PUTUSAN PENINJAUAN KEMBALI PERKARA PIDANA SEBAGAI NOVUM DALAM PENINJAUAN KEMBALI PERKARA PERDATA

ABSTRAKUndang-Undang Nomor 15 Tahun 2001 tentang Merek mengatur bahwa untuk penyelesaian sengketa atau pelanggaran merek dapat ditempuh melalui dua alternatif penyelesaian, yaitu dengan mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan niaga (secara perdata) dan diadukan kepada penyidik untuk diselesaikan secara pidana. Kedua penyelesaian inilah yang ditempuh sekaligus oleh GG melawan GB. Kasus ini kemudian sampai pada upaya hukum luar biasa yaitu peninjauan kembali. Dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata, pihak GG mengajukan putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana sebagai novum. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, dapat dirumuskan permasalahan dalam tulisan ini adalah: apakah putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana dapat dijadikan novum dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata? Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam tulisan ini adalah metode penelitian yuridis normatif atau metode penelitian kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa jika dikaji dari alasan pengajuan peninjauan kembali yang diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung, suatu putusan pengadilan dapat dijadikan alasan dalam permohonan peninjauan kembali, apabila ada pertentangan antara putusan yang satu dengan yang lain. Pertentangan itu harus antara putusan oleh peradilan yang sama atau sama tingkatan. Pengajuan putusan peninjauan kembali perkara pidana menjadi novum dalam peninjauan kembali perkara perdata atau sebaliknya, tidak dapat dibenarkan.Kata kunci: peninjauan kembali, pidana, perdata, novum. ABSTRACT Law Number 15 of 2001 concerning Trademark stipulates that resolution of disputes or violations of brands can be taken through two alternative ways, namely filing a lawsuit to the Commercial Court (civil) and secondly filing a complaint with the investigator for a criminal settlement. These two solutions were taken at the same time by both parties, GG against GB. This case was then up to the extraordinary request for review. In the review of civil cases, GG filed a decision on a criminal case review as novum. Based on this, the problems outlined in this analysis is whether the decision of a criminal case review can be made novum in reviewing a civil case. The method used is a normative juridical research method or literature research method. As stipulated in Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning the Supreme Court, pertaining to the reasoning of filing an extraordinary request for case review, the research result shows that a court decision can be used as an excuse to file a case review, provided that there is conflict between one decision and another. Filing a criminal case review decision as novum in civil case review or vice versa cannot be justified. Keywords: case review, criminal, civil, novum.

Download Full-text

Analisis Yuridis terhadap Kasus Gugatan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum atas Ketidakabsahan Peralihan Hak Milik Benda Bergerak (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1081/K/PDT/2018)

Kosmik Hukum ◽

10.30595/kosmikhukum.v20i1.6433 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 21

Author(s):

Fathalya Laksana

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Civil Code ◽

Court Decision ◽

Analysis Method ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Analytical Research ◽

The Law

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

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

Analisis Pemberian Wasiat Wajibah terhadap Ahli Waris Beda Agama Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 331 K/Ag/2018

Jurnal Suara Hukum ◽

10.26740/jsh.v1n2.p172-185 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 172

Author(s):

Alip Pamungkas Raharjo ◽

Elok Fauzia Dwi Putri

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Islamic Law ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Conceptual Approach ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Before And After ◽

The Republic ◽

A Share

In Article 171 letter (c) Instruction of the President of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1 of 1991 concerning Compilation of Islamic Law affirms that the rights of non muslim heirs to the inheritance of Islamic heirs do not obtain inheritance from the inheritor's inheritance. However, in its development because it felt unfair, the Supreme Court through The Supreme Court Decision Number 368.K / AG / 1995 provided a way for joint cooperation of different inheritance through a wasiat wajibah. But in its development, this provision was changed again by a landmark decision from the Supreme Court, namely through the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018 because there was a change in the value of justice in the community. The research method used normative research with constitutional approach, conceptual approach and case approach. This study aims to explain the rights of non muslim heirs to the inheritance of Islamic heirs before and after the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018. The results showed that prior to the Supreme Court Decision Number 331 K / AG / 2018, heirs of non muslim religions were given a share of inheritance in the form of a wasiat wajibah for ¾ of the inheritance inheritance. Post the Decision of the Supreme Court Number 331 K / AG / 2018, the amount of wasiat wajibah will change to ¼ from the inheritor's inheritance.

