to extend mycongratulations on the opening of the new Tokyo Hearing
Facility of JIDRC. Japanese companies, lawyers andarbitrators all play an important role in the international
arbitration landscape in Asia. The new Tokyo Hearing
Facility will certainly enhance this position and will provide
an important platform for Tokyoʼs development as aleading international arbitration hub alongside Hong Kong,
Singapore and Seoul. I wish all of my friends andcolleagues in Tokyo every success in the years ahead!
Michael Moser,
International Arbitrator

As President of UIA, I congratulate the JFBA and theMinistry of Justice on creation of the new facilities of JIDRC.
The JIDRC and its facilities will serve an important role asa seat for cross-border cases and will permit international
lawyers to practice more effectively and efficiently.
I welcome JIDRC to the international legal scene.
Jerome Roth,President of UIA (International Association of Lawyers)

The JIDRCʼs new hearing facility in Tokyo provides
important infrastructure for the practice of international
arbitration in Japan. It is a development that will bewelcomed by all members of the arbitration community in
Asia and, indeed, around the world. This new facility will
provide state-of-the-art support for large and complex
cases and serves to highlight Japanʼs continued growthand prominence as a leading jurisdiction for international
arbitration in Asia.
Gary Born,
International Arbitrator & President of SIAC Court of Arbitration

08

Congratulations to JIDRC on the establishment of its
state-of-the-art hearing facilities in Tokyo. These will no
doubt promote Tokyo as an excellent venue for arbitration
hearings and add to Japanʼs attraction as an arbitral seat.
Christopher Lau,
International Arbitrator

On behalf of all of us at SIAC, we would like to convey
our warmest congratulations to the Japan International
Dispute Resolution Center on the launch of its new
premises in Tokyo. SIAC is honoured and delighted to be
an MOU partner of JIDRC, and looks forward to working
closely with JIDRC to jointly promote and developinternational arbitration within the Japanese legal andbusiness communities.
Lim Seok Hui,CEO of Singapore International Arbitration Centre09

Congratulations to JIDRC on the opening of yournew hearing facilities in Tokyo. Japan has long
been a key supporter and innovator in the field ofinternational commercial and investment disputesettlement. In fact, Japan was one of the first
countries to ratify the ICSID Convention in 1967,
and many of its most distinguished legal
professionals have served on the ICSID panels ofarbitrators and conciliators. The launch of JIDRCʼsfirst-class facilities in Tokyo offers further
opportunities for cooperation between Japanʼs
dispute resolution community and ICSID̶and I
look forward to making these a reality.
Meg Kinnear,
Secretary-General of International Centre for
Settlement of Investment Disputes

With the opening of the JIDRC in Tokyo and Osaka,
Japan has indicated its commitment to becoming amajor seat of arbitration. I expect that Japan willsoon become a very frequent seat for arbitrations
in all types of transactions. Its status as a highly
respected economic powerhouse around the world
will make it a popular destination both forarbitrations among Asian parties, as well as among
other parties engaging with Asia. I look forward toseeing the very promising effects of the JIDRC inthe coming years.
Kevin Kim,
Former Secretary General ofInternational Council for Commercial Arbitration

I would like to congratulate JIDRC on the grandopening of the brand-new facilities in Tokyo.
This movement shows a strong determination
which is not just only for Japan but also
Asia-pacific as a new hub of International ADR
seat. I believe Japan will be a reputable ADRseat in the world in the very near future.
Pasit Asawawattanaporn,
President of Asian Pacific Regional
Arbitration Group & Managing Directorof Thailand Arbitration Center

It is my great pleasure to congratulate theopening of JIDRC-Tokyo. The new beginning of
an international dispute resolution center inTokyo is an exciting occasion not only to dispute
resolution experts in Japan, but it is also a
special event for us here in Korea. As the
Chairman of the KCAB INTERNATIONAL, I
believe the JIDRC-Tokyo will advance thealternative dispute resolution landscape of not
only Japan, but also the Asia Pacific region. I
hope the new center in Tokyo will provide a solid
arbitration platform to benefit both internationaland domestic dispute resolution. Once again,
congratulations on the opening of the
JIDRC-Tokyo!
Hi-Taek Shin,
Chairman of Korean Commercial
Arbitration Board International

