Gesetzesübersetzungen

A Bill Regarding the Electronic Declaration of Intention in Japan

Masao Yanaga

Many legislative initiatives have been recently undertaken in Japan to facilitate and cope with e-commerce. Though a more comprehensive introduction to these initiatives will appear in the next issue of this Journal, this article gives a brief introduction and an unofficial translation of a bill regarding the exceptions to the Civil Code with respect to errors in consumer contracts and notices of acceptance in electronic commerce (March 27, 2001).

According to the Explanatory Memorandum of this Bill, this Bill was introduced because recent developments in the information society have made it necessary to provide exceptions to the Civil Code with respect to both errors in consumer contracts and notices of acceptance in electronic commerce.

This Bill is significant because e-commerce using the Internet has become so popular in Japan that it is necessary to ensure legal stability and consumer protection in this type of transaction. The Consumer Contracts Act (Law No.61 of 2000) shall apply to e-commerce transactions with consumers as a matter of course, but the possibility of a customer mistaking what is being purchased and the quantity being purchased seems to be higher when the transactions take place over the Internet than in person or when using hard copy order forms.

Thus Art. 3 of this Bill provides a special and clear rule meant to protect the e-commerce consumer. Art. 95 of the Civil Code stipulates that a declaration of intention shall be null and void if it has been the result of an error with regard to any essential elements of the juridical act (yôso no sakugo), unless the declarant has acted in gross negligence. However, Art. 95 does not clearly define under what circumstances the courts will find the purchaser grossly negligent.

It is widely accepted that the seller can demonstrate the purchaser’s gross negligence when the website was designed so as to prevent the purchaser’s likely errors and where the purchaser is given an opportunity to correct the error once it has been made. Art. 3 is in line with this view.

The definitions of “consumer” and “entrepreneur” in the Bill are the same as those provided in Art. 2 of the Consumer Contracts Act.