Evicting a Tenant in Arrears in Japan｜Proceedings, Injunction and the Execution Officer

The demand has gone out, the tenant neither pays nor leaves, and the telephone no longer connects. Foreign owners of investment property in Japan meet this regularly. Japanese law does not allow a landlord to retake the premises personally. Even where the lease has been validly terminated, possession is recovered only step by step, through a judgment of the court and the work of a court execution officer. What follows sets out that process under the law of Japan, from the demand to the completion of enforcement.

Contents

The sequence, and how long it takes
What must be pleaded and proved
When someone other than the tenant is in occupation
The execution officer: notice, removal and the goods left behind
Reinstatement, guarantors and the guarantee company
Where the tenant is not Japanese
In closing
How to contact us

The sequence, and how long it takes

Demand and conditional termination. A demand is sent by content-certified mail (naiyo shomei yubin), allowing a period for payment and providing in the same letter that the lease terminates automatically if payment is not made in time. Everything that follows rests on this document.
Negotiating a voluntary surrender. Once the lease has ended, the date of departure, the treatment of the contents and the handling of the arrears should be discussed. Writing off part of the arrears in exchange for an agreed departure is common, and is usually far quicker and cheaper than litigation and enforcement.
Filing of an action. Where negotiation fails, ordinary civil litigation is brought for possession and for the unpaid rent, the two claims being made together in the same proceedings.
Settlement or judgment. A large proportion of cases settle in the course of the proceedings, on terms fixing a departure date and instalments for the arrears. A record of settlement is an enforceable title in the same way as a judgment.
Compulsory execution. If the tenant still does not leave, enforcement of possession is applied for and carried out by a court execution officer.

From demand to completed enforcement, several months is the usual expectation. The period varies considerably, however, according to whether the tenant defends, whether anyone other than the tenant is in occupation, and how much there is inside the premises.

What must be pleaded and proved

The landlord will ordinarily have to establish the conclusion of the lease and delivery of the premises (the lease document and payment records), the months for which rent was not paid (the rent ledger and bank credits), the demand and its arrival (the retained copy of the content-certified mail and the post office’s certification), and the notice of termination and its arrival.

It is worth understanding how the burden falls in Japanese practice: it is for the tenant to plead and prove that payment was made, and that special circumstances exist such that the relationship of trust has not been destroyed. The landlord therefore prepares the arrears and the demand; the tenant’s own circumstances are answered once raised. Whether the relationship of trust has been destroyed remains the heart of the court’s decision, so the tenant’s past payment record, the course of any discussions and the landlord’s own conduct should all be assembled as documentary evidence in advance.

When someone other than the tenant is in occupation

A judgment binds only the defendant. If a person other than the tenant is in occupation, a judgment obtained against the tenant alone cannot be enforced against the premises.

Sub-letting without consent. Where the tenant has sub-let without the landlord’s consent, Article 612 of the Civil Code of Japan permits termination; but under the case law of Japan, termination is not allowed where there are special circumstances such that the conduct cannot be regarded as a breach of trust. A sub-tenant in occupation in his own right must be joined as a defendant.
Family members living with the tenant. These are ordinarily assistants in possession rather than possessors in their own right, so a judgment against the tenant suffices.
A company tenant housing an employee. The possessor is in principle the company, the employee being an assistant in possession — though a dispute arises if the employee asserts possession of his own.

To prevent the tenant from passing possession to someone else while the case is running, a provisional disposition prohibiting transfer of possession (senyu iten kinshi no karishobun) should be applied for before or at the same time as the action. Once that order has been made and a public notice posted by a court execution officer, the judgment against the tenant may be enforced even against a person who takes possession afterwards. The application requires a prima facie showing of the right to be preserved and of the necessity of preservation, and a security bond deposited with the Legal Affairs Bureau.

The execution officer: notice, removal and the goods left behind

Application and notice. The execution officer attends the premises, confirms who is in occupation, and gives public notice of the date by which possession must be delivered up — as a rule one month from the notice. A good number of tenants leave of their own accord at this stage.
The day of removal. If the date passes and the tenant remains, the officer opens the premises on the appointed day, removes the occupants and the contents, and delivers the premises to the landlord. The physical removal is carried out by contractors engaged as assistants to the enforcement.
The contents. Goods inside may not simply be thrown away. They are in principle handed to the tenant on the spot; anything unclaimed is taken into storage and, if it is not collected within a reasonable period, sold or disposed of under the statutory procedure.
Costs to be advanced. The officer’s fees, the removal charges and the storage charges must all be paid in advance by the landlord who applies. Depending on the volume of goods this commonly runs to several hundred thousand yen, and can exceed one million yen.

In law the costs of enforcement are borne by the tenant, but in practice the landlord advances them and claims them back afterwards. Against a tenant with no means, they are often never recovered. Whether to press on to physical removal is therefore a question to be weighed against a negotiated departure.

Reinstatement, guarantors and the guarantee company

Under Article 621 of the Civil Code of Japan the tenant is obliged to make good damage for which he is responsible, but not wear arising from ordinary use nor deterioration through the passage of time. Whether the cost of renewing wallpaper, tatami or flooring can be claimed turns on that distinction. The guidelines issued by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism of Japan are widely relied upon in practice.

Against a joint and several guarantor, the landlord may claim the arrears, damages for the period from termination until possession is given up, and the cost of reinstatement. A guarantee given by an individual is ineffective unless a maximum amount is stated in the contract. A rent guarantee company pays under its own contract, but usually subject to a ceiling and to a notification deadline — so notify it as soon as arrears appear.

Where the tenant is not Japanese

The demand should be drawn in Japanese, with a translation into the tenant’s own language attached. If it is later relied on in evidence, the Japanese text governs.
Under Article 74 of the Court Act of Japan, the courts use the Japanese language. An interpreter is appointed by the court for a party who does not speak it, and documents in a foreign language must be filed with a Japanese translation.
If the tenant has left the country or cannot be traced, the premises still may not be dealt with unilaterally. Check the resident register, the residence card details, the place of work and whatever the guarantor knows; if the tenant still cannot be found, proceedings may be served by publication.
Where the premises contain items the tenant regards as valuable, the day of removal is a common flashpoint. Set out the storage period and the method of collection clearly, in the tenant’s own language, well beforehand.

In closing

Recovering possession is a chain of three linked stages — demand, proceedings, enforcement — and a weakness at any one of them delays the whole. The fastest and cheapest route, more often than not, remains a negotiated departure. We act for foreign owners of property in Japan and for foreign companies with a property business here, and are equally glad to work through the client’s own counsel abroad.

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