In November 2019, HKIAC concluded acooperation agreement with JIDRC underwhich parties in HKIAC proceedings may
have access to JIDRCʼs facilities and the two
institutions may run joint events. HKIAC
looks forward to working closely with JIDRC
in leading initiatives that contributeinternational arbitration in Asia.
Sarah Grimmer,
Secretary General of Hong Kong
International Arbitration Centre

Japan is a natural venue for arbitrations in northAsia. What has been missing, until recently, is a
dedicated facility to host arbitrations. The
establishment of the Japan International Dispute
Resolution Center fills this void. For this reason
alone it is to be welcomed by all persons
concerned with international arbitration.
Moreover it is a further demonstration of thecontinuing development of international arbitrationin Japan, one of the world's most importanteconomies. I offer JIDRC warm congratulations
and wish it great success.
Michael Pryles,
International Arbitrator

1011Japan International
Dispute Resolution CenterTo activate international arbitration
In June 2017, the “Basic Policy on Economic and Fiscal Management and Reform 2017” was approved by the
Cabinet of Japan. It aimed to “develop a foundation to activate international arbitration” in Japan as one of
the important policies of the Japanese Government. In September 2017, the “Liaison Conference of Relevant
Ministries and Agencies” for the policy was established in the Japanese Government.
In December 2017, responding to the governmental movement, the “Liaison Council” for the policy was alsoestablished by the entities in the private sector, which relates to arbitration and other types of ADR. The
Japan Federation of Bar Associations and the Japan Association of Arbitrators jointly took initiatives in theestablishment of the “Liaison Council.” By the proposal of the “Liaison Council”, in February 2018, the Japan
International Dispute Resolution Center (JIDRC) was established as a driving-force entity for implementing
specific projects for the policy.
As one of the specific projects, in May 2018, JIDRC-Osaka started its operation at Nakanoshima, Osaka as
the first-ever-recorded facilities specialized for a hearing of international arbitration or other types of ADR in
Japan. Additionally, in March 2020, JIDRC-started its operation at Toranomon, Tokyo as one of the worldʼsbest facilities for a hearing of international arbitration or other types of ADR. The facilities can be used for ahearing of ad-hoc arbitration or institutional arbitration by various arbitration institutions. The facilities canbe also used for various seminars or symposium of arbitration or other types of ADR. Equipment required forhearing proceedings in international arbitration and related seminars/symposiums will be available, such as
Wifi, videoconference systems, simultaneous interpretation systems and live script systems.

Reception

Hearing Room (Main Room)(for Seminor)

12

13

Hearing Room (Main Room)Hearing Room (Main Room)Breakout Room (Medium Room)Breakout Room (Medium Room)

14

15

JIDRC-Osaka

The facilities can be used, in principle, on weekdays:■Morning Set: from 9:00am to 1:30 pm■Afternoon Set: from 1:30 pm to 6:00pm
The service charges per four and half hours for the use of
the facilities are:
■Main room: 50,000 JPY■Medium room: 10,000 JPY■Small room: 5,000 JPY

Please note that a Corporate Support Member of JIDRC which has two or more memberships is entitledto a 60% discount on the above-noted fees for the use of the facilities.

JIDRC-Tokyo

The facilities can be used, in principle, on everyday■Morning Set: from 9:00am to 1:00 pm■Afternoon Set: from 1:00 pm to 5:00pm■Evening Set: from 5:00pm to 9:00pm
The charges per four and half hours for the use of the
facilities are:
■Main room: 50,000 JPY■Medium room: 25,000 JPY■Small room: 20,000 JPY

Moreover, JIDRC provides many training sessions for the human resources who will actively work ininternational arbitration and other types of ADR and organize many seminars and symposiums for promotinginternational arbitration and other types of ADR to Japanese and foreign business corporations withworld-widely renowned arbitration institutions and related organizations. JIDRC also promotes Japan as theSeat of Arbitration in many foreign countries.
JIDRC continues to serve as a driving-force for the activities to activate international arbitration in Japan.

