Minority Shareholders’ Legal Protection in a Limited Liability Company System

The purpose of this study is to determine the legal protection model for the majority and minority shareholders in public limited companies. This research method is normative research. To investigate the ineffectiveness of laws and regulations, in particular, Law No. 40 of 2007 on limited liability companies in providing shareholder protection, researchers have studied the laws and regulations and considered the views of experts on legal concepts related to legal protection for shareholders, particularly, minority shareholders. The results showed that the law did not provide maximum legal protection for minority shareholders, creating an imbalance between the rights of the minority and majority shareholders. For this reason, 1) reform or progressive changes in laws and regulations are needed, for instance, in PT Law No. 40 of 2007. These changes should be fundamental to philosophical aspects (values and perspectives) in providing shareholder protection; 2) the review of shareholders’ protection methods should be based on the aspects of fairness

Download Full-text

Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Pemegang Saham Minoritas Pada Perseroan Terbatas Yang Melakukan Merger

Jurnal Analogi Hukum ◽

10.22225/ah.2.1.1618.59-62 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 59-62

Author(s):

I Kadek Sridana ◽

I Nyoman Putu Budiartha ◽

I Putu Gede Seputra

Keyword(s):

Research Method ◽

Government Regulation ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Limited Liability ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Minority Shareholders ◽

Legal Position ◽

The Law ◽

A Company

Abstract-Mergers can be said as a strategy or one way to increase a company, therefore there is a need for legal protection for minority shareholders if they do not agree with the merger but the merger is still implemented, and the shareholders are forced to accept the merger. The formulation of the problem in this case is (1) what is the position of the minority shareholders for the limited liability company that merges? (2) What is the legal protection of minority shareholders in a limited liability company that merges? This research method uses a normative research method by approaching the problem in the form of a draft law that relates to the problem under study. The sources of legal material to be used are sourced from research, the literature in the form of primary legal material and secondary legal material. The result of this study are the legal position of the minority shareholders of the company (PT) that carried out the merger has been regulated in Law number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and in Government Regulation Number 27 of 1998 concerning merger, consolidation and takeover of the interests of minority shareholders. In general, the law of limited liability companies is a guideline in the framework of protecting minority shareholders. Protection of minority shares is one of the important things, especially when the company conducts legal actions such as mergers, both preventive legal protection and repressive legal protection. Keywords: Legal protection, shareholders, mergers Abstrak- Merger dapat dikatakan sebagai strategi atau salah satu cara untuk meningkatkan suatu perusahaan oleh karena itu perlu adanya perlindungan hukum terhadap pemegang saham minoritas apabila mereka tidak setuju dengan merger namun merger tetap dilaksanakan, dan pemegang saham tersebut dipaksakan untuk menerima merger tersebut. Adapun rumusan masalah dalam hal ini (1) Bagaimanakah kedudukan pemegang saham minoritas bagi perseroan terbatas yang melakukan merger? (2) Bagaimanakah perlindungan hukum terhadap pemegang saham minoritas pada perseroan terbatas yang melakukan merger? Metode penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian normatif dengan melakukan pendekatan masalah berupa pedekatan perundang-undangan yang berkaitan dengan masalah yang dikaji. Adapun sumber bahan hukum yang akan digunakan yakni bersumber dari penelitian, kepustakaan berupa bahan hukum primer dan bahan hukum sekunder. Adapun hasil dari penelitian ini adalah kedudukan hukum pemegang saham minoritas terhadap perusahaan (PT) yang melakukan merger, sudah diatur dalam Undang-undang nomor 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan terbatas serta dalam Peraturan pemerintah Nomor 27 Tahun 1998 tentang penggabungan, peleburan, dan pengambilalihan tentang kepentingan pemegang saham minoritas. Secara umum hukum perseroan terbatas menjadi pedoman dalam rangka perlindungan pemegang saham minoritas. Perlindungan terhadap saham minoritas merupakan salah satu hal yang penting terutama saat persroan melakukan perbuatan hukum seperti merger baik perlindungan hukum secara preventif maupun perlindungan hukum secara represif. Kata kunci: Perlindungan hukum, Pemegang saham, Merger

