PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KOMPETENSI ABSOLUT ANTARA ARBITRASE DAN PENGADILAN

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Cut Memi
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
National Board ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Case Based

ABSTRAKPasal 3 Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa menyatakan bahwa pengadilan negeri tidak berwenang untuk mengadili sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dengan perjanjian arbitrase, akan tetapi sampai saat ini masih saja terdapat pertentangan kompetensi absolut antara arbitrase dan pengadilan. Sebagai contoh dan sekaligus fokus dalam pembahasan tulisan ini adalah dalam hal penanganan perkara antara PT B melawan PT CTPI. Metode yang digunakan dalam kajian ini adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif. Berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 10/PDT.G/2010/PN.JKT.PST, perkara ini telah diputus oleh pengadilan dengan menyatakan bahwa Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat berwenang mengadili perkara bahkan putusan ini kemudian dikuatkan sampai tingkat peninjauan kembali di Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 238 PK/PDT/2014. Sementara di pihak lain perkara ini juga diputus oleh Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia (BANI) dengan Putusan Nomor 547/XI/ARB-BANI/2013 yang menyatakan bahwa BANI berwenang dalam mengadili perkara yang sama. Pertentangan kompetensi absolut antara dua lembaga tersebut tentu perlu diselesaikan dengan menentukan lembaga mana yang sebenarnya berwenang dalam menangani perkara bersangkutan. Berdasarkan kajian yang dilakukan dalam tulisan ini, diperoleh jawaban bahwa yang berwenang dalam mengadili perkara PT B melawan PT CTPI adalah BANI bukan pengadilan.Kata kunci: kompetensi absolut, arbitrase, pengadilan. ABSTRACTArticle 3 of Law on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution states that the district court is unlawful to decide dispute of parties bound by arbitration agreements, but to date, such absolute competence dispute between arbitration tribunal and court of law is still occurring. As an example, as well as the focus of discussion in this analysis is the case between PT B against PT CTPI. This study uses normative legal research methods. Based on Court Decision Number 10/PDT.G/2010/PN.JKT.PST, it was decided that the District Court of Central Jakarta has the authority to adjudicate the case. In fact, this decision is subsequently filed for an extraordinary request for review in the Supreme Court based on Court Decision Number 238 PK/PDT/2014. On the other hand, the case is also arbitrated by Indonesia National Board of Arbitration (BANI) by Arbitral Award Number 547/XI/ARB-BANI/2013 confirming its authority to adjudicate the same case. The absolute competence dispute between the two parties need to be resolved by determining which party is actually authorized in settling the case. Based on the analysis in this paper, it can be concluded that the case between PT B against PT CTPI is the authority of arbitration tribunal (BANI) to arbitrate, not court of law. Keywords: absolute competence, arbitration tribunal, court of law.

scholarly journals Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Nasional Oleh Pengadilan Negeri

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Andriansyah
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
The South ◽  
Arbitration Award

Abstract: The National Arbitration Award Cancellation By Court. Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, stating that the award can only be canceled if it is thought to contain elements of letter/false documents, or documents found hidden by the other party, or a decision that is taken from the results of deceit trick performed by one of the parties in the dispute. To prove whether or not one of the above three elements must be proved by a court decision. If the District Court stated that the reasons are evident, then the arbitration award may be canceled, if not proven, the Court should reject the application for cancellation of the arbitration decision. But in practice, there is still the District Court received the request for cancellation of arbitration outside the context of Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 as stated in the South Jakarta District Court. Abstrak: Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Nasional Oleh Pengadilan Negeri. Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, menyatakan bahwa putusan arbitrase hanya dapat dibatalkan jika diduga mengandung unsur-unsur surat/dokumen palsu, atau ditemukan dokumen yang disembunyikan oleh pihak lawan, atau putusan yang diambil dari hasil tipu muslihat yang dilakukan oleh salah satu pihak dalam pemeriksaan sengketa. Untuk membuktikan ada atau tidaknya salah satu dari tiga unsur diatas harus dibuktikan dengan putusan pengadilan. Apabila Pengadilan Negeri menyatakan bahwa alasan-alasan tersebut terbukti, maka putusan arbitrase dapat dibatalkan, apabila tidak terbukti, maka Pengadilan Negeri harus menolak permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Akan tetapi dalam pelaksanaannya, Pengadilan Negeri masih ada yang menerima permohonan pembatalan arbitrase di luar konteks pasal 70 Undang-Undang No 30 Tahun 1999 sebagaimana tertuang dalam putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v1i2.1472

