FACTS

 

The Appellant is the Claimant in the basic case where the consular service (Article 108 of Civil Service, Article 8(1) of the Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (the "Hague Service Convention"), and Article 17(1)(e)(i) of the Consular Convention between Japan and the United States of America (the "Japan-US Consular Convention")) to the Defendant residing in Illinois, United States of America was not successful due to the absence of the recipient or the closure of the business. After that, the Appellant filed a petition for service by publication, which was dismissed by the court clerk. The Appellant objected to the decision, which was also dismissed by the court. Therefore, the Appellant filed this appeal.

 

 

FINDINGS

 
The judge held:

 

Dismissal of appeal.

 

"The Appellant alleges that of the services in foreign states stipulated in Article 108 of the Code of Civil Procedure, the consular service was unsuccessful, and therefore it meets the requirements for service by publication. However, of the above methods, even if the consular service, which is a simple service procedure, does not work, it is expected that the service by the central authority will still be possible. Therefore, it should be understood that it will not fall within cases "[i]f…it is impossible to effect service through the means under the provision of Article 108 or it is found to be impossible to effect service even through such means." (Article 110(1)(iii)).

Miyake Law | Debt Collection in Japan