scholarly journals INTERPRETASI MAHKAMAH AGUNG TERHADAP ALASAN PEMBATALAN PUTUSAN ARBITRASE DALAM PASAL 70 UU NO. 30/1999

Yuridika ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilhami Ginang Pratidina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Universal Principles ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Arbitration Award

Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Law No. 30/1999) establish three basic reasons limitedly as cancellation of the arbitration decision. In the case of PT.Comarindo Express Tama Tour against Yemen Airways, the Supreme Court considers the court decision based on the elucidation and cancels the arbitration award on the grounds out of Article 70 of Law No. 30/1999. This paper seeks to elaborate on the interpretation of the Supreme Court against the cancellation reason arbitration award in terms of universal principles in the practice of modern arbitration and the legislation laws to use the statute approach, conceptual approach and case approach and suggests some court decision both Indonesian court and foreign court. The Supreme Court in this case misapplied the law due to the fact that consideration of the elucidation is in contrast to the universal principles in the practice of arbitration.Keywords: arbitration, the reason for the cancellation decision.

scholarly journals UPAYA HUKUM BAGI PIHAK YANG MENOLAK PUTUSAN ARBITRASE AD-HOC

Solusi ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-257
Author(s):  
Farrah Rizky Amelia Mirza
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Arbitration Award

Dispute resolution through alternative channels is arbitration known since the conflict with Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Arbitration is a method of civil approval outside the general court made based on an arbitration agreement made by the parties to the dispute. Ad-hoc arbitration is an arbitration specifically designed to resolve or reduce certain disputes, or in other words, ad-hoc arbitration is incidental. Arbitration decisions can be returned if it is agreed to contain no-no in Article 70 letter (a), (b), (c) Law Number 30 Year 1999. Can be proven by one of the disadvantaged parties, it can be asked. Cancellation to the Chair of the District Court and being received by the Chair of the Supreme Court requesting an examination of the cancellation of the arbitration award at the first and last level. The Judicial Review (PK) can also be used in arbitration disputes that have permanent legal requirements, asking PK to be asked to the Supreme Court, which is submitted requesting PK to approve the arbitration decision, will be the decision of the Chair of the District Court to support the cancellation of the award.

DISSENTING OPINION PUTUSAN SENGKETA MEREK PIERRE CARDIN INDONESIA MELAWAN PIERRE CARDIN PERANCIS DALAM KAJIAN HUKUM ISLAM: Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 557 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2015

JURISDICTIE ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Masrifatun Mahmudah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Bad Faith ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Trademark Law ◽  
The Supreme Court

<p>This article intents to examine the dissenting opinion in the judges consideration on the Supreme Court Decision No. 557 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2015. This article is normative research with statute approach dan conceptual approach. The legal material on this research consist of primery legal materials namely Law No. 15 of 2001 on Trademark and Supreme Court Decision No. 557 K/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2015, while the secondary legal materials are books, journals, research related to trademarks. The judge decide to reject the application of Pierre Cardin because the petition of Pierre Cardin has passed a period of five years from the registration of Pierre Cardin Indonesia. However, the conclusion of this study revealed that Pierre Cardin entitled to be protected because it is a well-known mark. Finally, Pierre Cardin Indonesia has violeted the terms of article 4 jo article 6 paragraph (1) letter b of Trademark Law because he has a bad faith and had imitated the well-known mark.</p>

scholarly journals Pengujian Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ali Marwan Hsb
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Government Regulation ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Form Of Government ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic

Article 24C Section (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia authorizes the Constitutional Court to reviewthe law against the constitution. However, when referring to the hierarchy of legislation, the law has the equal hierarchy with government regulation in lieu of law. It makes a question whether the Constitutional Court truly has the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law against the constitution? Based on the research in this paper, it was found that by the Constitutional Court Decision Number 138/PUU-VII/2009, the Constitutional Court stated that the authority to review government regulation in lieu of law under the authority of the Constitutional Court because the substance of government regulation in lieu of law is similar with the substance of law. So, the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law materially. Such decision is correct; the Constitutional Court has the authority to review a government regulation in lieu of law in material because the substance is similar with the law. While formally reviewing should be the authority of the Supreme Court due to government regulation in lieu of law formally is in the form of government regulation

scholarly journals Tax Debt in the Bankruptcy Dispute: Industries Badja Garuda Inc. v.s. Tax Office of Medan Belawan