KEWENANGAN PENGADILAN DALAM PEMBATALAN PUTUSAN ARBITRASE INTERNASIONAL DI INDONESIA

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Yuanita Permatasari ◽  
Pranoto ,
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
District Court ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Legal Substances ◽  
Arbitration Award

<p>Abstract<br />This article aims to find out the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration award in Indonesia, as well as the authority of the courts in annulment the international arbitration award in Indonesia. This research is a normative and prescriptive legal research. The type and source of materials used is the source of secondary legal material. The legal substances used in this study are of two kinds, namely primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The method of collecting legal materials in this study is obtained through assessment of existing libraries, books, law journals, and court awards. Based on the result of the discussion, it can be concluded: Firstly, the international arbitration award can be recognized and enforced if the award is registered and obtain an execution from the Central Jakarta District Court. International arbitration rulings can only be recognized and enforced if they full fil the conditions in Article 66 of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution law. Second, the international arbitration award is final and binding. However, in reality many international arbitration awards are requested for annulment to the Court in Indonesia.</p><p>Keywords: international arbitration award, annulment of international arbitration award, enforcement of international arbitration award</p><p>Abstrak<br />Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia, serta kewenangan pengadilan dalam membatalkan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif bersifat preskriptif. Pendekatan yang digunakan penulis adalah pendekatan kasus. Sumber bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah bahan hukum primer dan bahan hukum sekunder, dengan teknik analisis bahan hukum menggunakan metode silogisme dan interpretasi dengan menggunakan pola berpikir deduktif. Berdasarkan hasil pembahasan dapat disimpulkan: Pertama, agar putusan arbitrase internasional dapat diakui dan dilaksanakan, maka putusan tersebut harus terlebih dahulu didaftarkan dan memperoleh exequatur dari Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat. Putusan arbitrase internasional hanya dapat diakui dan dilaksanakan apabila memenuhi syarat-syarat yang ditentukan dalam Pasal 66 Undang-Undang Nomor. 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa. Kedua, putusan arbitrase internasional bersifat final and binding. Sehingga, putusan arbitrase internasional tidak dapat diajukan upaya pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Namun, dalam realitanya banyak putusan arbitrase internasional yang dimintakan pembatalannya kepada Pengadilan di Indonesia.</p><p>Kata Kunci: putusan arbitrase internasional, pembatalan putusan arbitrase internasional, pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional</p>

scholarly journals JURIDIS ANALYSIS OF CONFLICT COMPETENCY OF BUSINESS DISPUTE SETTLEMENT THROUGH ARBITRATION AND GENERAL JUSTICE IN STOCK OWNERSHIP

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Edi Prayitno ◽  
Martin Roestamy
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
District Court ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Actual Case ◽  
Arbitration Clause ◽  
Investment Agreement

