ABSTRAKSengketa jual beli tanah dalam perkara ini menyeret pihak penjual yang telah menjual objek yang sama kepada dua pembeli dalam dua kali transaksi. Pembeli kedua (penggugat) melayangkan gugatannya terhadap pembeli pertama (tergugat II). Posisi hukumnya dilematis. Kedua pembeli sama-sama merasa mempunyai hak atas tanah sengketa karena telah membeli objek yang sama dari penjual. Untuk membuktikan siapa pembeli yang berhak, hakim perlu mempertimbangkan asas "iktikad baik" (good faith), sebagai dasar untuk menentukan pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum. Permasalahannya, kedua pembeli sama-sama mengklaim dirinya adalah pembeli yang beriktikad baik. Sehingga, untuk menilai siapa pembeli yang patut mendapat perlindungan hukum, hakim berpegangan pada prinsip duty of care, dengan mempertimbangkan siapa pembeli yang berhati-hati dan cermat memeriksa data yuridis dan data fisik sebelum dan saat jual beli dilakukan. Prinsip duty of care ini bersifat abstrak, maka metode penulisan yang digunakan, menelusuri dan mengkaji pendapat para ahli hukum perdata dan agraria untuk didialogkan dengan putusan-putusan hakim. Perkembangan putusan-putusan pengadilan mengenai pembeli beriktikad baik yang mengadopsi prinsip duty of care, seharusnya menjadi 'pegangan' para hakim dalam menangani kasus yang serupa, untuk menilai kapan pembeli dikategorikan sebagai pembeli beriktikad baik.Kata kunci: iktikad baik, perlindungan hukum, duty of care, data yuridis dan fisik.ABSTRACTThe dispute of land sale and purchase in this case drag the seller who had sold the same object to two buyers in two transactions. The second buyer (plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the first buyer (defendant II). Its legal standing created a dilemma. Both buyers felt equally entitled to be the owner of the disputed land, which is the same object purchased from the seller. In providing evidence of the most eligible buyer, the judge should take into consideration the principle of "good faith" as the basis for determining the buyer deserving legal protection. The problem is that both buyers claimed that they were buyers of good faith. Therefore, to appraise which buyer deserving the legal protection, the judges adhered to principle of "duty of care" by taking into account which one of them was carefully and meticulously reading-through the juridical and physical data prior to and during the sale and purchase of the land was conducted. Given the abstract nature of the principle of "duty of care" the analysis method used in this discussion is exploring and studying the opinions of the experts of civil and agrarian law as to be juxtaposed with the decisions of the judges. The development of court decisions related to the issue of good faith buyers adopting the principle of "duty of care" should serve as a reference for the judges in handling similar cases to determine a good faith buyer.Keywords: good faith, legal protection, duty of care, juridical and physical data.
Faith-based Schools and the State. Catholics in America, France and England | In Good Faith. Schools, Religion and Public Funding