icon-angleicon-facebookicon-hatebuicon-instagramicon-lineicon-linked_inicon-pinteresticon-twittericon-youtubelogo-not
People

With one of the largest legal teams in Japan, we bring a wealth of practical knowledge focused on the singular purpose of providing high quality legal services.

Publications

Our lawyers have authored or co-authored a number of newsletters, articles, books and other materials covering a wide range of legal areas to address the latest legal developments and increasingly diverse and complex issues.

Seminars

We regularly hold seminars and offer lectures through various formats, such as online streaming.

SCROLL
TOP
Publications
Newsletters

The JFTC’s new evidence disclosure regime: a step forward for companies suspected of anti-competitive conduct?

NO&T Japan Legal Update

Author
Yoshitoshi Imoto
Publisher
Nagashima Ohno & Tsunematsu
Journal /
Book
NO&T Japan Legal Update No.4 (March, 2016)
Reference
Practice Areas
*Please note that this newsletter is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. In addition, it is based on information as of its date of publication and does not reflect information after such date. In particular, please also note that preliminary reports in this newsletter may differ from current interpretations and practice depending on the nature of the report.

I. Introduction
Japan’s competition authority, the Japan Fair Trade Commission (the “JFTC”) is now under pressure to disclose to parties it suspects of anti-competitive behavior more evidence in the JFTC’s pre-decision phase with the introduction of a new regime of evidence disclosure and pre-decision hearing sessions.

Under the old regime, the suspected parties that allegedly have infringed the Anti-Monopoly Law only had a limited opportunity in the JFTC’s pre-decision phase to seek information from the JFTC about the evidence that the JFTC investigators relied on to prepare their draft order(s). This was typically a few months before the order(s) were issued, usually at the time pre-notification of the draft order(s) was made to the suspected parties.

Although there was an opportunity to request the JFTC to reconsider disputed points before the order(s) were issued, the JFTC’s explanation itself did not entail any disclosure of the evidential documents and the explanation was usually not extensive. Therefore, if the suspected parties wanted to review the evidence in detail, they had to resort to filing a complaint with the JFTC’s examination panel (as opposed to a judicial court) after the order(s) were officially issued and then had to wait for the JFTC investigators to present the evidence in response to such complaint.

Download Newsletter PDF

Lawyers

Antitrust and Competition Related Publications

Antitrust and Competition Law Advice Related Publications

Apply Select Practice Areas
Apply