Rechtsidee ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Rilda Murniati ◽  
Richmond Cosmas Tobias
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Law ◽  
Study Type

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.

scholarly journals KILKA UWAG DOTYCZĄCYCH POWOŁYWANIA CZŁONKÓW ZARZĄDU SPÓŁEK KAPITAŁOWYCH

2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 23
Author(s):  
Aleksandra Gawrysiak-Zabłocka
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Legal Capacity ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Company Directors ◽  
The Law ◽  
Polish Code

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.

scholarly journals AXIOLOGY ARBITRATION VALUE RULING IN THE CASE SETTLEMENT TRADE (Case Study Decision Of Supreme Court Number : 199 K / Pdt.Sus / 2012)

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 228
Author(s):  
Safrin Salam
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Opportunity Loss ◽  
Legal Grounds

The existence of the Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI) in Indonesia that still exist to this day is one manifestation of diakomodasinya patterns of dispute resolution outside the court. Legal Considerations Application Reasons Cancellation Arbitral Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution in Supreme Court Decision No. 199 K / Pdt.Sus / 2012 Relation Ensure Legal Certainty In the disputing parties are legal considerations of the cancellation decision was not all acceptance or rejection of the cancellation request arbitration decision based on legal grounds contained in Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999. Act No. 30 of 1999 on the ADR needs to be improved, especially the explanation of article 60 and article 70 which could lead to legal uncertainty for justice seekers among businesses in the dispute and the opportunity loss of trust businesses to resolve the dispute out of court through arbitration institution (the Arbitration Tribunal Ad-Hoc, BANI, etc.)

ANALYSIS OF ELEMENT ‘UNLAWFUL’ OF CORRUPTION IN THE BANKING SECTOR (STUDY OF THE SUPREME COURT DECISION NUMBER 1812 K / PID.SUS / 2014)

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 397
Author(s):  
Angga Wijaya Holman Fasa ◽  
Ferianto Ferianto ◽  
Tommy Hendrix
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Banking Sector ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Bank Credit ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Application Of Law ◽  
Banking Service ◽  
The Supreme Court

The banking sector as one of the drivers of the national economy plays an important role in funding a business through bank credit distributing activities. In practice, this banking service raises legal problems, not only banking crimes but also corruption. Supreme Court Decision No. 1812 K / PID.SUS / 2014 on behalf of the Defendant Dian Siswanto, S.E. MM., in the case of a corruption shows this. This paper examines the element of unlawful and abuse of authority in cases of corruption in the banking sector. The research method used is normative law which is prescriptive with a statute approach, a conceptual approach, and a case approach. The results show 2 (two) things, first, that the defendant's actions met the unlawful element in the act of corruption as charged in the primary indictment. Second, the judge had wrongly in the application of law based on the subsidiary indictment concerning abuse of authority which was not fulfilled. The judge in this case, was not punctilious in digging up legal facts and was not correct in applying the law. Therefore, in the case of deciding a case, if the charges are of subsidiarity, the judge should prove the primary indictment carefully before deciding based on the subsidiary indictment to create justice, benefit and legal certainty in law enforcement in general, and especially for the accused.

scholarly journals PEMBUKTIAN PERKARA KARTEL DI INDONESIA DENGAN MENGGUNAKAN BUKTI TIDAK LANGSUNG (INDIRECT EVIDENCE)

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 311 ◽  
Author(s):  
Udin Silalahi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Case Study Approach ◽  
Relevant Market ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Study Approach ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Article 5