Download Full-text

Penyelesaian Perkara Perdata di Pengadilan Berdasarkan Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2016

Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) ◽

10.24843/jmhu.2018.v07.i04.p04 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 7 (4) ◽

pp. 456

Author(s):

I Komang Wiantara

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Dispute Resolution ◽

Research Method ◽

Civil Procedure ◽

Good Faith ◽

Court Decision ◽

Party Autonomy ◽

Peace Agreements ◽

Procedure Code ◽

The Supreme Court

The existence of mediation in the settlement of civil disputes in the courts is regulated in the Supreme Court Regulation No. 1 of 2016 concerning Mediation Procedures in the Court which contains ten principles including: mediation must be taken, party autonomy, mediation in good faith, time efficiency, mediator certification, mediator responsibility , confidentiality, financing, repetition of mediation, peace agreements outside the court, become integral parts in resolving disputes in court. In addition, mediation in the court strengthened peaceful efforts as stated in the Civil Procedure Code. The purpose of this study is to understand and analyze the legal strength of mediation in the Court. This study uses a normative juridical research method using the statutory approach. Study show that due to its consensual and collaborative nature, mediation always results in a dispute resolution in a win-win solution that is strengthened to become a Peace Deed, which has Executorial power like a Court Decision. Eksistensi mediasi dalam penyelesaian sengketa perdata di pengadilan diatur dalam Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2016 Tentang Prosedur Mediasi Di Pengadilan yang memuat sepuluh prinsip meliputi: mediasi wajib ditempuh, otonomi para pihak, mediasi dengan itikad baik, efisiensi waktu, sertifikasi mediator, tanggung jawab mediator, kerahasiaan, pembiayaan, pengulangan mediasi, kesepakatan perdamaian di luar pengadilan, menjadi bagian dalam integral dalam penyelesaian sengketa di pengadilan. Selain itu mediasi pada pengadilan memperkuat upaya damai sebagaimana yang tertuang di dalam hukum acara Perdata. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk memahami dan menganalisis kekuatan hukum mediasi menurut Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1 Tahun 2016 Tentang Prosedur Mediasi Di Pengadilan. Kajian ini menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa karena sifatnya yang konsensual dan kolaboratif, maka mediasi selalu menghasilkan penyelesaian sengketa dengan cara sama-sama menguntungkan bagi para pihak (win-win solution) yang dikuatkan menjadi Akta Perdamaian, yang memiliki kekuatan Eksekutorial layaknya Putusan Pengadilan.

Download Full-text

Sistem Utang Piutang Pupuk Dibayar Gabah di Jember Perspektif Fiqih Muamalah dan Hukum Positif

rechtenstudent ◽

10.35719/rch.v1i3.37 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 (3) ◽

pp. 285-292

Author(s):

Siti Muhlisah

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Court Decision ◽

Accounts Receivable ◽

Positive Law ◽

Accounts Payable ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Principle Of Justice ◽

Descriptive Qualitative

Discussing about debt and credit is not foreign to everyone's ears. Accounts receivable is an agreement between one party and another with the agreed object and will be returned within a certain time as agreed. Debt and credit is a form of muamalah which is ta'awun (please help). The fact is that many debts and receivables are not following sharia and law in Indonesia. This study aims to determine and analyze how the practice of fertilizer receivables is paid with grain from the perspective of Fiqh Muamalah and Positive Law. The research method used is descriptive qualitative. The results of this study found that according to Fiqih Muamalah, the fertilizer receivable payable system is paid with grain that the transaction is allowed, but every addition in fertilizer receivables is paid with grain required by the creditor is usury. The practice of the fertilizer debt system being paid with grain also contradicts the principles of the contract, one of which is the divine principle, the principle of justice, and the principle of writing. In the Positive Law, the fertilizer accounts payable system is paid with the grain if it refers to the Supreme Court decision dated December 4, 1975, No. 804 K / Sip / 1973 principal debt plus 6% interest, because 6% interest is the usual interest at the time the agreement was held. And must be stipulated in writing. Meanwhile, the interest in the debt and credit is more than 70%.

