Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Notaris Atas Pembuatan Akta Oleh Penghadap Yang Dinyatakan Palsu (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 385 K/PID/2006)

Permasalahan yang sering terjadi berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan tugas jabatan Notaris adalah jika ada akta Notaris yang dipersalahkan oleh para pihak terlebih jika para pihak datang kepada Notaris dengan memberikan keterangan palsu atau menggunakan alat bukti palsu dalam pembuatan akta. Hal ini membuat Notaris dikaitkan sebagai pihak yang turut serta melakukan suatu tindak pidana. Penulis dalam penelitian ini ingin menelaah dan menganalisa lebih lanjut tentang keabsahan akta notaris yang didasarkan pada alat bukti yang dinyatakan palsu dan ratio decidendi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 385 K/PID/2006 Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder sedangkan pendekatan masalah dilakukan dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa akta Notaris yang didasarkan pada alat bukti yang dinyatakan palsu adalah batal demi hukum. Notaris tidak berwenang untuk mengkaji sah atau tidaknya Surat Kuasa di bawah tangan dan Notaris tidak bertanggungjawab secara dipidana atas akta yang dibuatnya meskipun pembuatan akta tersebut didasarkan pada alat bukti palsu. Issues that are commonly occur within notary public environment is concerning fake information given by client. Numerous clients commonly provide fake information and evidence in order to achieve their goals in making notarial deed published by notary public. This condition makes notary public alleged as party that conducting criminal act. The present research tries to analyze further about validity of notarial deed that is based on fake information or evidence provide by the client. Moreover, the present study tries to ratio decidendi of Indonesia Supreme Court No 385 K/PID/2006 The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches. The present study concludes that notarial deed based on fake information or evidence provided by the client is canceled. Notary public is not obliged to examine validity of information coupled with evidence provided by the client. Furthermore, notary public is not responsible for criminal act although he/she publishes notarial deed with fake information or evidence provided by the client.

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP NOTARIS ATAS PEMBUATAN AKTA OLEH PENGHADAP YANG DINYATAKAN PALSU (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 385 K/PID/2006)

Lex Journal: Kajian Hukum & Keadilan ◽

10.25139/lex.v2i1.1029 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Vitto Odie Prananda ◽

Ghansham Anand

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Legal Research ◽

Ratio Decidendi ◽

The Law ◽

Notary Public ◽

Public Environment

Issues that are commonly occur within notary public environment is concerning fake information given by client. Numerous clients commonly provide fake information and evidence in order to achieve their goals in making notarial deed published by notary public. This condition makes notary public alleged as party that conducting criminal act.The present research tries to analyze further about validity of notarial deed that is based on fake information or evidence provide by the client. Moreover, the present study tries to ratio decidendi of Indonesia Supreme Court No 385 K/PID/2006The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches. The present study concludes that notarial deed based on fake information or evidence provided by the client is canceled. Notary public is not obliged to examine validity of information coupled with evidence provided by the client. Furthermore, notary public is not responsible for criminal act although he/she publishes notarial deed with fake information or evidence provided by the client. Keywords: Legal Protection, Notary Public, Fake Evidence

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP NOTARIS ATAS PEMBUATAN AKTA OLEH PENGHADAP YANG DINYATAKAN PALSU (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 385 K/PID/2006)

Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani ◽

10.26623/humani.v8i2.1017 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 131

Author(s):

