scholarly journals The Crime Of Money Laundering With The Origin Criminal Action Of Drug Trafficking In Supreme Court Decision No. 1303 K / Pid. Sus / 2013 Juncto High Court Decision No. 700 / Pid / 2012 / Pt.Mdn Juncto Medan District Court Decision No.1234 / Pid.B / 2012

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 105
Author(s):  
Diah Ragil Kusuma ◽  
Munsharif Abdul Chalim

ABSTRAKKewajiban dalam melaksanakan wasiat wajibah itu bersifat Qadhai, disini dapat diartikan bahwa tidak hanya sebagai tanggung jawab seseorang dalam melaksanakan perintah agama, namun wasiat wajibah tersebut dapat dipaksakan apabila ia lalai dalam melaksanakannya karena sudah menyangkut kepentingan umum.Peran notaris dalam membuat akta pembagian harta waris terhadap ahli waris non muslim yakni dengan membuatkan Akta Keterangan Waris yang di dalamnya menjelaskan pemberiannya melalui wasiat wajibah. Demikian pula yang menjadi landasan yuridis atas pemberian wasiat wajibah kepada ahli waris non muslim oleh Putusan Mahkamah Agung RI Nomor: 368 K/AG/1995, tanggal 16 Juli 1998 yang telah menetapkan bahwa seorang anak perempuan yang beragama Nasrani berhak pula mendapat harta warisan pewaris, tidak melalui warisan melainkan melalui wasiat wajibah. Dan besar perolehannya adalah sama dengan bagian seorang anak perempuan, bukan 1/3 dari harta warisan dan bukan pula ¾ bagian dari perolehan anak perempuan pewaris. Selanjutnya Putusan Mahakamah Agung RI Nomor: 51 K/AG/1999, tanggal 29 September 1999 yang telah memberikan pertimbangan: “Menimbang, bahwa namun dengan demikian Mahkamah Agung berpendapat bahwa putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Agama Yogyakarta harus diperbaiki, karena seharusnya Pengadilan Tinggi Agama Yogyakarta memperbaiki amar putusan Pengadilan Agama Yogyakarta mengenai ahli waris non muslim, mereka berhak mendapat warisan melalui wasiat wajibah yang kadar bagiannya sama dengan bagian ahli waris muslim.”Kata Kunci : Notaris, Wasiat Wajibah, Non Muslim.ABSTRACTObligation in carrying out the mandate is Qadhai, here it can be interpreted that not only as a person's responsibility in carrying out religious orders, but the will is compulsory if he neglects in carrying it out because it is related to the public interest.Notary's role in making the deed of dividing the heirs against non-Muslim heirs by making the Deed of Inheritance Statement which in it explains its grant through the mandatory testament. Likewise, the juridical basis for the provision of a mandatory will to non-Muslim heirs by the Supreme Court Decision Number 368 K / AG / 1995, dated July 16, 1998 which has stipulated that a Christian girl is entitled to also get the inheritance, not through inheritance but through a mandatory will. And the gains are equal to the share of a daughter, not 1/3 of the estate and not the part of the acquisition of the daughter of the testator. Furthermore, the Supreme Court Decision Number 51 / K / 1999 dated 29 September 1999 has given consideration: "Considering that, however, the Supreme Court is of the opinion that the decision of the Yogyakarta High Religious Court must be improved, since the Religious High Court of Yogyakarta should have improved the amar the decision of the Religious Court of Yogyakarta concerning the non-Muslim heirs, they are entitled to inheritance through a mandatory testament whose content is equal to that of the Muslim heirs".Keyword : Notary, Mandatory Testament, Non-Muslim.


2021 ◽  
pp. 191-206
Author(s):  
Michael J. Rosenfeld

Chapter 14 tells the story of how Jim Obergefell, whose husband John Arthur was dying, sued the state of Ohio to try to force the state to list Obergefell as the husband on Arthur’s death certificate. Ohio was one of many states whose constitution explicitly rejected recognition of same-sex marriages, wherever they were originally celebrated. Obergefell won in federal district court, but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals consolidated his case with DeBoer v. Snyder from Michigan and cases from two other states, and overturned them all. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obergefell v. Hodges Supreme Court decision of 2015 made marriage equality the law of the U.S. After the Obergefell victory, April DeBoer and Jayne Rowse were legally married in Michigan and then cross-adopted their children.


1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omi

Ganimat v. The State of Israel (1995) 49(iv) P.D. 589.The appellant was indicted in the Jerusalem Magistrate Court for two incidents of car theft. His detention was requested on the grounds that he posed a “danger to society”. The Magistrate Court agreed to his arrest, holding that a custom has been established whereby custody may be justified in crimes which have become “a nationwide scourge”, including car theft. The District Court rejected the appeal. The appellant was granted permission to appeal the decision in the Supreme Court (decision of Dorner J. and Barak J.; Cheshin J. dissenting) and his conditional release was ordered. However, it was decided to hold Special Proceedings in order to discuss some of the important issues raised by the case. The principal constitutional question raised by the case was whether the Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty influences the interpretation of the existing law, in the present case, the law of arrest as regulated by the Law of Criminal Procedure.


