Jurisdiction Analysis of The Distribution of Integrity Children Out of Marriage as Substitute Heritages (Study of The Supreme Court Decision Number: 784 K/Pdt/2014)

Many problems regarding inheritance law occur due to distribution that is not in accordance with applicable regulations. In the Supreme Court Decision Number 784 K/Pdt/2014, the main research problems are: (1) How is the distribution of the inheritance of children out of wedlock as replacement heirs based on the Civil Code study of the Supreme Court's decision number: 784 K/Pdt/2014 . (2) Is the content of the Supreme Court's order Number: 784/Pdt/2014 concerning the distribution of the inheritance of children out of wedlock as replacement heirs appropriate or not according to the Civil Code. This type of research is normative juridical. The data used are secondary data, library study data collection and qualitative data analysis and deductive method conclusions. The conclusion of this decision study states that (1) the heirs to the inheritance of the Supreme Court decision study number: 784 K/Pdt/2014 are Dewina Tjandra, Trisnani Tjandra, Patty Tjandra, Sarina Tjandra, Arifin Tjandra, Ony Tjandra, and Fitri Tjandra . (2) The Supreme Court's decision Number 784 K/Pdt/2014 regarding the distribution of the inheritance of children out of wedlock as substitute heirs is not in accordance with Article 842 of the Civil Code.

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

Kajian Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Agung dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Pada Perusahaan Leasing Dengan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen

Jurnal Panorama Hukum ◽

10.21067/jph.v6i1.5093 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 6 (1) ◽

pp. 1-10

Author(s):

Agustine Azizah

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Study Data ◽

Court Decision ◽

District Court ◽

Literature Study ◽

Court Judge ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

Finance Company

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.

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

PEMBERIAN WASIAT WAJIBAH TERHADAP AHLI WARIS BEDA AGAMA (Kajian Perbandingan Hukum Antara Hukum Islam dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 368.K/AG/1995)

10.31219/osf.io/9f5cj ◽

2017 ◽

Author(s):

Muhammad Rinaldi Arif

Keyword(s):

Supreme Court ◽

Islamic Law ◽

Descriptive Analysis ◽

Secondary Data ◽

Supreme Court Decision ◽

Adoptive Parents ◽

Court Decision ◽

Adopted Children ◽

The Supreme Court ◽

The Republic

According to Islamic law, one of the obstacles to get inheritance is the religious difference between joint heirs and testator. The condition for the joint heirs of different religions felt unfair, so the problem is then brought to the realm of law. The Supreme Court Decision Number 368.K/AG/1995 provides a way for the joint heirs of different religions to obtain the inheritance through a wasiat wajibah. This study is a descriptive analysis that leads to normative legal research, with a research of legal approach. Data collection is obtained from secondary data by library study. The data obtained is then analyzed using qualitative analysis. Based on the results of the research according to the Supreme Court Decision Number 368.K/AG/1995, the concept of wills is not only for adopted children or adoptive parents, but also for non-Muslim heirs by giving Part or portion of the heirs of different religions based on the heirs of different religions based when he/she is Muslim. Analysis of the Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 368.K/AG/1995, about the provision of wasiat wajibah to the heirs of different religions is that the provision of wasiat wajibah to the heirs of non-Muslims actually is not in accordance with the rules of Islamic law.

Download Full-text