Page 22 - ดุลพาห เล่ม3.indd

ดุลพาห

(2) International comparison

With regard to Japan, the defendant’s domicile is also used as a primary
33
point of contact for general jurisdiction. Article 3-2 (1) of the JCCP provides that the
Japanese courts shall have jurisdiction over an action that is being brought against

a person domiciled in Japan. In the absence of the defendant’s domicile in Japan or
abroad, or when his or her domicile is unknown, the defendant’s residence in Japan

constitutes general jurisdiction. Furthermore, in the absence of the defendant’s
residence in Japan or abroad, or when his or her residence is unknown, general

jurisdiction is granted at the defendant’s last domicile in Japan before the instigation
of an action unless the defendant has had another domicile abroad in the meantime.

These rules intend to confirm that at least one country has general jurisdiction over
the defendant. On the other hand, in the case of a legal person defendant, Article

3-2 (3) of the JCCP stipulates that the place of the legal person’s principal office or
business office in Japan constitutes general jurisdiction of Japanese courts. If the

defendant has no business office or other office, or its location is unknown, general
jurisdiction is conferred based on the domicile of its representative or other person

principally in charge of its business in Japan .
34
The Brussels I (recast) also adopts domicile as a key concept for determining

the general jurisdiction of EU member states. When a transnational dispute covered
by the Regulation is brought to a court of a member state, the court must primarily

determine the domicile of the defendant. If the defendant has a domicile within its own
territory, then it can assert general jurisdiction irrespective of the nationality of the

defendant or the place of the cause of action . Article 4 (1) of the Brussels I (recast)
35
provides that persons domiciled in a member state may be sued in the courts of that

state. However, the Regulation does not prescribe the notion of domicile for natural

33. According to Article 22 of the Japanese Civil Code, domicile of the defendant points to the principal
place where in the defendant lives.
34. Nishitani, “International Jurisdiction of Japanese Courts,” 255.
35. Hartley, “International Commercial Litigation,” 29.

กันยายน - ธันวาคม ๒๕๖๑ 11