Download Full-text

DEKONSTRUKSI PENGAWASAN PERATURAN DAERAH SETELAH BERLAKUNYA UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 11 TAHUN 2020 TENTANG CIPTA KERJA

JURIDICA : Jurnal Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gunung Rinjani ◽

10.46601/juridica.v2i1.183 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2 (1) ◽

pp. 91-113

Author(s):

Basri Mulyani

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Research Method ◽

Central Government ◽

Court Decision ◽

Constitutional Court ◽

The Supreme Court

Constitutional Court Decision of Number 137/PUU-XIII/2015and Decision Number 56/PUU-XIV/2016 which state that theauthority of the Minister of Home Affairs and the Governor asthe representative of the central government in cancelingProvincial Regulations, District Regulation/City Regulation,Governor Regulation, and Regent Regulation/Regulation ofMayor was inconstitutional. So only the Supreme Court has theauthority to revoke Provincial Regulations, DistrictRegulation/City Regulations, Governor Regulation, and RegentRegulation/Regulation of Mayor. This analysis makes use of thelegal juridical normative research method. The results showthat in a state of unity it is appropriate that higher levels ofgovernment are given the authority to supervise theregulations set in the regions. The supervision can beimplemented by conducting such a guidance to the regionthrough the strengthening of executive preview or legal normreview before it is legally binding in general

Download Full-text

Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Alasan Penemuan Novum Palsu Sebagai Dasar Peninjauan Kembali Kedua dalam Perkara Perdata

AL-HUKAMA ◽

10.15642/alhukama.2019.9.1.130-148 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 130-148

Author(s):

Ulil Manaqib

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Criminal Case ◽

District Court ◽

Legal Analysis ◽

Civil Case ◽

Judicial Decisions ◽

Opposing Party ◽

The Supreme Court

This article discusses the juridical analysis of the reasons for the discovery of a fake novum as the basis of a second review in a civil case. This study aims to answer the question of how are the reasons for the discovery of a fake novum as the basis for a second review in a civil case? and how are the legal analysis of a reason for the discovery of a fake novum as a the basis for a second review in a civil case. The reason for receiving the second review in the civil case is based on the discovery of a novum which was declared false by the Criminal Judge of the Bandung District Court that has inkracht, is a reason that falls within the criteria of Article 67 letter (a) which reads: “If the decision is based on a lie or a ruse the opposing party that is known after the case has been decided or based on evidence which is later declared to be false by the criminal judge”, is not classified as a reason for finding novum or the reason there are two conflicting judicial decisions. Secondly, the second review in the pedata and criminal case is only limited to the reason that there are two Judicial Decisions that are interrelated with one another (SEMA Number 10 Year 2009), so in addition to these reasons, the Supreme Court has never issued a policy related to the second mechanism Judicial Review, including on the grounds that a novum has been legally and convincingly found false by a public court.

Download Full-text

KONSEP PEMBUKTIAN SEDERHANA DALAM PERKARA KEPAILITAN

Jurnal Yudisial ◽

10.29123/jy.v10i3.264 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. 331

Author(s):

Nelson Kapoyos

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Simple Proof ◽

Judicial Review ◽

Research Method ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Research Problem ◽