Kas
um

iga

Breakout Room (Small Room)sekiJapan International Dispute Resolution Center
Sta
.

Tor
a

nom

on
Sta
Toranomon.
Kotohiragu Toranomon

Nishi Shimbashi
1chome1-17-1, Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo,105-6405

TEL：+81-3-6273-3991▶ Scheduled to be connected directly with "Toranomon"

Post office

Toranomon
1chomeToranomon
2chomeNishi Shimbashi
Koban mae

NeareststationStation of Tokyo Metro Ginza Line▶ Scheduled to be connected directly with "Toranomon Hills"

Station of Tokyo Metro Hibiya Line▶ "Kasumigaseki" Station of Tokyo Metro Chiyoda Line,

Toranomon-Hils

Marunouchi Line or Hibiya Line

ta.

shi

ku

Fu

S
ma

Josho-bashi

a.
a St
him
kus
Osaka Fukushima
Station Post office
Asahi Television
Broadcasting
Corporation

nfu
Shi

shi
i-ba
Deir
a-3
jim
o
D
Founding monument ofResearch Institutefor Microbial Diseases,
Osaka Univ.

16

1-1-60, Fukushima, Fukushima-ku, Osaka City, Osaka, 553-0003
2F, Osaka Nakanoshima National Government Building

Osaka Nakanoshima
National goverment
Building
e-bashiWatanabSta.

Tamino-bashi
minamizume Nakanojima
Daibiru
Tamae-bashi
Post officekitazume

Corridor

Osaka facility▶ " Fukushima " Station of Japan Railways

Neareststation▶ " Shin-fukushima " Station of Japan Railways▶ " Fukushima Station " of Hanshin Electric Railway▶ " Watanabebashi " Station of Keihan Nakanoshima Line

Utility Space17

Japan Association of Arbitrators

JAA s Efforts and Vision Toward the Development of JIDRC
1. Japan Association of Arbitrators (“JAA”) was founded in 2003 and admitted in 2014 as a Public Interest
Corporation by the Cabinet Office. It aims to promote the study of law and develop the professional skills ofJapanese lawyers in the area of arbitration and mediation and to educate and increase the number of
excellent arbitrators, attorneys and professionals Japan can offer. JAA, since its foundation, has also madesignificant contributions in innovating techniques for the practice of arbitration and mediation in Japan.
JAA has been persistently proclaiming since its very inception that its primary policy is to establish world topclass arbitration facilities as such professional facilities were non-existent in Japan before. JAA has been
aggressively promoting and preparing public appeals and raising awareness about the need of such facilities
and pursuing all possible opportunities to lobby and persuade the government agencies, politicians, media
and business people as well as the bar associations to contribute towards the establishment anddevelopment of such sophisticated facility centers. As a consequence, the very first Japan International
Dispute Settlement Center (“JIDRC”) was established and launched in Osaka in April, 2018, and soon after,
the JAA launched its very first Japan International Mediation Center (“JIMC”) in Kyoto. Under suchenvironments that carry powerful tides toward globalization of judicial services, with the relentless support of
the government promoting their economic growth strategies, JIDRC successfully inaugurated its brand new
Tokyo dispute settlement center in March, 2020. This new special arbitration facility, which is the first of its
kind in Tokyo, is undeniably a world top class arbitration facility in Japan.
2. With the advent of globalization where the supply chains extend beyond the boarder of nations, disputes
arising due to international conflicts are a natural consequence of such global economic activities. These
disputes tend to become more and more complex and diversified in their nature with the expansion of suchinternational trade and Japan needs to be prepared and equipped to deal with such matters. It seems thatthe national court system which is strictly subject to the national judicial system and its culture, may nolonger perfectly function as a neutral forum to provide justice on such serious conflicts of legal and cultural
questions that transcend national borders. We all know that these kinds of conflict situations are occurring
almost every day all across the business world.
Although the following example is under a very different context, but is worthy of mention here: The recent
ruling against some Japanese companies by the Korean Supreme Court relating to the compensation claimsof Koreans for war time forced labor is a good illustrative example of the point mentioned above. The
function and role of arbitration appears to be getting better understood in Japan today than before as anecessary means of dispute resolution in an international context.
3. JAA is pleased and honored to fully support JIDRCʼs growth and envisions a bright future for it as the world
center for dispute settlement and, more importantly, assist with JIDRCʼs pledge to imparting education andtraining to arbitration and mediation professionals who may play crucial roles in the functioning of the JIDRC.