This Thesis was written based on the result of legal research that analyzes conflict of business dispute resolution between arbitration and litigation in accordance with the applicable regulation and court decisions which have acquired permanent legal force. The method used in this legal research is normative legal methods. The study of literature as a basis of the research and according to Law Number 30 Years 1999 about Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, in Article 3 and Article 11 of the Law have expressively stated that District Court does not have the authority to adjudicate disputes between the parties that bound by the arbitration agreement. The result of this legal research is that arbitration clause as stated in business investment agreement that should be absolute competencies to resolve the dispute, but the Decision of District Court Judges which have been strengthened by Supreme Court of Indonesia expressively stated that the court has the authority to check and adjudicate the dispute even it has arbitration clause or arbitration agreement with the reason that the dispute is a tort and there are another parties beside the party who sign the Investment Agreement, in the suit. The court attitude that adjudicate the dispute with arbitration clause lead to conflict of competency and never ending adjudication process of business dispute. From the actual case that researcher has been analyzes, researcher suggest that Supreme Court of Indonesia as the highest judicial body must respect arbitration body by rejecting all of the civil cases that have arbitration clause on its agreement. Law Number 48 Years 2009 about Judicial Power stated that non-litigation dispute resolution is conducted through arbitration or alternative dispute resolution. Based on pacta sun servanda and choice of forum principles on the agreement binding to the parties and must be obeyed by the parties.KeyWord : : Arbitration Clause, Pacta Sun Servanda Principle, Business.

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.

scholarly journals Penyelesaian Sengketa Para Pihak Yang Telah Terikat Dalam Perjanjian Arbitrase (Studi Kasus Di Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar)

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 119-123
Author(s):  
Ni Made Intan Maharani ◽  
Anak Agung Sagung Laksmi Dewi ◽  
Luh Putu Suryani
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Class I ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Relationship ◽  
The Way

Aside from going through the courts, there are alternatives that can be passed through the dispute, namely negotiation, mediation and arbitration. Arbitration institutions are bodies chosen by the parties to the dispute to provide decisions regarding certain disputes, these institutions can also provide a binding opinion of a legal relationship from matters that have not arisen yet. The formulation of the problem raised in this study is how this arrangement for dispute resolution of parties who have been bound in an arbitration agreement, as well as how the judges' legal considerations in resolving disputes in an arbitration agreement. This research is a normative legal research. Arrangement for dispute resolution of parties that have been bound in the arbitration agreement is contained in law number 30 of 1999 concerning arbitration and alternative dispute resolution, in which the dispute resolution is handed over by professional Arbitrators who will act as judges or private courts who will apply the procedure the way the peace law has been mutually agreed upon by the parties to arrive at a final and binding decision. Judge's Legal Considerations in the Case Verdict of the Denpasar District Court Class I A Number 3/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Dps. that is based on Article 3 of Law Number 30 of 1999 Concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, which states that the District Court is not authorized to adjudicate disputes of parties who have been bound in an arbitration agreement Selain melalui pengadilan, teruntuk mengatasi kasus sengketa ada suatu alternatif yang dapat dilalui, yaitu dengan cara negosiasi, mediasi, dan arbitrase. Lembaga arbitrase merupakan badan yang dipilih oleh para pihak yang bersengketa untuk memberikan putusan mengenai sengketa tertentu, lembaga tersebut juga dapat memberikan pendapat yang mengikat dari sebuah keterkaitan hukum dari hal yang belum timbul sengketa. Adapun rumusan masalah yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana ini pengaturan penyelesaian sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase, serta bagaimana pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam penyelesaian sengketa dalam perjanjian arbitrase. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normative. Pengaturan penyelesaian sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase yaitu terdapat pada undang-undang nomor 30 tahun 1999 tentang arbitarse dan alternatif penyelesaian sengketa umum, yang dimana penyelesaian sengketa tersebut diserahkan Arbiter yang profesional yang akan bertindak sebagai hakim atau peradilan swasta yang akan menerapkan tata cara hukum perdamaian yang telah disepakati bersama oleh para pihak tersebut untuk sampai pada putusan yang final dan mengikat. Pertimbangan Hukum Hakim Dalam Putusan Perkara Pengadilan Negeri Denpasar Kelas I A Nomor 3/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Dps. yaitu didasarkan pada Pasal 3 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase Dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, yang menyatakan bahwa Pengadilan Negeri tidak berwenang untuk mengadili sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dalam perjanjian arbitrase.

