Outline of the case
Our client, T Corporation sold a product for 3 million yen to a Y Corporation. Y Corporation claimed that it had not ordered .T Corporation did not know what to do, and came to our firm for a consultation,.According T Corporation it hadfully informed of the product and having obtained the customer’s signature on the purchase order form. As far as our firm could confirm the contract, we found that the contract was valid and that it was not a case falling under the cooling-off provision of the Consumer Contract Law. Therefore, we decided to negotiate with Y Corporation on behalf of our client T Corporation.
Representation in discussions and negotiations with the other party
In addition to hearing from the person in charge of the client, we also prepared a written opinion on whether the Cooling-Off provision of the Consumer Contract Act applies and confirmed that the Cooling-Off provision does not apply in this case, and that no violation of the Consumer Contract Act was found in the method of prior explanation or sales method. We also confirmed that there was no violation of the Consumer Contract Act in the method of prior explanation or sales method. We also asked the client to submit a POA requesting our firm to represent the client in negotiations, as there was a possibility that the other party would ask us to confirm our authority to represent the client.
We sent a content-certified mail to the other party, informing them that they were in default and liable for damages, and that we would like to meet with them directly to discuss what measures could be taken to resolve this matter. The attorney representing the other party contacted us about a week later to inform us that he had represented the case and would like to meet with us to discuss the matter.
On the day of the meeting, the representative directors of both companies and the attorney met in person to discuss the case, and the other party proposed to pay 300,000 yen, which was 10% of the 3-million-yen price of the product, as a settlement payment to resolve the dispute drastically, although they believed that the contract was originally void and there was no obligation to pay. We stated that we could never agree to a 10% payment because the other party was in default and it was clear that we had sufficient documentation to prove our case in a lawsuit. The first meeting ended as it did, but after the meeting, the other party’s attorney called us and proposed to settle the case by paying the equivalent of 20% of the price of the product. After consulting with our client, we insisted that we could not accept a settlement of less than one million yen, which was one-third of the product price, and that if no settlement was reached, we would have no choice but to file a lawsuit. Afterwards, the other party’s representative contacted us again and proposed to settle the dispute by paying 1,000,000 yen as a lump sum as a settlement payment. Therefore, we prepared a settlement agreement between our agents, obtained the approval of each client, and both agents signed and sealed the agreement. The other party remitted 1,000,000 yen by bank transfer on the same day, and the case was settled amicably.
We represent our clients in negotiating with the other party in various disputes that arise in the course of day-to-day business transactions. When companies are involved in various disputes. They have often no idea as to what kind of settlement they should aim for and what procedures they should follow in negotiations. Even when companies meet directly with each other to discuss disputes, there are often concerns about whether this is the correct way to resolve them from the standpoint of compliance. Kuribayashi Sogo Law Office not only represents companies in settlement negotiations, but also explores the nature of the case in question and advises on a reasonable settlement. When requested by a listed company, we will confirm the legal rights in writing by preparing a written opinion, as well as present a reasonable solution in writing. In actual negotiations, both sides will have conflicting opinions, and even if the other side’s claims are considered wildly unreasonable, it will be necessary to seek a possible compromise, obtaining concessions from both sides as much as possible. Such consultative negotiations are best conducted by attorneys with experience in a wide variety of negotiations. In addition, by having an attorney on the side of the company, it is possible for the company to suppress its emotions and make decisions in a calm and collected manner.
For out-of-court negotiation, it is common to bill by time charge since it is not known how much time will be used. Our typical time charge is 35,000 yen (excluding tax) for a partner attorney and 25,000 yen (excluding tax) for an associate attorney.
For our clients
In the above case, it took about 12 hours to confirm the facts, explain the case to the client, research the Consumer Contract Act, negotiate a settlement with the other party, and draft a settlement clause. Since the client entered into Legal Consultant Agreement with our firm, discount fee was applied, and the amount of attorney’s fee was 30,000 yen x 12 hours = 360,000 yen (excluding tax).