The Japan Federationof Bar Associations

The Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA) was founded in 1949 on the grounds of the Attorney Act,
which took effect with the promulgation of the Japanese Constitution. Since its inception, the JFBA has been
aspiring to achieve their goals of protecting fundamental human rights and delivering social justice. The JFBA
also govern matters relating to the guidance, liaison and supervision of all lawyers and bar associations toensure that the dignity of lawyers is maintained and their legal services are improved.
The JFBAʼs initiatives to enhance and reform the legal system for the sake of citizens, as well as their various
activities to protect human rights, are key for the organization to “protect fundamental human rights anddeliver social justice”, which has been laid down as the mission of lawyers in Article 1 of the Attorney Act.
Therefore, in the area of international dispute resolution, the JFBA has also undertaken a variety ofendeavors in order to promote and boost international arbitration in Japan. The Opinion Calling for the
Enhancement of the Functions of International Arbitration in Japan, which the JFBA issued on February 16,
2017, as part of these efforts, urged the Japanese Government to take action, immediately and throughcross-agency collaboration, so as to devise measures and systems to strengthen the international arbitration
function in Japan. Taking into account the importance of international arbitration as a measure for Japaneseparties to resolve international disputes, and considering specifically the major trend as a whole to chooseinternational arbitration to resolve international commercial disputes, the Opinion submitted by the JFBA led
to the creation of the following aspirations related to building physical and human infrastructure: Provide
facilities that are suitable to carry out international arbitration proceedings; establish an arbitral legal
framework; increase the number of arbitration organizations and enhance their operation; and retain andfoster development of legal professionals with arbitral capabilities.
Consequently, after the deliberation and discussions took place among the organizations in both the private
and public sectors, the Japan International Dispute Resolution Center Osaka (JIDRC-Osaka) was establishedin May 2018 as the first arbitral tribunal in Japan, engaged specifically in international arbitration andalternative dispute resolution. Subsequently, the opening of the Japan International Dispute Resolution
Center Tokyo (JIDRC-Tokyo) in Toranomon, on a scale comparable with the worldʼs most renowned arbitral
tribunals, constitutes the completion of the undertaking to build the physical infrastructure environment for
the growth of international arbitration in Japan.
From this point onwards, in addition to the tangible circumstances represented by these facilities, theintangible circumstances such as a legal framework need to be developed. In this regard, the JFBA has been
exploring the Japanese laws relevant to arbitration and, on June 21, 2019, published the Proposal for Core
Amendments to the Arbitration Act, the Civil Execution Act and Other Relevant Legislation Reflecting theʻUNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration with Amendments as Adopted in 2006ʼ. The
JFBA are also addressing other issues including international arbitration awareness activities and humanresource development.
The JFBA is committed to undertaking many more initiatives towards invigorating and facilitatinginternational arbitration in Japan.

18

19

The Japan Commercial
Arbitration Association

Why JCAA Arbitration?
■Wealth of Experience in Handling International Cases
JCAA is a non-profit organization and operates as an independent private entity. It has a track record spanning 70 years.
Since 2000, the JCAA has administered over 300 arbitration cases in total. Among the 74 arbitration cases filed with JCAA
from 2015 to 2019, 82% were international cases involving one or more non-Japanese companies or citizens.

■Neutrality and Independence of Arbitrators
JCAA is mindful of the importance of neutrality of arbitrators, which is one of the main reasons why parties choose arbitration.
JCAAʼs panel of arbitrators offers a highly diverse spectrum of arbitrators. Around 2/3 of the 350-plus panel arbitrators are
non-Japanese from over 50 different jurisdictions.
Out of 100 arbitrators appointed in JCAA-administered international arbitrations from 2015 to 2019, 44% were non-Japanese.