Vitto Odie Prananda

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Legal Research ◽

Ratio Decidendi ◽

The Law ◽

Notary Public ◽

Public Environment

Permasalahan yang sering terjadi berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan tugas jabatan Notaris adalah jika ada akta Notaris yang dipersalahkan oleh para pihak terlebih jika para pihak datang kepada Notaris dengan memberikan keterangan palsu atau menggunakan alat bukti palsu dalam pembuatan akta. Hal ini membuat Notaris dikaitkan sebagai pihak yang turut serta melakukan suatu tindak pidana.Penulis dalam penelitian ini ingin menelaah dan menganalisa lebih lanjut tentang keabsahan akta notaris yang didasarkan pada alat bukti yang dinyatakan palsu dan ratio decidendi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 385 K/PID/2006Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder sedangkan pendekatan masalah dilakukan dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa akta Notaris yang didasarkan pada alat bukti yang dinyatakan palsu adalah batal demi hukum. Notaris tidak berwenang untuk mengkaji sah atau tidaknya Surat Kuasa di bawah tangan dan Notaris tidak bertanggungjawab secara dipidana atas akta yang dibuatnya meskipun pembuatan akta tersebut didasarkan pada alat bukti palsu.Issues that are commonly occur within notary public environment is concerning fake information given by client. Numerous clients commonly provide fake information and evidence in order to achieve their goals in making notarial deed published by notary public. This condition makes notary public alleged as party that conducting criminal act.The present research tries to analyze further about validity of notarial deed that is based on fake information or evidence provide by the client. Moreover, the present study tries to ratio decidendi of Indonesia Supreme Court No 385 K/PID/2006The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches.The present study concludes that notarial deed based on fake information or evidence provided by the client is canceled. Notary public is not obliged to examine validity of information coupled with evidence provided by the client. Furthermore, notary public is not responsible for criminal act although he/she publishes notarial deed with fake information or evidence provided by the client.

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM KREDITUR TERHADAP PELAKSANAAN EKSEKUSI HAK TANGGUNGAN (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2859K/PDT/2011)

Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani ◽

10.26623/humani.v8i2.1016 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 117

Author(s):

Lutfi Walidani ◽

Habib Adjie

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Legal Research ◽

Ratio Decidendi ◽

The Law ◽

Credit Agreement

Hak Tanggungan dalam perjanjian kredit mempunyai fungsi untuk memberikan rasa aman bagi kreditur apabila terjadi wanprestasi oleh debitur melalui eksekusi Hak Tanggungan. Namun upaya hukum dari debitur berupa gugatan agar pelaksanaan lelang eksekusi ditangguhkan dan permohonan restrukturisasi kredit menimbulkan permasalahan baru. Penulis dalam penelitian ini ingin menelaah dan menganalisa lebih lanjut tentang upaya hukum debitur untuk menangguhkan pelaksanaan eksekusi hak tanggungan dan ratio decidendi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2859K/PDT/2011.Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder sedangkan pendekatan masalah dilakukan dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa debitur hanya dapat mengajukan gugatan penangguhan lelang eksekusi hak tanggungan apabila didasarkan pada adanya cacat hukum pada perjanjian kredit atau hutang piutang atau perjanjian pengikatan hak tanggungan. Tidak adanya restrukturisasi pinjaman tidak dapat dijadikan alasan untuk menunda eksekusi hak tanggugan.Mortgage within credit agreement plays role as warrant to provide secure for creditor when contract default is happened. Mortgage is conducted through execution of mortgage rights. Nevertheless, legal effort from debtor in form of suit to suspend the auction of mortgage coupled with restructuring of the credit stimulate new.The present research tries to elaborate and examine further about legal protection of debtor in suspending execution of mortgage. Moreover, the present study also tries to study ratio decidendiof Indonesian Supreme Court No 2859K/PDT/2011.The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches. The present study shows that debtor able to propose suspension of mortgage auction when there is some defect within the credit agreement. The absence of credit restructuring can be used as justification to suspend or delay execution of mortgage rights.

Download Full-text

Perlindungan Hukum Kreditur Terhadap Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Hak Tanggungan (Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2859K/PDT/2011)

Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani ◽

10.26623/humani.v8i2.1377 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 117

Author(s):