2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra

The purpose of this study was to provide an overview of the actions of the defendant already fulfilling the elements of Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court Decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016 and to illustrate the basic consideration of the judge in imposing a verdict on a criminal offense charged with Article 351 paragraph (3) of the Criminal Code in the Supreme Court decision No. 1043 K / PID / 2016. The method used in this study is normative law research. Data collection methods in this study were carried out with literature study, which is a method of collecting data by searching and reviewing library materials (literature, research results, scientific magazines, scientific bulletins, scientific journals). Data collection techniques using qualitative analysis methods. The conclusion in this study is the application of material criminal law by the Panel of Judges of the Supreme Court in the case of Number 1043 K / PID / 2016 which corrected the decision of the Banjarmasin High Court Number 59 / PID / 2016 / PT.BJM, dated 13 July 2016 which strengthened the Kotabaru District Court Decision Number 64 / Pid.B/2016/PN. Ktb, dated April 27, 2016 stating that the defendant Nanang Ramli bin (late) Syamsudin was proven legally and convincingly guilty of committing a criminal act of maltreatment which resulted in the death of the victim Jumadi alias jumai bin yahya ( alm) as stipulated in Article 351 paragraph (3) the Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the Criminal Code) is correct, it is in accordance with the Public Prosecutor's Subsidies indictment, and has been based on the facts of the trial, the evidence presented The Public Prosecutor is in the form of witness statements, evidence, post mortem, and statements of the defendant. The Panel of Judges of the Kotabaru District Court in its consideration there are still some shortcomings, especially in its subjective considerations, namely on consideration of things that are burdensome and matters that alleviate the defendant. The consideration used by the judge in this case only focuses on the perpetrators of the crime. Whereas Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law Number 48 Year concerning Judicial Power requires judges to explore, follow, and understand the legal values ​​and sense of justice that lives in society. This means that the judge must also consider the loss of the crime victim, and the community


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Agustine Azizah

The purpose of this study for reviewed the dispute resolution between the finance company and the consumer decided by BPSK in the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 210 K/Pdt.Sus-BPSK/2015 and examine the consideration of the Supreme Court Judge stating that BPSK is not authorized to decide case in between consumer financing companies.This research is normative descriptive who use secondary data and collecting data use literature study. Data analysis use interactive model.The result of the research indicates that the Supreme Court Decision Number 210 K/Pdt.Sus- BPSK/2015 in the case of special dispute on consumer dispute between First Indo American Leasing Branch Bandung ("First Indo Finance") with BPSK Bandung and Neva Rahmansyah, SE stated that The Supreme Court rejected the appeal from the First Appeal Applicant of PT First Indo American Leasing Bandung ("First Indo Finance") and amended the decision of Bandung District Court Number 461/Pdt.G/2014/PN Bdg. dated December 24, 2014 so that it is clear that the Supreme Court accepted the exception of the petitioners and stated that BPSK is not authorized to examine and adjudicate the case and to punish the Cassation Applicant Applicant to pay the court fee in the appeal level stipulated at Rp 500,000 (five hundred thousand rupiahs). Consideration of the Supreme Court Judge stating that BPSK is not authorized to  decide the case in the case between the finance company and the consumer because the legal relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant constitutes a joint financing agreement with the fiduciary transfer of property, which implements civil law relationships and does not include consumer disputes as provided in the Act Number 8 Year 1999 on Consumer Protection so that the dispute arising from the implementation of the consumer financing agreement is a dispute agreement which is the authority of the District Court.  


2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 253
Author(s):  
Livia Clarista ◽  
Endang Pandamdari

Buying and selling is a process of transferring rights of land carried out by making a sale and purchase deed by a land deed official. Therefore, the procedure must be in accordance with the applicable laws and regulations to produce a valid deed and can be used to transfer the land rights. In this case, there was a mismatch in the procedure for making land sale and purchase deeds carried out by land deed official. This caused a legal defect in the deed which was then supported by a statement from the District Court Verdict Number 381/Pdt.G/2014/PN/Bdg. and the Bandung High Court with Decision Verdict 451/PDT/2015/ PT BDG., where both of them grant the plaintiff's claim, namely land deed official itself. However, the Supreme Court Judges considered that land deed official did not have a legal standing in filing a claim because it was deemed not to have legal interests in the sale and purchase deed. The Supreme Court Judges in Verdict Number 888 / PDT / 2016 canceled the previous court decision. This resulted in the deed returning to its original state. However, the deed can then only be canceled by the parties in it, but the cancellation also can only be done if both parties agree. While the legal consequences of the land deed official issuing the sale and purchase deed are the acceptance of sanctions in the form of temporary and permanent dismissals.


Author(s):  
Redi Res

Parate executive is the primary purpose of establishing Law Number 4 of 1996 concerning Mortgage Rights to provide solid legal protection for creditors holding mortgage objects. The easy and inexpensive execution process should make the parate executive the leading choice for creditors in auctioning mortgage objects if the debtor defaults. However, in reality, the parate execution could not be carried out properly because of the Supreme Court Decision No. 3210 K/Pdt/1984, in which one of the ratio decidendi in it that the public auction conducted by the Bandung KPKNL is invalid, and this is also supported by book II of the Supreme Court's guidelines which requires fiat execution from the District Court. This paper will explain how the two conflicting legal bases will impact the implementation of parate executives in the field. Keywords: Parate Executie;  Mortgage; Land.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document