Page 51 - วารสารกฎหมาย ศาลอุทธรณ์คดีชํานัญพิเศษ

ฉบับพิเศษ ประจำ�ปี 2564

A case before the Japanese Supreme Court

The case deals with a claim for delivery of a stolen foreign car imported into
the Japanese market. According to the court’s fact-finding, the facts of the case are

as follows.
A Mercedes-Benz 500SL registered in Germany was owned by a German leasing

company and leased to German resident A. But when A went to Italy, his car was stolen.
Subsequently, this car was exported by Dubai-based car dealership “Ideal” to

the Japanese Company “Inter Auto.” However, the process from the moment of the
theft of the car to its exportation by the car dealer in Dubai to “Inter Auto” in Japan was
not clarified by the court’s fact-finding.

Later on, through the successive sales (Inter Auto to “N Motors” to “Kosei
Manufacturing”, which are all Japanese companies seemingly engaged in the car trade),

a Japanese individual B purchased the car and registered it for the first time in Japan.
Finally, B sold the car to car dealers “Yanase”, who in turn sold it to “Autopia Nakajima”,
from whom Y purchased the car, and obtained possession of the car with the ownership-

registration filed.
The characteristic point of this case is that the original ownership registration

in Germany still existed, on the basis of which further transactions or further financing
could have taken place. In fact, on the basis of this German registration, the German
leasing Company had concluded a car insurance contract, and the car insurance company

X, after paying the policy to it and A, filed a claim for the car’s delivery before a Japanese
court in the place of the leasing Company.

Theoretical implications of the case

This claim for delivery refers to the issue of opposition between the claim based

on ownership and the defensive plea based on purchase made in good faith, with transfer
of possession.
On the one hand, there still remains the German registration of ownership of

the stolen car. A further successive transaction and also finance in good faith could have
taken place on the basis of registration in the market under the German legal order.

However, on the other hand, due to the theft, the car has been removed from its original

49