Lutfi Walidani ◽

Habib Adjie

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Legal Research ◽

Ratio Decidendi ◽

The Law ◽

Credit Agreement

Hak Tanggungan dalam perjanjian kredit mempunyai fungsi untuk memberikan rasa aman bagi kreditur apabila terjadi wanprestasi oleh debitur melalui eksekusi Hak Tanggungan. Namun upaya hukum dari debitur berupa gugatan agar pelaksanaan lelang eksekusi ditangguhkan dan permohonan restrukturisasi kredit menimbulkan permasalahan baru. Penulis dalam penelitian ini ingin menelaah dan menganalisa lebih lanjut tentang upaya hukum debitur untuk menangguhkan pelaksanaan eksekusi hak tanggungan dan ratio decidendi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2859K/PDT/2011. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder sedangkan pendekatan masalah dilakukan dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa debitur hanya dapat mengajukan gugatan penangguhan lelang eksekusi hak tanggungan apabila didasarkan pada adanya cacat hukum pada perjanjian kredit atau hutang piutang atau perjanjian pengikatan hak tanggungan. Tidak adanya restrukturisasi pinjaman tidak dapat dijadikan alasan untuk menunda eksekusi hak tanggugan.Mortgage within credit agreement plays role as warrant to provide secure for creditor when contract default is happened. Mortgage is conducted through execution of mortgage rights. Nevertheless, legal effort from debtor in form of suit to suspend the auction of mortgage coupled with restructuring of the credit stimulate new. The present research tries to elaborate and examine further about legal protection of debtor in suspending execution of mortgage. Moreover, the present study also tries to study ratio decidendiof Indonesian Supreme Court No 2859K/PDT/2011. The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches. The present study shows that debtor able to propose suspension of mortgage auction when there is some defect within the credit agreement. The absence of credit restructuring can be used as justification to suspend or delay execution of mortgage rights.

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM SAKSI DAN KORBAN SEBAGAI WHISTLEBLOWER DAN JUSTICE COLLABORATORS PADA PENGUNGKAPAN KASUS KORUPSI BERBASIS NILAI KEADILAN

Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum ◽

10.26532/jph.v4i1.1653 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

pp. 130

Author(s):

Suratno Suratno

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Legal Status ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Research Approach ◽

Legal Research ◽

Interesting Issue ◽

Approach Method ◽

The Law ◽

Legal Force

The question of Whistle blower or Justice Collaborator is a complex and interesting issue tobe discussed in a conception or legislation. The role of Whistle Blower and Justice Collaboratorin exposing such extraordinary crimes as corruption is a dilemma, because there is no adequatelegal tool to facilitate the legal guarantee to be obtained. The research approach used in thisresearch is sociological or socio-jurisdiction approach method -legal research. The results of theresearch indicate that: 1. The protection of the witness and victim’s witness law as Whistleblowerand Justice Collaborators on the disclosure of corruption has not been based on the valueof justice, it can be seen that the legal status of a whistle blower does not stop only whistleblowers, Be someone to be held accountable. 2. Legal protection barriers to the existence ofWhistleblower and Justice Collaborators on the disclosure of corruption based on the value ofjustice, known from the side of the substance of the law is the weakness of the arrangement ofJustice collaborator explicitly regulated only in Supreme Court Circular Number 4 of 2011 onthe treatment of rapporteur of acts A Whistleblower and a Justice Collaborator in a particularcriminal case, so that the SEMA does not have a binding legal force as does the Law.

Download Full-text

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AS A CAUSE FOR DIVORCE: ARE THERE EFFORTS FOR MEDIATION?

Al-Bayyinah ◽

10.35673/al-bayyinah.v4i2.835 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 196-211

Author(s):

Jasmaniar Jasmaniar ◽

Sutiawati Sutiawati

Keyword(s):

Domestic Violence ◽

Supreme Court ◽

Dispute Resolution ◽

Legal Research ◽

Civil Case ◽

Civil Process ◽

Legal Problems ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Law ◽

Civil Cases

AbstractMediation as an alternative to dispute resolution has been integrated in court. Further provisions for mediation as a process that must be carried out are further regulated in the Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 concerning mediation procedures in court. This means that cases filed in court including cases of divorce on the grounds of domestic violence are obliged to undergo mediation. This research is a normative legal research that focuses on solving legal problems by providing a basis for theoretical argumentation and adequate concepts. Sources of data in this study came from primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. The findings of the study indicate that in cases of divorce on the grounds of domestic violence, they still take the path of mediation. This is stated in the Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 which requires mediation in civil cases, even in the Supreme Court Regulation states that in the resolution of a civil case a judge does not take mediation, it is considered to have violated the law. Divorce cases on the grounds of domestic violence cannot be categorized as a criminal act, if the filing process is a civil process (divorce), it is different when the wife makes a complaint (complaint offense) and/or an ordinary offense which results in a violation of the Abolition of Domestic Violence. However, divorce cases are considered civil and processed according to other civil cases and on the grounds of domestic violence they still go through mediation. Keywords: Mediation; Divorce; Violence; Household.

