In a lawsuit disputed over whether or not the provision of "single custody" under the Civil Code, in which the court determines that either the father or the mother has custody of the child when a divorce is finalized in a court, is unconstitutional, the Supreme Court ruled that custody should be granted. The decision was made to reject the appeal of the father who filed a lawsuit because he could not have it, and the ruling that the provision did not violate the Constitution was finalized.
A man in Tokyo who has lost custody of his two children after a divorce, if the divorce is approved by the court, the court will decide either the father or the mother as the person with custody. He sued the country for violating the constitution, which stipulates the right to pursue happiness and equality under the law.
Last year, the Tokyo High Court of the second trial said, ``The provision is to protect the interests of the child by designating the person with parental authority who is more suitable for the court to avoid a situation where the child's care and education cannot be decided appropriately. “It makes sense from a legislative point of view,” he said.
On top of that, he said, ``It can only be said that whether or not to allow 'joint custody,' in which both parents have custody even after divorce, is still at the stage of leaving it to the discretion of the Diet.'' The current provision is unconstitutional. I decided that it was not correct, and dismissed the appeal following the first trial.
The man filed an appeal, but presiding judge Katsuya Uga of the 3rd Petty Bench of the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal by the 30th, and the ruling that the provision of "single custody" does not violate the constitution was finalized. .
The Legislative Council is currently debating issues related to parental authority and child rearing after divorce, including a review of the system.