■Arbitration Procedures ‒ Global Standards and Beyond
JCAA provides first-class services that meet global standards in international arbitration practice. One way JCAA
accomplishes this is by allowing users to choose from three different sets of arbitration rules to meet their specificadministration needs:
UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (2010)

The UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are well-tested and widely recognized in the arbitration community as an ideal set of rules for a flexible
arbitration based on party autonomy.

Commercial Arbitration Rules (2019)

The Commercial Arbitration Rules not only incorporate global standards, such as emergency arbitration and expedited procedures, but also
provide carefully crafted provisions to prevent unnecessary procedural disputes arising out of the partiesʼ different legal backgrounds.

Interactive Arbitration Rules (2019)

The Interactive Arbitration Rules offer maximum predictability and efficiency by incorporating a “civil law approach”. This enables the arbitral tribunal totake a more active role, such as requiring it to communicate its preliminary views on important issues to the parties before the evidentiary hearing.

Arbitration Institutions in JapanThe Japan Commercial Arbitration Association
The Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration Center
The International Arbitration Center in TokyoJapan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel

20■Diverse Procedural Language
Parties are free to select the language of the arbitration. The foreign language capabilities of the arbitrators on JCAAʼs list
include: English, Chinese, French, German, Korean, Russian, and many others.
As for the language used in international cases filed with JCAA from 2015 to 2019, 53% were conducted in English and 4%
were conducted in Chinese.

■Comprehensive Support
The JCAA provides quick and comprehensive support throughout arbitral proceedings. In particular, the JCAA can make all
the necessary arrangements for meetings and hearings (e.g., rooms, interpreters, court reporters) upon request.
Very efficient assistancethroughout the arbitral proceedings.

I have experienced with most leading arbitration
institutions. The JCAAʼs support is absolutely first class.

Dr. Klaus Sachs, CMS

Mr. Gavin Denton, Arbitration Chambers

Japan Sports Arbitration Agency■Speedy Resolution

The Japan Shipping Exchange, Inc.

In JCAA-administered arbitrations concluded during the period between 2010-2019, the average length of the proceedings fromthe request for arbitration to the final award was 16.6 months, including the period of suspension for settlement discussions.

21

The Japan Intellectual
Property Arbitration Center

The International
Arbitration Center in Tokyo

The Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration Center (JIPAC) is an alternative dispute resolution (ADR)

The International Arbitration Center in Tokyo (IACT) is a highly regarded private ADR center established inorganization, originally founded in March 1998 as the Industrial Property Rights Arbitration Center by the

September 2018. IP leaders around the globe united to create outstanding Asia-based alternative dispute

Japan Patent Attorneys Association and the Japan Federation of Bar Associations for the purpose ofresolution, headed by Randall Raider, a former chief judge of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

resolving industrial property rights disputes. The Center began its business on April 1 of the same year.
In August 2000, the Center concluded an agreement with the Japan Network Information Center (JPNIC) andbecame an approved organization for resolving disputes related to JP domain names registered by JPNIC.
Then in April 2001, the Center was renamed the Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration Center and expanded
the scope of its business from industrial property rights to intellectual property rights.
In March 2004, the Center started to offer a new service for providing "Advisory Opinion on Infringement"and "Advisory Opinion on Validity". In April 2011, the Center started to offer a new service for providing"Freedom-to-Operate Opinion".

IACT is the most skilled institution in Intellectual Property.
The important factors in IP arbitration are the arbitrator's knowledge and experience in international IP law
and the procedural validity of arbitration. Without a rightful decision, the parties would not respect an award,
which could lead to lengthy and costly litigation. On the other hand, intellectual property needs efficient
processing. The unparalleled feature of IACT is the quality of arbitration that satisfies these requirements. At
IACT, former IP judges, including retired judges from the Tokyo Intellectual Property High Court, arbitratecases. In addition, the efficiency of arbitration (in principle, one year after the establishment of the arbitral
tribunal), the geographical coverage, and the review of an award by the supervisory committee are attractive
features to the parties.

