Refusal letter to the Court

Tarcento, November 12^th 2019

To:

Tokyo High Court

Chiyoda –Ku, Kasumigaseki 1-1-4

Tokyo

100-8933 Japan

Court Clerk: Takenouchi  Kouji    

Tel 03-3581-2010

Fax 03-3581-5529

東京高等裁判所　令和元年（ネ）第２５９７号　離婚等請求控訴事件

（原審：新潟家庭裁判所長岡支部　平成２９年（家ホ）第１１号離婚等請求事件）

Tokyo High Court, Reiwa Gannen (Ne) No.2597 Rikontou Seikyuu Kouso Jiken

(Original Court: Niigata Family Court Nagaoka Branch Heisei 29 Nen (Ie Ho) No. 11 Rikontou Seikyuu Jiken)

To whom it may concern,

The undersigned (Meneghetti Andrea) declares that he has received a summons from the High Court of Tokyo. The summons has been received September the 20^th 2019. The summons has arrived through an e-mail of the Italian Consulate in Tokyo.

The undersigned cannot accept the summons of the High Court of Tokyo due to the fact this summons lacks in the minimum requirements.

The most obvious and gross faults and errors are listed:

- Having sent the summons via the Consulate doesn’t guarantee the Appellee that all the documents have been sent to him. These documents are necessary for the Appellee.

- In the documents received by the Appellee through the e-mail there isn’t any document that declares what has been effectively sent.

- Having sent the documents via an e-mail, not even certificated, doesn’t give a proof or a signature of the acceptance of the procedure. Actually, this implicit acceptance is not existing.

- It is been accepted that only the judgment of the Family Court of Nagaoka could be sent via the Consulate, but not all the communications of all Courts of Japan.

- In the documents received the Appellee cannot understand the procedures how to present his motivations in defense.

- The summons should have been arrived directly to the Appellee given the fact the answer cannot be done via the Consulate. In other words, the Consulate doesn’t work for the Appellee.

- Sending the summons via the Italian Consulate severely violates the privacy of the Appellee. How is possible that the Consulate knows the exchange of personal letter between the Appellant and the Appellee? How is possible that a Court makes a so gross violation of the privacy?

- Not all the files received by the Appellee were in a readable format.

The Appellee reckons that he has received only a portion of the documents of the Court. The documents received are chaotic and not translated.

It is obvious that having chosen this modality damages the Appellee. It limits the chances that the Appellee may provide a precise and complete answer. Consequently, the Appellee cannot have a satisfactory and clear defense (also for the analysis of the Court itself).

The situation is also more severe given the fact to the Appellee has been requested to pay the court costs of a court hearing that he hasn’t asked and that it is completely external to his will. In other words, the Appellee is summoned to a hearing in an improper and inadequate way. And the request to pay also for the expenses is meaningless.

Sending the summons for this supplementary hearing in this patchy and deficient mode, further invalidates the defendant’s rights for his defense.

In faith.

Andrea Meneghetti