Download Full-text

Perlindungan Hukum Pemegang Saham Minoritas Perseroan Terbatas Tertutup dan Keadilan Berdasar Pancasila

SASI ◽

10.47268/sasi.v25i2.222 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 25 (2) ◽

pp. 199

Author(s):

Mustaqim Mustaqim ◽

Agus Satory

Keyword(s):

Decision Making ◽

Qualitative Data ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Limited Liability ◽

Secondary Data ◽

General Meeting ◽

Voting Rights ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Minority Shareholders ◽

Full Control

Legal protection for the majority shareholders is sufficiently guaranteed, especially through the mechanism of the RUPS, but this is not the case for minority shareholders, thus creating an injustice problem for minority shareholders. The purpose of this study is to uncover and find out legal protection for minority shareholders in a limited liability company based on Pancasila justice. This research is normative juridical so it uses secondary data with the law approach and qualitative data analysis. The results showed that the General Meeting of Shareholders did not reflect legal protection for minority shareholders, because in every decision making through the General Meeting of Shareholders and various other decisions based on the attendance quorum about the majority of votes present at the General Meeting of Shareholders. Such matter is detrimental to the interests of minority shareholders because without the presence of minority shareholders, a General Meeting of Shareholders can be held, while minority shareholders also have the same rights and obligations and responsibilities. The majority of shareholders hold a large and full control over the company, resulting in minority shareholders, there is no guarantee to get justice based on Pancasila justice. Therefore, the General Meeting of Shareholders must be held if attended by all shareholders with voting rights present or represented. If this is not the case, the results of the General Meeting of Shareholders may be canceled.

Download Full-text

Politics of Legal in Nominee Agreement And Its Practice In Indonesia

Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics ◽

10.14505//jarle.v11.1(47).23 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 11 (1) ◽

pp. 196

Author(s):

SUPARJI SUPARJI

Keyword(s):

Human Behavior ◽

Research Method ◽

Code Of Ethics ◽

Limited Liability ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Legal Research ◽

Community Needs ◽

The Law ◽

A Company

This study aims to examine the legal politics of nominee agreement in Indonesia. The research method used is normative juridical, which conceptualizes the law as what is written in the legislation or the law as a rule or norm that is a benchmark of human behavior that is considered appropriate. This type of legal research is carried out by examining secondary data in the field of law as library data using deductive thinking methods. The results stated that there are no specific rules that override or provide other possibilities related to the issue of absolute ownership of shares by shareholders registered in the register of shareholders of a limited liability company. The unauthorized nominee of agreement in Indonesia is prohibited. The prohibition on nominee agreement is clearly stated in Law No. 25 of 2007 concerning investment. In fact, nominee agreement has grown and developed in the community, due to community needs. Establishment of nominee agreements in practice can be categorized into the formation of direct nominee agreements, namely by directly making agreements between those who affirm that ownership of shares in a company is limited to and on behalf of others. Thus, the legal profession such as notary, legal consultant and lawyer in this case must provide legal counseling, and participate in supervisory duties. As a profession, it should keep the professional code of ethics instead of making unauthorized nominee by making a nominee agreement.

Download Full-text

Reconstruction of Roles and Responsibilities of The Board of Directors in Share Repurchase in Limited Liability Company Based on Fair Values

JOURNAL OF SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH ◽

10.24297/jssr.v15i.8527 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 15 ◽

pp. 27-33

Author(s):

Anis Mashdurohatun ◽

Lenny Mutiara Ambarita ◽

Gunarto

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Limited Liability ◽

Share Repurchase ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Roles And Responsibilities ◽

Alternative Approach ◽

Limited Company ◽

The Board Of Directors ◽

The Law

This research aims to find out the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors in repurchasing shares in limited companies that have not been fair and to reconstruct the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors in repurchasing shares in limited companies based on fair values. This research is a sociolegal research, that is, an alternative approach that tests doctrinal studies of law. The word 'socio' in sociolegal represents the correlation between the context in which the law is located (an interface with a context within which law exists). It was found that the Board of Directors is jointly and severally liable for losses suffered by shareholders in good faith, arising from repurchases that are null and void due to the law. This does not provide fair/balanced legal protection for the parties. The fair values in buying shares are to provide balanced and proportional legal protection. Reconstruction of the roles and responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the repurchase of shares in a limited company based on fair values by carrying out reconstruction of Article 37 paragraph (3) and (5) of Law Number 40 Year 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies.