Since November 1, 2012, the Center has been approved as an ADR organization certified under ADR act inJapan (Certification No. 119). The Center are providing their services at 8 offices including the Head-quarters

Multinational litigation is common in todayʼs IP. In particular, disputes over standard essential patents areat Tokyo, the branches in Kansai region and at Nagoya, and subbranches in Hokkaido, Tohoku, Chugoku,

becoming increasingly important, and it is necessary to resolve complex multijurisdictional disputes over

Shikoku and Kyushu regions.

important technologies in an expedited manner so that the public can continue to use them. IACT is the

As the duties that our center is performing now, there is the Consultation, Mediation, Arbitration, JP Domain
Name Dispute Resolution, Center's Advisory Opinions, Center's Essential Patent Evaluation, Advisory Opinion
on Operability and Contribution Degree Evaluation of the Patent.
Mediation is a system in which mediators, consisting of one attorney-at-law and one patent attorney,
cooperate to resolve a dispute between the parties, and work toward reaching a settlement. Cases aresettled and set forth in a settlement agreement based on mediators' opinions and decisions and agreed to by
the parties.

most appropriate venue to provide an arbitration, mediation, and expert determination for the proper andprompt resolution of highly technical issues.
Starting February 2020, IACT will officially introduce expert determination, an effective simple dispute
resolution tool for companies. It is noteworthy that IACT is expanding its reach to cover intellectual property
disputes related to Canada, Germany, etc. to enhance its global dispute resolution capability. Advances ofhigh-speed communication and digitization/digitalization have connected the entire universe where
consumers can easily conduct international transactions. IACT continues to develop as does science andtechnology.

Arbitration is a process in which the resolution of disputes is entrusted to at least three arbitrators, including
an attorney-at-law and a patent attorney, and is based on the parties' agreement to adhere to thearbitrators' binding decision.
Additionally, arbitral expert testimony is heard and the parties agree to accept a decision which is made on
particular facts (For example, the parties agree not to seek an injunction or damages, but request a decisionon the issue of whether or not A's products infringe B's patent, and accept such decision.). Rules for Arbitral
Proceedings shall be applied to all arbitral expert testimony.

22

23

Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel

Japan Sports Arbitration Agency

The Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel (hereinafter, the “Disciplinary Panel”) is an organization set forth

Japan Sports Arbitration Agency (“JSAA”) is a dispute resolution body established in 2003 to soundly promoteby the Japan Anti-Doping Code which undertakes the role of finding the existence or non-existence of the

sports through the resolution of disputes related to sport competitions or their governance ("sports-related

fact of an anti-doping rule violation and determines the consequence.
In specific, where Athletes or Athlete Support Persons (supervisors and coaches, etc.) are suspected ofcommitting an anti-doping rule violation, the Japan Anti-Doping Agency (hereinafter, “JADA”) notifies andasserts an anti-doping rule violation against such person. Thereafter, three members (one lawyer who is the

disputes"). Since its establishment, JSAA has been working to resolve sports-related disputes between athletes
and sport organizations through arbitration and mediation. The expectation of JSAA as a dispute resolution
body in Japanese sports is increasing because the Governance Code for National Sport Federation Members
has been adopted in June 2019 (the "Code"). The Code requires national sport federation members to provide
in their regulations automatic acceptance to claims by athletes under the Sport Arbitration Procedure of theSport Arbitration Regulation ("Sport Arbitration Procedure(s)").

