Hyakuri Air Base suit

Supreme Court precedent
Case name	Real estate proprietary rights confirmation, usucaption registration erasion request original suit, the counterclaim, real estate proprietary rights confirmation, condition precedent changing point having a right move provisional registration registration of an erasure request original suit, the counterclaim, bill of proof case
Case number	1982 (オ) the 164th, the 165th
It is June 20 (1989) for 1,989 years
Casebook	385 pages of 43 collection of people 6
The trial point
Even if it is the act of the country, the act of the country to perform by the viewpoint that is equal with a private citizen does not correspond to individual "other acts about affairs of state" that it is said in constitution Article 98 Clause 1 because I use authorities although concreteness-like and am not accompanied by the theses of the law example. A country takes the viewpoint that is equal with a private citizen as the administrative main constituent, and the contract concerned sees the contract in the privacy law to conclude for an individual between a private citizen in process of the establishment and contents substantially; and of an act as the motion of authorities and the special circumstances that it may be said that is unchanged at all as far as there is not it; of constitution Article 9 receive the application of the privacy law for the purpose of the fair adjustment of the interest of the private citizen interval without receiving an application directly. I can determine whether it resemble it to judge decision すべきではないのであつて, the construction of the Self-Defense Forces base whether it resemble it to judge whether a purpose called the construction of the Self-Defense Forces base to a motive adapt to a purpose of direct constitution Article 9, and connections, this matter sales contract become invalid as public order and morals violation whether you have a purpose to an asociality as you observe this matter sales contract concluded as a motive generally and should deny the effect in the cause of the privacy law-like value order, and connections become invalid as public order and morals violation for the first time.
Third Petty Bench
The presiding judge	Masami Ito
Associate judge	Mitsuhiko Yasuoka Toshio Sakagami
Opinion
Major opinion	Unanimous
Opinion	Unavailable
Dissenting opinion	Unavailable
Reference articles
Constitution Article 98 Clause 1, Article 9, civil law Article 90
I display a template

Hyakuri Air Base suit (ひゃくりきちそしょう) is suit focusing on the constitutionality of the Self-Defense Forces which began in 1977. With a hundred miles trial.

Table of contents

Summary

When I established Hyakuri Air Base of the Air Self-Defense Force in Ogawa-machi, Ibaraki (existing Omitama-shi), the inhabitants who owned the base construction planned site canceled a contract of the land which I sold to the inhabitants of the construction opposition and sold the land to the Defense Agency (existing Ministry of Defense). The constitutionality of the Self-Defense Forces became the issue in conjunction with reversion of the land-ownership in this.

Governing act theory was applied in the Mito District Court of the first trial, and it was said that the Self-Defense Forces did not become targeted for the examination of the court. I eliminated the need for constitution judgment in itself to the Self-Defense Forces about this matter in the Tokyo High Court of the second trial, and the Supreme Court gave judgment in support of the second trial, too.

Flow of the trial

First trial

About constitution Article 9, it was said, "Article 9 is not the thing which abandoned war for self-defense", and, on February 17, 1977, the Mito District Court said, "I cannot conclude that seemingly the Self-Defense Forces were "force" clearly", but I applied a judgment, governing act theory saying "I cannot do the unconstitutionality of the Self-Defense Forces with the examination object of the court" and did it with neither the constitutionality nor the violation of the constitution about the Self-Defense Forces. Therefore, the inhabitants of the base construction opposition which demanded the unconstitutionality of the Self-Defense Forces became the lost case.

Second trial

On July 7, 1981, it was said, "this matter made a problem whether the Self-Defense Forces violated public order and morals, and need in itself of the constitution judgment does not exist" in the Tokyo High Court. Therefore, the inhabitants of the base opposition became the lost case in the second trial.

Third trial

On June 20, 1989, the constitution judgment eliminated the need in support of the judgment of the second trial in the Supreme Court and dismissed the final appeal of the inhabitants of the base opposition.

Allied item

• A hundred miles airport
• Governing act theory
• Private citizen interval effect
• Constitution of Japan Article 9
• Naganuma Nike case

Outside link

• The Hyakuri Air Base homepage - Air Self-Defense Force

This item is an unfinished item in conjunction with the fields of law. I demand the cooperator who corrects it, and corrects this item (P: law /PJ law).

It is acquired by "https://ja.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title= Hyakuri Air Base suit &oldid=55941948"

This article is taken from the Japanese Wikipedia Hyakuri Air Base suit

This article is distributed by cc-by-sa or GFDL license in accordance with the provisions of Wikipedia.

Wikipedia and Tranpedia does not guarantee the accuracy of this document. See our disclaimer for more information.

In addition, Tranpedia is simply not responsible for any show is only by translating the writings of foreign licenses that are compatible with CC-BY-SA license information.