2023.10.19

2023 (Kyo) 1

Minshu Vol. 77, No. 7

(Civil Case)Decision on, where the value of the subject matter of a litigation is calculated by totaling the values of claims of the plaintiffs who jointly filed an action, the amount of fees for filing the action that should be subject to legal aid granted to each plaintiff

Case of an appeal with permission against the appellate court's decision to revoke the decision to dismiss without prejudice a petition for legal aid

Decision of the First Petty Bench, quashed and remanded

Hiroshima High Court, Okayama Branch, Decision of October 7, 2022

1. Where the value of the subject matter of a litigation is calculated by totaling the values of claims of the plaintiffs who jointly filed an action, the amount of fees for filing the action that should be subject to legal aid granted to each plaintiff is limited to the amount obtained by prorating the amount of fees for filing the action which is calculated based on the above value of the subject matter of the litigation in proportion to the value of claim of each plaintiff.
2. Where the value of the subject matter of a litigation is calculated by totaling the values of claims of the plaintiffs who jointly filed an action, the amount of fees for filing the action that should be considered as "expenses necessary for preparing for and conducting litigation" as set forth in the main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure in relation to each plaintiff is the amount obtained by prorating the amount of fees for filing the action which is calculated based on the above value of the subject matter of the litigation in proportion to the value of claim by each plaintiff.

(For 1 and 2) Main text of Article 9, paragraph (1) and main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure and Article 4, paragraph (1) and the chapeau of Article 9, paragraph (3) of the Act on the Cost of Civil Proceedings
(For 1) Article 83, paragraph (1), item (i) of the Code of Civil Procedure

The decision in prior instance is quashed.
This case is remanded to the Hiroshima High Court.

Concerning the reasons for the appeal stated by the counsel for the appeal, OHARA Kazuto et al.
1. A total of 32 persons including the adverse parties jointly filed an action, by alleging that they suffered from a river flood caused by heavy rain, to demand that the appellant and three other persons jointly and severally pay compensation for the damages suffered by each of them and delay damages therefor while also filing a petition for legal aid.
The court of first instance ruled to dismissed without prejudice the above petition filed by the adverse parties on the ground that they did not meet the requirements specified in the main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure. The adverse parties then filed an immediate appeal against the above ruling.
2. The court of prior instance determined as outlined below, revoking the ruling in first instance and remanding the case to the court of first instance:
Where the value of the subject matter of a litigation is calculated by totaling the values of claims of the plaintiffs who jointly filed an action, each plaintiff is obliged to pay the entire amount of fees for filing the action which is calculated based on the above value of the subject matter of the litigation. For this reason, the amount of fees for filing the action that should be subject to legal aid is such entire amount in relation to any plaintiff. Accordingly, in the case stated above, the amount of fees for filing the action that should be considered as "expenses necessary for preparing for and conducting litigation" as set forth in the main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure is the above entire amount in relation to any plaintiff.
3. However, the aforementioned determination of the court of prior instance cannot be upheld. The reasons therefor are as follows:
When the value of the subject matter of a litigation is calculated by totaling the values of claims by the plaintiffs who jointly filed an action, it is understood that the amount of fees for filing the action pertaining to a claim by each plaintiff is the amount obtained by prorating the amount of fees for filing the action which is calculated based on the above value of the subject matter of the litigation in proportion to the value of claim by each plaintiff (see the chapeau of Article 9, paragraph (3) of the Act on the Cost of Civil Proceedings). Accordingly, in the case stated above, it is reasonable to consider that the amount of fees for filing the action that should be subject to legal aid granted to each plaintiff is only the amount obtained by prorating as specified above.
Even if each plaintiff files an action individually without filing it jointly, the plaintiff may be granted legal aid. For this reason, it cannot be thought that there is need to grant each plaintiff legal aid on the assumption that each plaintiff is required to pay the fees for filing the action pertaining to the claims of the other joint plaintiffs. Accordingly, in the case stated above, it is reasonable to consider that the amount of fees for filing the action that should be considered as "expenses necessary for preparing for and conducting litigation" as set forth in the main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure in relation to each plaintiff is the amount obtained by prorating as specified above.
4. The determination by the court of prior instance that differs from the above contains a violation of law or regulation that has clearly influenced the judicial decision. The counsel's arguments are well-grounded, and the decision in prior instance should inevitably be quashed. This case is remanded to the court of prior instance for further examination into whether the requirement specified in the main text of Article 82, paragraph (1) of the Code of Civil Procedure is met.
Accordingly, the Court unanimously decides as set forth in the main text of the decision.

Justice SAKAI Toru
Justice YAMAGUCHI Atsushi
Justice MIYAMA Takuya
Justice YASUNAMI Ryosuke
Justice OKA Masaaki