scholarly journals COURT VERDICT ANOMALY THAT DROPPED PUNISHMENT AGAINST CHILDREN UNDER 12 (TWELVE) YEARS OLD

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sabungan Sibarani
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Child Protection ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Legal Effect ◽  
The Future

The protection of children is a very serious problem and need to be considered better. That is because the child has a very important role in life of the nation in the future. Author emphasizes research how the legal effect of a District Court decision which is contrary to the Constitutional Court No. 1/PUU-VIII/2010. The author examines the problem with normative legal research methods. The research data shows that the victims are Doni Yoga (DY) who was aged 11 years old. Doni Yoga charged with the crime of theft under Article 363 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code of the theft. The author concluded that the decisions of the cases by Pematangsiantar District Court  has been at odds with the law and the Constitutional Court Decision No. 1 / PUU / 8/2010. However, the decision is still to be considered true and valid throughout not be appealed or an appeal that was canceled by court decision on a higher level.Keywords: Child Protection, Punishment.

scholarly journals Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase oleh Pengadilan dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tri Ariprabowo ◽  
R. Nazriyah
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Legal Uncertainty ◽  
Mutual Agreement ◽  
Arbitration Award

Kewenangan pengadilan dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase antara lain, putusan arbitrase harus didaftarkan di Pengadilan Negeri. Menurut Mahkamah, Penjelasan Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (UU AAPS) menambah norma baru dan menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Pasal 70 UU AAPS tersebut sudah cukup jelas (expressis verbis), yang justru menimbulkan multi tafsir adalah penjelasan pasal tersebut sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum yang adil. Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa, Penjelasan Pasal 70 UU AAPS bertentangan dengan Pasal 28 ayat (1) UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan mengikat. Dengan adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014, bagi para pihak yang tidak puas terhadap putusan arbitrase mempunyai peluang yang lebar untuk dapat pengajukan permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase tanpa harus dibuktikan terlebih dahulu di Pengadilan. Hak para pihak untuk mengajukan permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 70 UU AAPS dapat dikesampingkan berdasarkan kesepakatan bersama para pihak. Dengan demikian putusan arbitrase yang merupakan mahkota seorang Arbiter tidak mudah “tercabik” oleh suatu kepentingan. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014 harus diapresiasi dan secepatnya direspon oleh pembentuk undang-undang untuk merevisi UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 terkait dengan mekanisme pembatalan putusan arbitrase setelah adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut.The jurisdiction of the court in the process of resolving disputes through arbitration among other arbitral rulings shall be registered in the district court. According to the Court, the Explanation of Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Act AAPS) adds new norms and creates legal uncertainty. Article 70 of the AAPS Act is quite clear (expressis verbis), the thing which leads to multiple interpretations is an explanation of the article so that this rises fair legal uncertainty. It stated that, Explanation of Article 70 of AAPS Law is contrary to Article 28 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution and has no binding force. By the decision of the Constitutional CourtNumber 15/PUUXII/2014, for the parties which are not satisfied with the arbitration decision, this provides wide opportunities to pursue cancellation request of arbitral decision without having been proofed in court. The rights of the parties to apply for the cancellation of an arbitral award under Article 70 of AAPS Law may be waived by mutual agreement of the parties. Thus the arbitration award which is the crown of an arbitrator does not easily "torn apart" by an interest.Constitutional Court decision should be appreciated and quickly responded to by the legislators to revise Law No. 30, 1999 related to the cancellation mechanism arbitration decision after the decision of the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals KONFLIK KEWENANGAN ABSOLUT PENGADILAN AKIBAT PENENTUAN POKOK SENGKETA YANG BERBEDA

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 75
Author(s):  
Harijah Damis
Keyword(s):  
Research Methods ◽  
Subject Matter ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Tangency Point ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Ne Bis In Idem ◽  
The Subject