Download Full-text

Criminal Liability in Environmental Crimes Committed by Corporations after the Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2016 at Indonesia

Unram Law Review ◽

10.29303/ulrev.v4i1.86 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 4 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Fitriani Rahmadia ◽

Hari Sutra Disemadi ◽

Nyoman Serikat Putra Jaya

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Corporate Crime ◽

Criminal Liability ◽

Legal Research ◽

Criminal Sanctions ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Law ◽

Legal Consequences ◽

Environmental Crimes ◽

Legal Entities

Corporations are organized groups of people and / or properties, both in the form of legal entities or non-legal entities. In relation to the corporation as a legal subject in environmental crime, it is formulated in Article 1 number 32 of the Law Number 31 Year 2009 about Environmental Protection and Management, each person is an individual or business entity, both legal entities and non-legal entities. The context of corporate crime in the environment is still not solid enough to ensure corporations in criminal sanctions because there is no legal basis regarding the procedures for handling environmental crimes committed by corporations. The Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2016 concerning Procedures for Handling Corporate Crime provides a basis for enforcement of criminal law, then the purpose of writing this article is to find out the form of criminal liability for corporations for environmental crimes and legal consequences after the Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2013.The type of research used is legal research which is included in the normative legal research typology where this study focuses on positive legal norms in the form of legislation. The theory used by the author in analyzing is using the theory of criminal liability which is based on the principle of legality. The conclusions include: criminal sanctions that can be applied to corporations based on Article 4 of Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2016 are in the form of criminal fines, additional crimes, and disciplinary actions except prisons and confinement. Last, the legal consequences of the application Article 25 Supreme Court Regulation Number 13 of 2016 with the principal criminal is a criminal fine and then the criminal added according to the law governing environmental criminal acts is the Law Number 32 Year 2009 concerning Environmental Protection and Management.

Download Full-text

Tanggung Jawab Notaris terhadap Ketidaksesuaian Akta Salinan Dengan Minuta Akta

Kosmik Hukum ◽

10.30595/kosmikhukum.v20i1.5410 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 35

Author(s):

Tyas Fidelia

Keyword(s):

Code Of Ethics ◽

Public Official ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Law ◽

Notary Public ◽

The Difference

Notary is a public official who has the authority to make authentic deeds and has other powers as referred to in this Law or based on other laws, as described in Article 1 number 1 of the Law on the Position of Notary Public. In carrying out his position, a Notary is required to act trustworthy, honest, thorough, independent, impartial, and safeguarding the interests of the parties concerned as well as making a Deed in the form of a Minute Deed. In addition, a Notary is required to issue a Grosse Akta, a Copy of the Deed, or a Quotation of the Deed based on the Minuta Deed. These matters are regulated in Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning Amendments to Law Number 30 of 2004 concerning the Position of Notary Public. By looking at these provisions, it is fitting for a Notary to carry out his obligations. But in reality, you can still find Notaries who do not carry out the obligations as stipulated in the Law on Notary Position. Starting from negligence in maintaining the Minuta Akta to differences between the Deed of Copy and the Minuta Akta. Of course, the difference between the Deed of Copy and the Minuta of the Deed will give losses to the parties who entered into an agreement. Regarding the responsibilities of a Notary Public, in general, it can be reviewed on a civil, criminal basis, the Law on the Position of Notary Public, and the responsibility for carrying out his / her duties based on the Notary's code of ethics. By looking at this raises a problem regarding, "What is the responsibility of the Notary for the non-conformity of the Copy Deed with the Minuta Deed?". The method used in this research is a normative or juridical legal research method.Keywords: Notary, Deed, and Notary Responsibilities

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN KONSUMEN DALAM PENERAPAN BATAS KEWENANGAN BADAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN MENYELESAIKAN PERKARA KONSUMEN (Studi Putusan No 481 K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015)

Jurnal Hukum Adigama ◽

10.24912/adigama.v1i1.2187 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 1 (1) ◽

pp. 1087

Author(s):