chair or vice chair, one physician, and one sport related person), from among the members of the said panel,
are appointed as the hearing panel by the chair of the Disciplinary Panel. The hearing panel convenes ahearing with JADA being one party and the Athlete, etc. alleged to have committed an anti-doping ruleviolation being the other party. On such basis, such hearing panel finds the existence or non-existence of ananti-doping rule violation and determines the consequence.
The Disciplinary Panel is under the jurisdiction of the Japan Sport Council (hereinafter, “JSC”), but its
operation is independent from JSC, and it is a fair, neutral and independent organization required to neutrally
and fairly make determinations regarding anti-doping rule violations. For instance, the power to appoint
members is held by the JSC, but upon appointment, reports are made regarding the suitability, etc. of thecandidate member by the advisory committee composed of experts. Specific administrative affairs related toprocedural operations such as communications with the party, convening of the hearing, and determinationof the consequence are entrusted to independent external experts (operation coordinators) who areappointed to assist the appropriate operations of the Disciplinary Panel. Furthermore, the section
responsible for doping investigations (intelligence activities) and the section responsible for affairs related tothe operations of the Disciplinary Panel are distinct even within the JSC internally, and the flow of
information is cut off between these affairs.
Decisions of the Disciplinary Panel (the hearing panel) are publicized on the JADA website in accordancewith the Japan Anti-Doping Code. JADA and Athletes, etc., who are dissatisfied with such decisions, areable to appeal to the Japan Sports Arbitration Agency.

Sport Arbitration Procedure, which is the most utilized procedure in JSAA, is the procedure for appeals against
decisions made by sport organizations. The typical disputes are selection disputes or disciplinary disputes. The
main features of the Sport Arbitration Procedure are as follows:① Prompt Dispute Resolution.
Sports-related disputes require prompt resolution because athletesʼ careers are limited and there are fixed entry
deadlines for competitions. The Sport Arbitration Procedure allows for flexible proceedings and resolves disputes
promptly, taking into account factors such as the entry deadlines.

② Low Arbitration Cost.
In the Sport Arbitration Procedures, the arbitration filing fee borne by the claimant is, in principle, limited to 50,000 yen(excluding consumption tax) . The parties are not required to pay the administration fee or the arbitratorsʼ fees. Thus,
parties can use the procedure with certainty of low cost.

③ Highly Specialized Arbitrators.
In the Sport Arbitration Proceedings, arbitrators are, in principle, nominated or selected from the candidate list for sport
arbitration. The list is composed of arbitrators who are specialized in sports law. Therefore, it is expected that disputes
are resolved by highly specialized arbitrators.

Based on the Japan Anti-Doping Code, JSAA is also positioned as an appeal body against decisions made by
Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panel. For these appeals, arbitration proceedings are conducted under theSport Arbitration Regulation related to Doping Disputes.
In addition to these arbitration procedures, JSAA also resolve sports-related disputes through mediation. The
sport mediation procedures in JSAA is the first certified procedure under the Act on Promotion of Use of
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR Act).

24

25

The Japan
Shipping Exchange, Inc.

ADR Centers of Bar Associations

The Japan Shipping Exchange, Inc. (JSE) was established in 1921 in order to maintain a healthy market inWith respect to ADR centers operated by the bar associations, there are 38 established centers (including

maritime industry after World War I. It started arbitration service in 1926, organizing an Arbitration Commission

Mediation Center Osaka in which the Osaka Bar Association participates) for 35 bar associations

and setting up arbitration rules. Since then, JSE has worked to resolve disputes in maritime industry for about

nationwide currently as of January 2020, under names such as “dispute resolution center” or “arbitration

90 years to the present.
JSE drafts and circulates standard contract forms under another committee called the Documentary
Committee of JSE, and the forms provide TOMAC arbitration clauses. Therefore, TOMAC arbitration is widelyused for disputes arising from such forms as contracts of affreightment, ship sale contracts, and salvage
agreements irrespective of coastal trade or overseas trade. TOMAC arbitration is also used where printed
arbitration clauses in prevailing standard forms drafted by other bodies are amended to provide TOMAC
arbitration.
TOMAC Rules were substantially revised in accordance with the enactment of the Arbitration Law based on the
UNCITRAL Model Law in 2004.

There are some points which differ from the Arbitration Law and thecenter.” An attorney will attentively listen to your and ther counterparty’s talk as a mediator, and aim toresolve the dispute by agreement between both parties appropriately reflecting the demands of bothparties as well as appropriateness in legal terms. The aim is to resolve civil troubles (including family
matters as well as those involving a local municipality as a party, etc.) fairly and satisfactorily within ashort period and at a reasonable cost through flexible procedures.
1. Cases which people are hesitant to bring to the court such as harassment cases and adultery cases.
2. Specialized cases likely to become grave and lengthy if litigated such as medical malpractice cases andconstruction disputes.

