Collecting a Debt Through Provisional Attachment｜Where It Sits Among the Methods of Recovery in Japan

“If we attach the debtor’s assets now, do we get paid?” Enquiries from overseas creditors often open with that question. Provisional attachment (kari-sashiosae) is indeed among the most effective measures available in Japanese debt collection, yet it does not, by itself, put a single yen in the creditor’s hands. To use it well one must first see the whole map of recovery under Japanese law, and understand where provisional attachment sits on it.

Contents

The three routes to recovery
Provisional attachment and attachment are not the same thing
The difference in speed
What it gains and what it costs
From provisional attachment to judgment to execution
In closing
How to contact us

The three routes to recovery

Japanese law offers three broad routes.

Recovery by agreement between the parties — demand, negotiation, an instalment arrangement, settlement. The cheapest and the quickest, but it presupposes a debtor with both the will and the means to pay.
Recovery by enforcing security — a mortgage, a revolving mortgage, security by way of transfer, a joint and several guarantee. Where security was taken at the outset, it may be enforced without waiting for a judgment, which is why security should be considered when the contract is made rather than when payment fails.
Recovery through the courts — civil litigation, civil conciliation, a demand for payment (shiharai-tokusoku), and compulsory execution thereafter. The last resort where there is neither agreement nor security.

Provisional attachment belongs to none of these three. It is a preparatory measure whose function is to make the third route actually work. That distinction is the key to the whole subject.

Provisional attachment and attachment are not the same thing

The two English terms look alike; under Japanese law they belong to different stages of different procedures.

Provisional attachment — a stage of the provisional remedy procedure, taken before judgment on the merits and without any enforceable title.
Attachment — a stage of the compulsory execution procedure, taken after a judgment or other enforceable title has been obtained.

Their purposes differ accordingly. Provisional attachment aims at preserving the assets available to satisfy the claim: it freezes the position as it stands, so that the debtor cannot conceal, transfer or spend the property while the action runs. It transfers no money to the creditor. Attachment in execution aims at satisfaction of the claim: attached deposits are collected, attached real property is sold at auction, and the creditor is actually paid. One is defensive preparation; the other is the realisation of the right.

The difference in speed

An application for provisional attachment is decided without the debtor being heard, and the court gives no advance warning before the order issues. In practice the order commonly follows the application within days or a few weeks. That structure — freezing the assets before the other side knows anything of it — is precisely where the value of the measure lies.

Attachment in execution, by contrast, presupposes an enforceable title. Where that title must come from ordinary litigation, the first instance alone commonly takes six months to a year or more, and longer again if the losing party appeals. It is not unusual to reach the end of that road only to find that the debtor’s assets have gone. Provisional attachment exists to bridge exactly that interval.

What it gains and what it costs

Three advantages. First, the assets are secured — bank deposits, real property, accounts receivable — so that execution later has something to bite on. Second, the practical pressure it creates: a bank whose customer’s deposits are attached learns at once of the customer’s difficulties, as does any trade debtor whose payable is attached, and debtors who would not negotiate often begin to. Third, early resolution — a good number of matters settle shortly after the order issues, without the action ever being fought out.

Three burdens. First, a security bond, deposited with the Legal Affairs Bureau on the court’s order and in practice commonly ten to thirty per cent of the sum claimed; it is cash out of the door, and as a rule it is not returned until the main proceedings end. Second, liability in damages: if the right to be preserved is not upheld in the action on the merits, the creditor must compensate the debtor for the loss the attachment caused. Third, the effect on the debtor’s business — the pressure is sometimes too great, and a debtor whose working capital is cut off may fail altogether, and a bankrupt debtor pays nobody.

From provisional attachment to judgment to execution

The sequence typically runs as follows. Investigate the debtor’s assets and identify what can usefully be attached. Apply for provisional attachment, showing the right to be preserved and the necessity of preservation. Obtain the court’s ruling on security and deposit the bond. The order issues and is executed — deposits frozen, or the attachment registered against the land. File the action on the merits: the attachment is a temporary measure only, and a creditor who delays may be met with an order to file an action (kiso-meirei), non-compliance with which revokes the attachment. Obtain judgment or settlement, and with it an enforceable title. Finally, execute — converting what was provisionally attached into attachment proper, and taking payment.

Provisional attachment, in short, is a beginning and not an end. A creditor unwilling to litigate the claim should not apply for it at all.

In closing

The power of provisional attachment comes from acting before the debtor knows, and that same structure brings with it the cost of the bond and the risk of damages. Weigh the three routes — agreement, security, the courts — before reaching for it, and apply only where litigation is genuinely necessary and the assets would otherwise disappear. Instructions, asset investigation and the preparation of the application can all be handled from outside Japan by email and video conference, and we are equally glad to work through the creditor’s own counsel.

How to contact us

Telephone 03-6435-8418 within Japan, or +81-3-6435-8418 from overseas. Lines are open from 08:00 to 24:00 Japan time, including Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays. Enquiries are also received at any hour through the form on this site.

M&A Partners Law Office LPC　Katsuhiro Tsuchiya, Representative Attorney-at-Law (Tokyo Bar Association, Registration No. 26775)　17F Mori Trust Shiroyama Trust Tower, 4-3-1 Toranomon, Minato-ku, Tokyo, Japan

This article is a general explanation based on the laws and practice of Japan as at August 2026 (Reiwa 8). The outcome of any particular matter depends on its own facts, and no specific result is guaranteed.

Contents