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 454/PDT.G/2005/PA.LMG menarik untuk dianalisis karena dua hal. Pertama, terkait dengan titik singgung kewenangan mengadili sengketa hibah/waris pada dua lembaga peradilan dengan adanya Putusan Nomor 163/PDT.G/2008/PT.SBY, dan kedua, tidak ada amar bersifat condemnatoir pada putusan tersebut. Adanya dua putusan pada dua lembaga peradilan yang saling berlawanan terhadap objek dan subjek yang sama menyebabkan penyelesaian perkara ini belum berakhir hingga kini dan tidak adanya kepastian hukum bagi masyarakat pancari keadilan walaupun perkara ini telah melalui proses panjang (sejak tahun 2005 sampai saat ini di tahun 2017). Untuk menganalisis masalah tersebut, ada dua masalah pokok yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini. Apakah pertimbangan hukum pengadilan negeri dalam menerima dan mengadili perkara ini dapat dibenarkan menurut kompetensi absolut yang dimilikinya? Apakah asas ne bis in idem dapat diterapkan dalam hal pengadilan negeri mengadili perkara yang sudah diputus oleh pengadilan agama? Adapun metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pokok sengketa yang harus diangkat oleh pengadilan negeri maupun pengadilan agama adalah keabsahan hibah dengan jalan pewarisan. Asas ne bis in idem tidak dapat diterapkan oleh pengadilan negeri dalam mengadili perkara tersebut karena putusan pengadilan agama belum berkekuatan hukum tetap.Kata kunci: hibah, waris, kewenangan, peradilan, pokok sengketa. ABSTRACT Court Decision Number 454/PDT.G/2005/PA.LMG is thought-provoking to examine for two things. Firstly, it is related to the authority tangency point in adjudicating grant/heir disputes at two judicial institutions with the Court Decision Number 163/PDT.G/2008/PT.SBY, and secondly, the ruling of the decision is not condemnatory. Two decisions on two opposing jurisdictions against the same object and subject cause the case to remain unresolved until now. There is no legal certainty for the justice seekers, although the case has gone through a long process (since 2005 until now in 2017). To analyze the problem, there are two main issues elaborated in this study. Could the legal considerations of a district court in accepting and adjudicating cases be justified according to their absolute competence? Could the principle of nebis in idem be applied in the case of a district court adjudicating a case which has been decided by a religious court? This research uses normative legal research methods. The results of the study indicate that the subject of the dispute that should be examined by the district court as well as the religious court is the validity of the grant through inheritance. The district court cannot apply the nebis in idem principle in the proceedings as the decision of the religious court has not been permanently enforced.Keywords: grant, inheritance, authority, judiciary, subject matter dispute.

scholarly journals MEKANISME PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PELANGGARAN HAK CIPTA MELALUI ARBITRASE

Acta Comitas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 161
Author(s):  
I Made Dwi Dimas Mahendrayana
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Final Stage ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
District Court ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Copyright Violation ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
Arbitration Award

A copyright violation occurs when someone makes an announcement or reproduction of a work without permission from the creator or copyright holder. If this happens, the creator or copyright holder can bring his dispute to be resolved through alternative dispute resolution or arbitration. However, the Law No. 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright does not regulate the mechanism for resolving copyright disputes through arbitration. The purpose of this study is to determine the mechanism for resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration and the mechanism for canceling decisions on resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration. This research uses normative legal research. From the results of the study, the initial stage of the mechanism of resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration begins with the submission of the request for arbitration. Furthermore, the applicant makes a claim letter and proceed with the selection and appointment of the arbitrator. Then the arbitration examination. The final stage of the trial in arbitration is the submission of the award to the parties, and continued with the implementation of the arbitration award. An arbitration award can be requested to be canceled. The mechanism for cancellation of a national arbitration award begins by registering an arbitration award for cancellation at the Registrar's Office of the District Court. Then the court will examine the facts about whether or not the reasons stated by the applicant to cancel the arbitration award. If no, the application is rejected, but if the facts are found, the court is only authorized to cancel part of the arbitration award.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document