UNCITRAL Model Law as follows.

3. Disputes occurring from continuous personal relationships such as family, employer-employee and lease
related matters.

In maritime industry, we find a certain state called “Charter chain” where an owner charters its vessel out and4. Cases for which “justice and equity” cannot be realized simply by formalistically applying the law.

the charterer also charters it out and then sub-charterer charters it out as well.
When a dispute arises under such a situation, they have to apply for another, new arbitration against their own

are an example of the cases which are brought to the ADR centers of the bar associations. ADR seeks

counterparty respectively if they are involved in arbitration proceedings. It takes time and costs a lot, and in

resolutions lined with the actual circumstances through discussion aiming for appropriate and prompt

addition, it may give rise to contradictory awards between the above arbitrations even though they are

resolution of such cases. Many of the cases are resolved by settlement through discussion in the course

concerning the same dispute. Therefore, in order to avoid these problems, article 27(1) of TOMAC Rules
provides that when multiple arbitral proceedings are commenced such as those regarding disputes arising fromthe multiple contracts on the same ship of charterparty, shipbuilding contract, ship sale and purchaseagreement, etc. or when the issues of law or fact are mutually related to each other, TOMAC may decide toconsolidate such multiple proceedings into one proceedings at the application of any party or at its discretion.
Though there are no provisions in the UNCITRAL Model Law, article 47 (1) of the Arbitration Law provides thatthe arbitrators may receive remuneration in accordance with the agreement of the parties, and (2) provides
that failing the agreement, the tribunal determines the remuneration. On the other hand, TOMAC Rules clearlyprovide the amount of arbitration cost which shall be calculated, in principle, in accordance with the amount in
dispute and include the remuneration for the arbitrators. Although the ratio of the amount each party bears
is decided in the arbitral award, parties can predict the total amount they need in the arbitral proceedings
before application for arbitration.

of seeking terms satisfactory to both parties from a wide perspective and high viewpoint (other than this,arbitration may be conducted pursuant to the Arbitration Act). Bar association ADR plays a rule of private
autonomy platform.
The success of the discussion largely depends on the persons who will actually be involved. In thisregard, attorneys who are constantly working at the forefront of disputes are equipped with not only legal
expertise for the resolution of troubles but also the power to precisely view the case and the power toappropriately progress the resolution procedures. The ADR centers of the bar associations prepare
systems where experienced attorneys assume the role of mediators in order to exert utmost efforts for the
resolution of the troubles met by everyone. Some bar associations perform settlement mediation inaccordance with methods corresponding to the respective issue types such as medical ADR, finance
ADR and disaster ADR. The ADR centers of the bar associations wish for speedy and satisfactory
resolution of civil troubles for the good of everyone.
*ADR centers operated by the bar associations are listed on the Japan Federation of Bar Associations website.

26

27

Final Remarks

contact

The Booklet aims to describe the present situation ofJapan International Dispute Resolution Centerinternational arbitration in Japan and to provide related information.

http://idrc.jp/

Japan Association of Arbitrators

We would be delighted if the Booklet could enhance

https://arbitrators.jp/

your interest in international arbitration in Japan.

Japan Federation of Bar Associations

The following is contact details for enquiries for information
on international arbitration in Japanif you would like to obtain more detailed information.
Please do not hesitate to contact the following organizations.

Japan International Dispute Resolution Center

https://www.nichibenren.or.jp/

Japan Commercial Arbitration Association

http://www.jcaa.or.jp/

Japan Intellectual Property Arbitration Center

https://www.ip-adr.gr.jp/

International Arbitration Center in Tokyo

https://www.iactokyo.com/?lang=ja
Japan Anti-Doping Disciplinary Panelhttps://www.jpnsport.go.jp/corp/gyoumu/
antidoping/tabid/772/Default.aspx
Japan Sports Arbitration Agency

http://www.jsaa.jp/

The Japan Shipping Exchange, Inc.

http://www.jseinc.org/

Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan

https://www.meti.go.jp/
Ministry of Justice in Japan

http://www.moj.go.jp/

28