scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS TUMPANG TINDIH HPL PELINDO II YANG TERBIT DI ATAS HGB PT RAI (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN PENINJAUAN KEMBALI NOMOR: 392PK/PDT/2020) [JURIDICAL ANALYSIS OF THE OVERLAPPING RIGHT TO MANAGE ISSUED ON TOP OF PT RESOURCES ALAM INDONESIA'S RIGHT TO BUILD (CASE STUDY ON SUPREME COURT DECISION NO 392 PK/PDT/2020)]

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 200
Author(s):  
Astrid Unggul Pawestri

Overlapping and problems arise because of the issuance of the certificate of management rights Number 91/Sungai Selincah in the name of PT Pelindo II.  That HPL certificate overlaps HGB certificates owned by PT RAI, HGB certificate Number 100/Sei Selincah and HGB certificate Number 101/Desa Sei Selincah. BPN issued PT Pelindo II's HPL certificate on January 6, 2012. With the issuance of the HPL certificate of PT Pelindo II, which overlaps HGBs of PT RAI, BPN was unable to extend PT RAI's HGB certificate for those two plots of land previously owned by PT RAI, prompting PT RAI to file a lawsuit in court. The research employs a normative juridical research methodology that includes a statutory analysis, a case study, and a conceptual analysis. Findings of the research show that the issuance of PT Pelindo II's HPL certificate was following applicable regulations (UUPA, UUCK, PP 24/1997, and PP 18/2021), and no provisions were violated. However, PT Pelindo II's HPL Certificate that overlaps the PT RAI's HGB has administrative defects. Regarding the judge's decisions and legal considerations, the District and High Court's was not following the provisions of Article 27 paragraph (1) PP 40/1996, which was still applicable at that time. The Cassation and Judicial Review's decisions in Supreme Court demonstrate the cancellation of the District and High Court's decision due to the judge's negligence in applying the law as specified in the applicable laws and regulations.<p>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT:</p><p>Terdapatnya tumpang tindih dan permasalahan atas penerbitan sertifikat Hak Pengelolaan Nomor 91/Sungai Selincah seluas 23.500 m² milik PT Pelindo II yang mana sertifikat HPL tersebut bersinggungan dan tumpang tindih dengan sertifikat HGB Nomor 100/Sei Selincah dan sertifikat HGB Nomor 101/Desa Sei Selincah milik PT RAI. Atas terbitnya sertifikat HPL PT Pelindo II di atas HGB PT RAI tersebut BPN tidak bisa menerbitkan perpanjangan sertifikat HGB PT RAI atas kedua bidang tanah tersebut yang pada akhirnya mendorong PT RAI untuk mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan kasus, dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian mengenai penerbitan HPL atas nama PT Pelindo II yang diterbitkan di atas tanah yang sudah terdapat sertifikat HGB atas nama PT RAI ditinjau dari UUPA, UUCK, PP 24/1997, dan PP 18/2021 menunjukkan telah sesuai dengan ketentuan yang berlaku dan tidak ada ketentuan yang dilanggar. Namun demikian, penerbitan Sertifikat HPL PT Pelindo II di atas HGB PT RAI tersebut memiliki cacat administratif. Selanjutnya mengenai amar dan pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam putusan Pengadilan Negeri tingkat pertama dan tingkat banding di Pengadilan Tinggi tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan Pasal 27 ayat (1) PP 40/1996 yang masih berlaku saat itu. Pada putusan tingkat kasasi dan peninjauan kembali di Mahkamah Agung menunjukkan adanya pembatalan atas putusan putusan Pengadilan Negeri tingkat pertama dan tingkat banding di Pengadilan Tinggi dikarenakan adanya kekhilafan hakim dalam menerapkan hukum sebagaimana ketentuan peraturan-perundangan.</p>

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 1193
Author(s):  
Jesslyn Gressella ◽  
Andari Yurikosari