Takenia Tifany ◽

Anna Maria Tri Anggraini

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Methods ◽

Consumer Protection ◽

Legal Protection ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Law

Consumer Protection Law regulates the legal protection of consumer and including Consumer Dispute Completion Firm who autorhized to resolve consumer disputes who feel harmed over the acts of business from people that sometimes arbitrary, but decisions taken by Consumer Dispute Completion Firm often incriminate business actors, and usually seem to exceed the limit of their authority even wrong in applying the law. Consumer Dispute Completion Firm’s authority to adjudicate and decide a dispute is induced by Supreme Court’s decision which makes Consumer Dispute Completion Firm’s authority to limited. Therefore, the writer proposed an issue about how are the limits of Consumer Dispute Completion Firm’s authority in adjudicate and decide a consumer disputes? And how are the implementation and Supreme Court’s views regarding the limitation of Consumer Dispute Completion Firm’s authority? The writer examines the problem using normative legal research methods that use secondary data. From the results of the research, it can be concluded that the limits of Consumer Dispute Completion Firm authority in solving consumer disputes are limited to the agreement between both parties. In sense the Supreme Court believes that all transactions based on an agreement become the jurisdiction of the court

Download Full-text

PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP PARA PIHAK YANG DIRUGIKAN ATAS PENYULUHAN HUKUM OLEH NOTARIS

Hukum dan Masyarakat Madani ◽

10.26623/humani.v8i2.1015 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 8 (2) ◽

pp. 105

Author(s):

Ferdiansyah Putra ◽

Ghansham Anand

Keyword(s):

Legal Protection ◽

Proper Solution ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Future ◽

The Law ◽

Notary Public

Pasal 15 ayat (2) huruf e Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (UUJN) memberikan kewenangan bagi Notaris untuk memberikan penyuluhan hukum sehubungan dengan pembuatan akta, artinya Notaris berwenang memberikan penyuluhan hukum sehubungan dengan akta yang di buatnya. Berkaitan dengan kewenangan tersebut dapat terjadi permasalahan jika dikemudian hari penyuluhan hukum yang diberikan oleh Notaris tersebut kemudian di tindak lanjuti oleh para pihak dalam pembuatan akta namun ternyata akta tersebut dinyatakan batal dan bertentangan dengan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan.Penulis dalam penelitian ini ingin menelaah dan menganalisa lebih lanjut tentang bentuk penyuluhan hukum oleh Notaris serta tanggung gugat Notaris atas penyuluhan hukum yang merugikan para pihakMetode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif, yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder sedangkan pendekatan masalah dilakukan dengan menggunakan pendekatan undang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa bentuk penyuluhan hukum yang dapat dilakukan oleh Notaris hanya sebatas pada hal yang berkaitan dengan pembuatan akta saja. Notaris dalam memberikan penyuluhan hukum harus memahami substansi permasalahan yang akan diberikan penyuluhan sehingga mampu memberikan solusi yang benar. Notaris hanya sebatas memberikan penyuluhan hukum kepada para pihak namun hasil akhirnya dikembalikan kepada para pihak untuk membuat perjanjian tersebut sehingga Notaris tidak dapat dimintakan tanggung gugat atas kerugian para pihak.Article 15 section 2e Legal Constitution of Notary Public Profession (UUJN) provides authority for notary public to conduct legal counseling in related to publishing deed. In other words, notary public has authority to provide legal counseling about notarial deed. Concerning this authority, issue that might be occurred in the future is when the counseling given by notary public is regarded as breaching and the notarial deed is canceled by the court.The present study aims to examine and elaborate further about counseling material conducted by notary public coupled with accountability of notary public in related to legal protection of aggrieved parties in related to the legal counseling conducted by notary public. The method used in the present study is a normative legal research, namely legal research which is conducted by examining the library materials or secondary law while in finding and collecting the data is done by two approaches, namely the law and conceptual approaches. The present study concluded that notary public only has authorization in conducting legal counseling concerning publication of notarial deed. Notary public in providing legal counseling shall comprehend substantial issue that is discussed in order to provide proper solution concerning the issue. Despite the outcome of the counseling will be applied or not it depends on the parties that consult to the notary public. Notary public cannot be asked for accountability for all losses that are experienced by the parties.

Download Full-text