ABSTRAKDalam rangka membuktikan terjadinya pelanggaran Pasal 5 (kartel harga), Pasal 9 (kartel wilayah pemasaran), dan Pasal 11 (kartel produksi) Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999, masing-masing pasal mensyaratkan pemenuhan unsur perjanjian. Namun demikian karena kartel biasanya dilakukan secara diam-diam, maka KPPU membutuhkan bukti tidak langsung untuk membuktikan adanya perjanjian kartel di antara pelaku usaha. Rumusan masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah 1) bagaimana penetapan pasar bersangkutan oleh KPPU dalam Putusan Nomor 17/KPPU-I/2010 dan Putusan Nomor 08/KPPU-I/2014 dihubungkan dengan Peraturan KPPU Nomor 3 Tahun 2009; dan 2) bagaimana penggunaan bukti tidak langsung oleh KPPU dalam Putusan Nomor 17/KPPU-I/2010 dan Putusan Nomor 08/KPPU-I/2014 dihubungkan dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang, pendekatan kasus, dan pendekatan konseptual. Dari hasil penelitian yang dilakukan diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa KPPU tidak konsisten dalam menetapkan pasar bersangkutan dalam Putusan Nomor 17/KPPU-I/2010 dan Putusan Nomor 08/KPPU-I/2014. Di samping itu dalam membuktikan dan memutuskan terjadinya pelanggaran Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999, KPPU hanya menggunakan bukti tidak langsung. Dalam Putusan Nomor 294 K/PDT.SUS/2012, majelis hakim kasasi menolak penggunaan bukti tidak langsung. Sedangkan dalam Putusan Nomor 221 K/PDT.SUS-KPPU/2016, majelis hakim menerima penggunaan bukti tidak langsung. Namun demikian dalam pertimbangan hukumnya majelis hakim tidak dimuat dasar hukum tentang diterimanya bukti tidak langsung sebagai alat bukti dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999. Di samping itu tidak pula dimuat pertimbangan hukum tentang prinsip pembuktian yang mensyaratkan sekurang-kurangnya dua alat bukti yang sah dalam memutus pelanggaran atas Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999.Kata kunci: kartel, pasar bersangkutan, bukti tidak langsung.ABSTRACTIn order to prove the violation of Article 5 (price cartel), Article 9 (allocation of territory cartel), and Article 11 (production cartel) of Law Number 5 of 1999, each article requires the fulfillment of agreement element. However since the cartels between the businesses actors are conducted in silent, therefore the Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) needs an indirect evidence to prove the existence of cartel agreement between them. The concerns of this analysis are 1) how the KPPU determines the relevant market based on the KPPU&rsquo;s Decision Number 17/KPPU-I/2010 and Decision Number 08/KPPU-I/2014 in relation to KPPU Regulation Number 3 of 2009, and 2) how the evidentiary process using indirect evidence by the KPPU based on Decision Number 17/KPPU-I/2010 and Decision Number 08/KPPU-I/2014 in relation to Law Number 5 of 1999. The research method of this analysis is normative legal research by using legal approach, case study approach and conceptual approach. The end result shows that KPPU is inconsistent to determine the relevant market on the Decision Number 17/KPPU-I/2010 and the Decision Number 08/KPPU-I/2014. In addition, KPPU only uses indirect evidence to prove the violation of Law Number 5 of 1999. The Supreme Court through the Court Decision Number 294 K/PDT.SUS/2012 rejects the using of indirect evidence while through the Court Decision Number 221K/PDT.SUS-KPPU/2016 the Supreme Court accepts the indirect evidence. However, in the legal considerations the judges do not contain the legal basis on the receipt of indirect evidence as evidence in Law Number 5 of 1999. Besides, the consideration of the Supreme Court does not contain the principle of evidentiary process which requires at least two valid evidences to prove the violation of Law Number 5 of 1999.Keywords: cartel, relevant market, indirect evidence.

scholarly journals Limitation of Application of Sharia Principles in Sharia Economic Dispute Resolution in Religious Courts

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 24
Author(s):  
Zaidah Nur Rosidah
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Religious Courts ◽  
And Training