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEMEGANG SAHAM MINORITAS YANG TIDAK DILIBATKAN DALAM PROSES AKUISISI

Yuridika ◽

10.20473/ydk.v32i3.4827 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 32 (3) ◽

pp. 441

Author(s):

Maya Sari Tan ◽

Abdul Rahcmad Budiono ◽

Hanif Nur Widhiyanti

Keyword(s):

Legal Protection ◽

Limited Liability ◽

General Meeting ◽

Voting Rights ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Minority Shareholders ◽

Acquisition Process ◽

Financial Difficulties ◽

The Republic ◽

Majority Shareholder

Acquisition as a form of corporate restructuring that is carry out to overcome the situation of financial difficulties or improve the performance of the company as a whole or part of the business unit. In Article 126 paragraph 1 of Laws of the Republic of Indonesia number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company stated that the acquisition process should consider the interests of minority shareholders. However, sometimes acquisition decisions have already been decided in advance by the majority shareholder without involving minority shareholders. Based on this, this paper intends to analyze the form of legal protection for minority shareholders who are not involved in the acquisition process. Through the approach of legislation and case approach, it is found that Laws of the Republic of Indonesia number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company has not provided enough legal protection to minority shareholders. The decision-making process of acquisition in the General Meeting of Shareholders should be procedurally and substantively in accordance with Laws of the Republic of Indonesia number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company. It is intended that minority shareholders have the opportunity to exercise their voting rights even though they do not have to be the party controlling the company.

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM PEMEGANG SAHAM MINORITAS DAN PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN NOTARIS DALAM RUPS PT TERTUTUP [LEGAL PROTECTION FOR MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS AND NOTARY RESPONSIBILITY IN A GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS IN A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANiES]

Notary Journal ◽

10.19166/nj.v1i1.2738 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 19

Author(s):

Susi Susantijo ◽

Shinta Pangesti ◽

Robbyson Halim

Keyword(s):

Legal Protection ◽

Limited Liability ◽

General Meeting ◽

Legal Action ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Minority Shareholders ◽

Legal Subject ◽

The Republic ◽

Formal Requirements ◽

Bahasa Indonesia

In practice, there often occurrs defective procedure when holding a Private Limited Company’s (PLC’s) General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS), which later stated in Deed of the Meeting Resolutions by a Notary. Regarding the defective procedure in GMS, shareholders will surely suffer losses because their rights are violated, especially minority shareholders. Two problems that arise and examined in this study are: How is the legal protection for minority shareholders in a PLC’s GMS? and How is the responsibility of the Notary for making Deed of the Meeting Resolutions from an Extraordinary GMS containing the defective procedures in a PLC? This research is normative legal research. Based on the research conducted, it can be concluded that legal protection for minority shareholders in PLC’s GMS, has been quite well regulated in Laws of the Republic of Indonesia number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company. On the other hand, the responsibility of the Notary for making Deed of the Meeting Resolutions from an Extraordinary GMS containing the defective procedures in an LLC is a liability limited to formal truth or formal requirements. Regarding the material truth, it is not the responsibility of the notary but is the responsibility of the legal subject who performed the legal action. Notary in carrying out his position also requires having thoroughness and carefulness in doing any legal action, including making Deed of the Meeting Resolutions.BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT: Dalam praktek, sering sekali terjadi penyelenggaraan RUPS PT Tertutup yang mengandung cacat prosedur, yang kemudian dituangkan dalam Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat oleh Notaris. Terhadap adanya penyelenggaraan RUPS yang mengandung cacat prosedur, para pemegang saham pasti akan mengalami kerugian karena hak-hak mereka dilanggar, khususnya para pemegang saham minoritas. Dua rumusan masalah yang timbul dan diteliti dalam penelitian ini adalah: Bagaimana perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang saham minoritas dalam RUPS PT Tertutup? serta Bagaimana pertanggungjawaban Notaris atas pembuatan Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat dari penyelenggaraan RUPS Luar Biasa yang mengandung cacat prosedur pada PT Tertutup? Penelitian ini adalah penelitian hukum normatif. Berdasarkan penelitian yang telah dilakukan, diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang saham minoritas sehubungan dengan penyelenggaraan RUPS dalam PT Tertutup sudah cukup baik diatur dalam Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU PT). Di samping itu, pertanggungjawaban Notaris atas pembuatan Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat dari penyelenggaraan RUPS Luar Biasa yang mengandung cacat prosedur pada PT Tertutup merupakan pertanggungjawaban sebatas pada syarat formal atau kelengkapan formal. Kebenaran materiil bukan tanggung jawab notaris, melainkan masing-masing subjek hukum yang melakukan. Notaris dalam menjalankan jabatannya juga dituntut memiliki ketelitian dan kehati-hatian dalam melakukan setiap perbuatan hukum, termasuk pembuatan Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat.