This study has title "Analysis of Process Wage Based on Constitutional Court Decision Number 37 / PUU-XI / 2011, Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 3 Year 2015 and Circular Letter Number 3 Year 2018 (Case Study of Central Jakarta Industrial Relations Court Decision Number 255 / Pdt.Sus -PHI / 2017 Jo. Supreme Court Decision Number 499 K / Pdt.Sus-PHI / 2018). This study uses the type of normative legal research or literature on labor agreement theory and legal certainty theory. The approach used in this research is the law approach which is completed with interview data. The wage of process given to workers in the discussion of this study is not in accordance with statutory regulations. The judge decides the case based on the Supreme Court Circular Letter Number 3 Year 2015 and Circular Letter Number 3 Year 2018. In the author's opinion, this case study can be the application of the law regarding process wages to be uncertain and unfair for workers. The application of process wages should be appropriate and fair in order to create legal certainty in the Industrial Relations Court


ILR Review ◽  
1982 ◽  
Vol 36 (1) ◽  
pp. 40-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryellen R. Kelley

According to the 1977 U.S. Supreme Court decision in Teamsters v. U.S., seniority systems that have disparate impacts on women and black workers as compared to white men are not necessarily illegal. This paper uses a case study to examine what constitutes illegally discriminatory treatment in a seniority system in light of the Teamsters decision and subsequent rulings by federal courts. The empirical findings strongly suggest that as of 1976, at least with respect to promotions, the seniority system in the plant studied illegally discriminated against white women and black workers. The author concludes that the methodology used in this case can be applied more generally to other establishments where formal rules and organizational structures are important in shaping promotion opportunities.


2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 250-259
Author(s):  
Nurhani Fithriah

Brand registration is very important for business people. A brand is one of the distinguishing entities between the business activities of business actors. The problem occurs when business actors already have a trademark which is then well known in the community but in fact they have not registered the trademark, as experienced by Ruben Samuel Onsu with his Geprek chicken business. However, in its development, it turns out that there are other business actors using the same mark but have registered the mark. This research was conducted using a normative method through a statutory approach and concepts. This research examines the Supreme Court's decision rejecting the appeal from Ruben Samuel Onsu and analyzes the urgency and procedures for trademark registration. Based on the research results, trademark law in Indonesia is regulated in Law Number 20 of 2016 concerning Trademarks and Geographical Indications. The terms and procedures for application for registration of a mark are regulated in Article 4 - Article 8 and further regulated in the Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights No. registration of a mark and being recognized as the legal owner of the mark and rights to the mark are obtainedafter the mark is registered. Ruben Onsu's Bensu mark was declared invalid because Ruben Onsu was not the first party to register the mark, and the Supreme Court decided to cancel all trademark applications made by Ruben Onsu.


Rechtsidee ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rilda Murniati ◽  
Richmond Cosmas Tobias

The biggest problem for the debtor who is the business actor is his inability to repay the loan to the creditors in case the business activities have problems. The inability to pay may result in the debtor being petitioned for bankruptcy by the creditor or the debtor himself. Curator as the party who performs the management and the settlement of all debtor debts is obliged to make a bill list based on the nature and rights of the bills of creditors as stipulated in Act Number 37 Year 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Obligation for Payment of Debts (the Law 37/2004). The problem that occurred in the case of Bankruptcy of Industries Badja Garuda Inc. (IBG Inc.) that the Tax Office of Medan Belawan (Tax Office) made a legal effort against the list of tax bills made by the curator of IBG Inc. which set Tax Office as the concurrent creditor through renvoi procedures to the Court Commerce so that the Tax Office loses its precedent over tax debt as stipulated in the Law of Commercial Court refuses the request so that the cassation law is also applied to the Supreme Court which in its decision strengthen the decision of the District Court. For that reason, there is a review effort but the Supreme Court in its sentence Number 45 PK/Pdt.Sus/Pailit/2016 still reinforces the previous verdict. This research is normative research with descriptive type and problem approach applied is normative applied with case study type of court decision. The result of the research indicates that the Tax Office has lost its predecessor right as regulated in Article 21 Paragraph (4) in Act Number 16 Year 2009 regarding General Provisions and Tax Procedures (the Law 16/2009) on the status of tax debt of IBG Inc.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gawrysiak-Zabłocka