This paper aims to find the basis for the philosophical rationality of applying sharia principles in resolving sharia economic disputes in religious courts as well as the prerequisites required by religious court judges to apply sharia principles in resolving sharia economic disputes. The type of research used is normative legal research to find philosophical rationality and the institutionalization of sharia principles in resolving sharia economic disputes. The approach used is a conceptual approach. Secondary data were collected through literature study. The research results obtained first, the philosophical rationality of the application of sharia principles in sharia economic dispute resolution in line with the first and third principles of Pancasila. Second, the institutionalization of sharia principles becomes effective if there are prerequisites that must be met, firstly enough information for judges to understand sharia principles, secondly the obstacles that come from the judges themselves who are still oriented towards the flow of legism / positivism will have an effect on providing legal basis and third the speed of instilling the institutionalization of sharia principles can be done through education and training organized by the Supreme Court for Religious Court judges.

scholarly journals Menimbang Kedudukan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi Setelah Terbitnya Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2020

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 899
Author(s):  
Zuhad Aji Firmantoro
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
State Government ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Material Research ◽  
Representative Government ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Constitutional State ◽  
The Supreme Court

AbstrakPenelitian ini membahas tentang penafsiran Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945 yang putusannya mengabulkan sebagian permohonan pemohon berupa perubahan terhadap komposisi anggota Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi, yakni Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 49/PUU-IX/2011. Ada dua permasalahan yang diteliti dalam penelitian ini, yaitu Pertama, apakah masuknya unsur DPR, Pemerintah dan Mahkamah Agung bertentangan dengan Pasal 1 ayat (3) dan Pasal 24 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UUD 1945? Kedua, apakah implikasi putusan pembatalan Pasal 27A ayat (2) huruf C, D, dan E terhadap mekanisme saling kontrol (chekcs and balance) antar cabang kekuasaan negara (eksekutif, legislatif dan yudikatif) di Indonesia? Metode penelitian yang digunakan yakni penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan konseptual, selain itu, dikaji dengan studi kasus yang berkaitan dengan materi yang dikaji. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah, pertama: berdasarkan kajian Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 yang mengabulkan sebagian permohonan pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2011 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2003 tentang Mahkamah Konstitusi terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945, Mahkamah Konstitusi menyatakan bahwa pembuat undang-undang telah membahayakan kemerdekaan kekuasaan kehakiman sebagaimana diatur dalam pasal 1 ayat (3) dan Pasal 24 ayat (1) dan ayat (2) UUD 1945 dengan memasukan unsur Pemerintah, DPR dan Mahkamah Agung dalam keanggotaan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Kedua, Putusan tersebut berimplikasi pada keanggotaan Majelis Kehormatan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang terdiri dan terbatas atas 2 (dua) unsur yaitu Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Komisi Yudisial. Karena itu utusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut dianggap telah berhasil menjaga berlakunya asas check and balance antar 3 (tiga) cabang kekuasaan (eksekutif, legislatif dan yudikatif) dalam sistem ketatanegaraan indonesia.AbstractThis research elaborates the Constitutional Court interpretation within Decision No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 on judicial review of Law No. 8 of 2011 on amendments of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court which its decision has granted mostly the petitioner’s petitions to change the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court members composition. There are at least two examined issues in this study, they are: Firstly, does the addition of elements House of Representative, Government and the Supreme Court contradict Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution? And secondly, what is the implication of the decision to repeal Article 27A paragraph (2) letters C, D, and E for check and balance between three branches of state government (executive, legislative and judicial) in Indonesia? This research is normative legal research that uses a conceptual approach, also reviewed with case studies related to material research. The results show; Firstly, based on the study to Indonesian Constitutional Court Decision No. 49/PUU-IX/2011 which accepted most of the petitioner’s petitions on judicial review of Law No. 8 of 2011, the Constitutional Court stated that the addition of elements House of Representative, Government and the Supreme Court as members in the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court then legislators have endangered the freedom of judicial power as regulated Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 24 paragraph (1) and (2) the 1945 Constitution. Secondly, this decision has an impact on the members of the Honorary Council of the Constitutional Court which only consists of two elements, namely the constitutional court and the judicial commission. Therefore, the Constitutional Court Decision is considered successful in keeping the principle of check and balance between three branches of state government in the Indonesian constitutional state system. 

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document