Download Full-text

PROGRESIFITAS HUKUM PENGEMBALIAN DEVIDEN SAHAM INTERIM PERSEROAN TERBATAS PADA UUPT NO.40 TAHUN 2007

Legal Standing Jurnal Ilmu Hukum ◽

10.24269/ls.v5i1.3552 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 1

Author(s):

Bella Mutiara Wahab

Keyword(s):

Board Of Directors ◽

Research Method ◽

Stock Exchange ◽

Limited Liability ◽

Company Law ◽

Limited Liability Company ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

Dividend Distribution ◽

The Board Of Directors ◽

Annual Book

AbstractProgressive law must place the law in a very close position with the law's community or stakeholders. This position is called responsive, progressive law and is always associated with stakeholders' reality and needs to create justice and happiness as law aspired itself. Also, progressive law emphasizes social integration to overcome public moral insularity.Starting from the viewpoint of progressive law, the author looks at the laws and regulations that discuss the return of interim dividends as stated in the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007, article 72, article 72 states that companies allow rules related to dividend distribution in a temporary (interim) way. The article is then interpreted as that if the company has positive profits, the company is allowed to distribute dividends before the company closes the book at the end of the year, provided that the board of directors officially announces the distribution with the approval of the GMS that the positive profits obtained by the company before closing the book will come as dividends interim. As a result, the company competes to distribute interim dividends to increase and show its credibility to investors. It was recorded on the Indonesian stock exchange (IDX) that in September 2020, 73 companies distributed interim dividends.However, article 72 paragraph 5 of the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007 explains that if after the company distributes interim dividends to shareholders and at the end of the closing of the annual book the company suffers a loss, the shareholders must return the dividends they have received. If the shareholder does not return it, the directors and commissioners are jointly responsible for covering the company's losses.This viewpoint is the basis for finding the location of the value and form of legal progressivity regarding the mechanism of interim share dividends in limited liability companies as stated in UUPT No.40 of 2007 Article 72 using a normative research method with a conceptual approach.

Download Full-text

Reformulasi Sanksi Pidana Pencemaran Nama Baik Melalui Media Online

Kanun Jurnal Ilmu Hukum ◽

10.24815/kanun.v21i2.11560 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 21 (2) ◽

pp. 327-338

Author(s):

Rahmat Fadli ◽

Mohd. Din ◽

Mujibussalim Mujibussalim

Keyword(s):

Research Method ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Online Media ◽

