Batchelder v. Kawamoto Appellees' Brief - Greines, Martin, Stein ...

see also Allstate Life Zm. Co. v. Linter Group Ltd., 994 F.2d 996, 999 (2d
Cir.), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 945, 114 S.Ct. 386, 126 L.Ed.2d 334 (1993).
A. Choice of Law Principles Require Application Of Japan's
Exclusive Jurisdiction Statute.
1. Japan's Exclusive Jurisdiction Statute Is Substantive.
Under Japanese law, any action to enforce a director's liability to a
corporation - whether initiated by the corporation itself or filed by a
shareholder derivatively on behalf of the corporation - can be brought only in
the district court having jurisdiction over the corporation's head office. Shoho
(Commercial Code), Law No. 48 of 1899 [Shoho] Art. 268(1). (I ER 54:774,
26-27 (Kitazawa Decl.); I ER 55:7y3B, 22-29 (Koma Decl.); I ER 52:773b,
11-17 (Henderson Decl.); I ER 61 :775, 14-19 (Young Decl.).)
Japan's exclusive jurisdiction statute does not merely express a procedural
preference. Numerous factors show it reflects paramount policy concerns:
Japanese courts are absolutely bound, without motion being made and
without discretion, to transfer or dismiss an action to ensure that it is