SOME REMARKS ON THE APPOINTMENT OF COMPANY DIRECTORSSummaryThe article discusses selected issues concerning the appointment of company directors. In the first part the focus is on the practical application of Art. 18 of the Polish Code of Commercial Companies (Kodeks spółek handlowych, KSH), which provides that only natural persons having full legal capacity and not convicted for crimes or offences mentioned in that provision can be members of a company’s board of managers. In the light of the inconsistent rulings handed down by the Polish Supreme Court (Sąd Najwyższy) it is not clear whether the registering court, which has information available from the National Criminal Register (Krajowy Rejestr Skazanych), may refuse to enter a resolution which has been passed at a shareholders’ meeting but is in breach of the law. In my opinion, the first premise in the ruling handed down by seven Supreme Court judges on 18 September 2013 (case III CZP 13/13) is flawed. Not only does it contradict the Supreme Court decision of 24 July 2013 (case III CNP 1/13), but also its consequences can hardly be reconciled with the consequences of the second premise. In the second part of the study I use the provision on the composition of a brokerage board to show that specific regulations may prove ineffective if they only give cursory attention to an issue, with no reference to what is stipulated by the KSH.


Kosmik Hukum ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 21
Author(s):  
Fathalya Laksana

The legal requirements are regulated in Article 1320 of the Civil Code (KUHPerdata). If the valid conditions of the promise are not fulfilled, then the law that results is that the agreement can be canceled or null and void. In the Court's practice contained in the Supreme Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018, there was a sale and purchase agreement between the Plaintiff's husband and the Defendant, the sale and purchase agreement was made by the Plaintiff's partner without the consent of the Plaintiff as his legal wife. Supreme Court Decision No. 1081K / PDT / 2018 stated that the sale and purchase agreement was invalid and null and void. Apart from that, in its decision, the Defendant's UN Supreme Court had committed an illegal act. The research method used is a normative juridical approach using secondary data obtained from literature studies, namely statutory regulations, legal theories, and the opinions of leading legal scholars. This research uses descriptive analytical research specifications that describe the regulations that are in accordance with legal theories that oversee the implementation practices of the problems under study. The data analysis method used is qualitative normative method. Based on the research results, it can be denied that the sale and purchase agreement in the Supreme Court Decision Number 1081K / PDT / 2018 is not legally valid. The agreement does not fulfill the validity requirements of the agreement in Article 1320 of the Civil Code, namely halal skills and causes because it violates Article 36 paragraph (2) of the Marriage Law No. 1 of 1974 resulting in the sale and purchase agreement to be null and void.Keywords: Buying and Selling, Acts against the Law, Agreement, Marriage, Collective Property


SASI ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 61
Author(s):  
Suparto Suparto

The Supreme Court (MA) decided that candidates for members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) from political party administrators for the 2019 Election were still allowed, even though previously the Constitutional Court (MK) had banned it (Decision No. This conflict is due to differences in interpreting the timing of the implementation of the ongoing 2019 Election stage process. The Constitutional Court stated that the decision was enforced since the 2019 Election and this was not retroactive. Because it is still at the Provisional Candidate List (DCS) stage, so it is possible to change regulations. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court considers that the Constitutional Court's decision must be enforced after the 2019 Election or apply in the future (prospective), because the stages have been running, so that changes in requirements can be made The legal implication that occurs is that there is legal uncertainty for the General Election Commission (KPU) to follow which decision. To solve this problem can be used the doctrine of validity (enforceability of norms). The existence of a hierarchy of legal products being tested and a basis for testing certainly has a legal consequence of the existence of a hierarchy of norm validity in the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court. When there is a conflict between the Supreme Court decision and the Constitutional Court, the verdict with the basis and object of examination in the hierarchy of laws and regulations that is higher, namely the Constitutional Court decision, has a higher validity than the Supreme Court decision. So that problems like this do not exist anymore, testing of laws and regulations should only be carried out by one institution, namely the Constitutional Court.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document