Criminal Sanctions ◽

Electronic Transactions ◽

The Law ◽

Sense Of Justice

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji perlindungan hukum terhadap korban pencemaran nama baik melalui media online dan menjelaskan pemenuhan restitusi yang seharusnya diterima korban pencemaran nama baik melalui media online. Pencemaran nama baik merupakan perbuatan melawan hukum, dikarenakan telah menyerang kehormatan atau nama baik seseorang. Rumusan tindak pidana pencemaran nama baik melalui media online diatur dalam Pasal 27 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Infomasi dan Transaksi Elektronik. Sanksi pidananya diatur dalam Pasal 45 ayat (3) Undang-Undang ini. Dalam Undang-Undang ini belum diatur sanksi pidana yang berbentuk restitusi, sehingga kurang melindungi korban pencemaran nama baik melalui media online. Metode penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier, Berdasarkan hasil penelitian ditemukan bahwa ancaman pidana pada Pasal 45 ayat (3) Undang-Undang Infomasi dan Transaksi Elektronik belum memenuhi rasa keadilan dan memberi manfaat kepada korban. Karena pada pasal ini belum mengatur sanksi pidana yang bersifat ganti rugi terhadap korban. Reformulation of Criminal Sanctions on Defamation Through Online Media This study aims to examine the legal protection of victims of defamation through online media and explain the fulfillment of restitution that should be received by victims. Defamation is an act against the law, because it has attacked someone's honor or reputation. The formulation of criminal defamation through online media is regulated in Article 27 paragraph (3) of the Information and Electronic Transactions Law. The criminal sanctions are regulated in Article 45 paragraph (3). This law has not yet regulated criminal sanctions in the form of restitution, so it does not protect victims of defamation through online media. The research method is a normative juridical by using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The results found that the criminal threat in Article 45 paragraph (3) of the Law on Information and Electronic Transaction had not fulfilled a sense of justice and benefited for victims. It is because this article does not yet regulate criminal sanctions that are compensation for the victim.

Download Full-text

Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Perjanjian Kerja Yang Dibuat Secara Lisan

Jurnal Ilmiah Penegakan Hukum ◽

10.31289/jiph.v5i1.1957 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 8

Author(s):

Fauzi Sumardi ◽

Ridho Mubarak

Keyword(s):

Research Method ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Field Research ◽

Civil Code ◽

Employment Relationships ◽

Work Relations ◽

Library Research ◽

Work Relationship ◽

Conducting Research ◽

Laws And Regulations

Juridical Review Of Work Agreements Made Orally A verbal work agreement is a work relationship that is made without the signing of a work agreement, a verbal work agreement is sufficient with a statement that is mutually agreed upon by both parties and should be witnessed by at least two witnesses. The purpose of this study was to find out how the legal strength of work agreements made verbally and how legal protection for workers whose employment relationships are based on verbal work agreements. The research method used is the library research method, namely by conducting research on various written reading sources, and the Field Research method, which is a juridical review of workers whose work relations are based on verbal work agreements. The purpose of this study is to find out the answers to the problems discussed. The results of the study indicate that the legal strength of the work agreement made orally is not specifically regulated in the Civil Code or in other laws and regulations so that the arrangement of oral agreements only follows the arrangement of work agreements in general

Download Full-text

PENERAPAN KODE ETIK NOTARIS DALAM PEMBUATAN AKTA PEMBAGIAN WARIS NO 31 MENURUT UUJN NO 2 TAHUN 2014

Jurnal Hukum Adigama ◽

10.24912/adigama.v1i1.2276 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 1859

Author(s):

Yoki Kurniawan ◽

Hanafi Tanawijaya

Keyword(s):

Public Interest ◽

Research Method ◽

Code Of Ethics ◽

Supervisory Board ◽

The State ◽

The Public ◽

The Law ◽

Laws And Regulations

Notary is a position or ordinary we call as general officials appointed by the State and work to serve the public interest. Not only that, a notary also in carrying out its duties and authority must comply fully with the prevailing laws and regulations in Indonesia. Each position certainly has an ethics in the profession which is called a code of ethics, as well as a notary who has a code of ethics in his profession. But out there masi no notaries who violate the code of ethics as mentioned in the law, In accordance with the title of the author of the adopted method of research used is the normative research method supported by interviews that are expected to help answer the problems of this study. The authors conducted interviews with the supervisory board, notaries, and legal experts. In this case the notary has been declared guilty by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPD) and will proceed the case to the level of sanction by the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW) and after receiving the sanction it will proceed to the next level of Central Assembly (MPP) to be sanctioned which has been granted by the level of the Regional Supervisory Board (MPW).

Download Full-text