Civil Code ◽

Court Decision ◽

Legal Research ◽

The Supreme Court

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini mempermasalahkan pembuktian sederhana dalam proses kepailitan terkait kewajiban pemberitahuan adanya peralihan piutang (cessie) kepada debitur. Putusan Nomor 02/PDT.SUS.PAILIT/2014/PN.Niaga.Mks telah mengabulkan permohonan kreditur cessionaries yang dikuatkan oleh Putusan Nomor 19 K/PDT.SUSPAILIT/2015, namun pada upaya hukum peninjauan kembali majelis hakim justru mengabulkan permohonan peninjauan kembali dengan alasan pembuktian sederhana terhadap cessie belum diberitahukan kepada debitur secara resmi melalui juru sita pengadilan. Rumusan masalah penelitian ini ialah bagaimana konsep pembuktian sederhana dalam kepailitan terhadap kewajiban pemberitahuan pengalihan piutang (cessie) pada pertimbangan majelis hakim peninjauan kembali Nomor 125 PK/PDT.SUS-PAILIT/2015. Metode penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif. Kesimpulan penelitian ini adalah konsep pembuktian sederhana di dalam pembuktian kepailitan tidak ada kewajiban pemberitahuan secara resmi melalui juru sita pengadilan karena Pasal 613 BW tidak mengaturnya, pemberitahuan hanya diajukan secara tertulis dan bisa kapanpun diberitahukan kepada debitur. Kata kunci: kepailitan, pembuktian sederhana, cessie.ABSTRACTThis analysis intends to question the simple proof in bankruptcy proceedings related to the transition of receivable notification obligation (cessie) to the debtors. The Commercial Court Decision Number 02/PDT.SUS.PAILIT/2014/PN.Niaga.Mks has granted the petitions of creditor’s cessionary which was strengthened by the Supreme Court Decision Number 19 K/PDT.SUSPAILIT/2015, but on the judicial review attempt, the Supreme Court has granted the petition for the judicial review on the grounds that a simple proof of cessie has not been officially disclosed to the debtor through a court bailiff. The formulation of this research problem is how the concept of simple proof in bankruptcy proceeding to the obligation of notification of transfer of receivables (cessie) in the consideration of Court Decision Number 125 PK/PDT.SUS-PAILIT/2015. The research method of this analysis is normative legal research. This analysis resolves thatin the simple proof concept of the bankruptcy proceedings, there is no obligation of official notice through the court bailiff because it is not set on Article 613 of Indonesia Civil Code Law, so the notification is only submitted in writing and may at any time be notified to the debtor. Keywords: bankruptcy, simple proof, cessie.

Download Full-text

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF AGREEMENTS THAT ARE QUALIFIED AS FRAUD CRIME

Cepalo ◽

10.25041/cepalo.v5no1.2135 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 5 (1) ◽

pp. 11-22

Author(s):

Joko Sriwidodo

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Criminal Code ◽

Civil Code ◽

Criminal Case ◽

Legal Research ◽

Criminal Offense ◽

Civil Case ◽

Library Research ◽

Criminal Offenses ◽

The Supreme Court

An agreement is a legal act in which a person promises to another person or more or in which two people promise to carry out something, as is also stated in Article 1313 of the Civil Code. Contract cases are the civil case domain, but they can become criminal offenses if what is promised is fictitious or a lie. However, the reality is that currently, in practice, many practitioners are confusing it so that the reporting party criminally reports many cases of this Agreement. The purpose of this research is to find out to what extent a case agreement can be reported criminally. The problems studied in this study are: (1) what is the significance of an agreement according to Indonesian Law? (2) what is the significance of an agreement as a criminal offense of fraud? In this research, the researcher provides an overview of the Agreement's significance according to national law and the meaning of the Agreement as a criminal offense of fraud, as we know that an agreement is a civil case domain but can be included in a criminal case if the elements as mentioned above are fulfilled. In Article 378 of the Criminal Code, as happened in the case of default as stated in the Supreme Court Jurisprudence No. 1689 K/Pid/2015, which gave a verdict that the defendant had violated Article 378 of the Criminal Code jo. 55 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code. This research is normative legal research conducted through library research by conducting studies and analyzing primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. And in writing this research, too, the researcher carried out observational activities of the practices carried out in the field.

Download Full-text