scholarly journals MEKANISME PENINGKATAN BADAN USAHA PERSEKUTUAN KOMANDITER (CV) MENJADI BADAN HUKUM PERSEROAN TERBATAS (PT)

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Yayah Wariah
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability ◽  
Unlimited Liability

Dunia bisnis selalu penuh dengan perkembangan yang memerlukan respon dan pengambilan keputusan yang segera, sehingga dapat mengantisipasi perubahan itu. Salah satu bentuk perubahan itu adalah apabila suatu bisnis yang sebelumnya berbentuk badan usaha Perseroan Komanditer (CV) akan dirubah statusnya menjadi badan hukum Perseroan Terbatas (PT). Perbedaan prinsipil antara Perseroan Komanditer atau dikenal dengan sebutan CV (Commanditaire vennootschap) dengan Perseroan Terbatas (PT) terdapat pada status badan hukumnya, karena CV merupakan persekutuan yang tidak berbadan hukum dan tanggungjawab dari para sekutu pengurus hanya sampai kepada harta pribadinya. Sedangkan Perseroan Terbatas (PT) merupakan perseoran berbadan hukum dan tanggungjawabnya terbatas. Adapun Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk meneliti dan menganalisis mekanisme perubahan Persekutuan Komanditer (CV) Menjadi Badan Hukum Perseroan Terbatas (PT).Untuk menganalisis Tanggung Jawab Sekutu Komplementer Terhadap Perseroan Terbatas (PT) Yang Didirikan. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analisis, pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan menggunakan data primer dan data sekunder berupa bahan hukum primer, sekunder dan tertier sebagai data utama. Setelah data sekunder dan primer terkumpul, kemudian diadakan analisis secara kualitatif Berdasarkan hasil analisis data disimpulkan bahwa Prosedur pengalihan asset dari CV kepada PT harus sesuai dengan ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku di bidang PT. Langkah pertama pengalihan asset tersebut adalah dengan mengadakan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham (RUPS) untuk meminta persetujuan para persero dalam pengalihan asset dari CV kepada PT sebagaimana diketahui dalam PT, RUPS adalah organ perseroan yang mempunyai wewenang yang tidak diberikan kepada direksi atau dewan komisaris dalam batas yang ditentukan dalam Undang-Undang PT Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 dan/atau anggaran dasar PT. Terdapatnya dua jenis sekutu dalam Persekutuan Komanditer, yaitu sekutu komplementer dan sekutu komanditer mengakibatkan terdapatnya dua jenis tanggung jawab pula, yaitu tanggung jawab tidak terbatas (unlimited liability) dan tanggung jawab terbatas (limited liability). Pertanggunggjawaban sekutu komplementer apabila melakukan perbuatan hukum sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 12 dan Pasal 13 UUPT, maka terjadi peralihan hak dan kewajiban dari sekutu komplementer tersebut ke dalam perseroan dan perbuatan hukum yang dilakukan oleh sekutu komplementer tersebut mengikat perseroan.

scholarly journals Information Processing and Limited Liability

2012 ◽  
Vol 102 (3) ◽  
pp. 30-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Maćkowiak ◽  
Mirko Wiederholt
Keyword(s):  
Information Processing ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Good Decision ◽  
Two Agents ◽  
Unlimited Liability

Decision-makers often face limited liability and thus know that their loss will be bounded. We study how limited liability affects the behavior of an agent who chooses how much information to acquire and process in order to take a good decision. We find that an agent facing limited liability processes less information than an agent with unlimited liability. The informational gap between the two agents is larger in bad times than in good times and when information is more costly to process.

‘The last acre and sixpence’: views on bank liability regimes in nineteenth-century Britain

2009 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
John D. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Complete Spectrum ◽  
The Us ◽  
British Experience ◽  
Unlimited Liability

AbstractIn the nineteenth century, British banking had a complete spectrum of shareholder liability regimes, ranging from pure limited to unlimited liability. Although the debate surrounding the US experience with double liability in banking is well documented, we know relatively little about the British experience of and debate about shareholder liability regimes in banking. Consequently, this article traces the development of views on shareholder liability regimes in nineteenth-century British banking. One of the main findings is that the chief argument for limited liability in British banking was based upon the perceived weaknesses of unlimited liability. In addition, it appears that much of the debate concentrated on the depositor-assuring viability of alternatives to unlimited liability.

scholarly journals TANGGUNG JAWAB PEMEGANG SAHAM PERSEROAN TERBATAS MENURUT HUKUM POSITIF

2014 ◽  
Vol 26 (1) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
Mr Kurniawan
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Commercial Law ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Personal Assets ◽  
Personal Liability ◽  
Unlimited Liability

Limited Liability Companies have completeness instrument called organ corporation which consists of General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS), the board of directors, and the board of commissioners. According to Commercial Law (KUHD), Act No. 1 of 1995 jo. Act No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies, the principle liability of General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS) is limited on their share. But, if it is proven that, among others, there has been a mixing of the shareholder’s personal assets and the Company’s assets, so the limited liability turns into unlimited liability or personal liability. Perseroan Terbatas (PT) memiliki alat kelengkapan yang disebut organ perseroan terdiri dari Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham (RUPS), Direksi dan Dewan Komisaris. Menurut Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Dagang (KUHD), UU PT No. 1 Tahun 1995 jo. UU PT No. 40 Tahun 2007, tanggung jawab Pemegang Saham (RUPS) pada prinsipnya adalah bersifat terbatas pada saham yang dimiliki. Akan tetapi, apabila dapat dibuktikan bahwa telah terjadi pembauran harta kekayaan pribadi Pemegang Saham dengan harta kekayaan perseroan, maka tanggung jawab terbatas tersebut akan berubah menjadi tanggung jawab tidak terbatas atau tanggung jawab pribadi.

scholarly journals Unlimiting Unlimited Liability: Legal Equality for Swedish Banks with Alternative Shareholder Liability Regimes, 1897–1903

2021 ◽  
Vol 95 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-218
Author(s):  
Seán Kenny ◽  
Anders Ögren
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Transaction Costs ◽  
Risk Preferences ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Additional Risk ◽  
Equal Footing ◽  
Interest Spreads ◽  
Changes In Risk ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Unlimited Liability

This article examines the aftermath of the 1897 Riksbank Act in Swedish banking. The act placed banks with unlimited liability and those with limited liability on equal footing, removing the note-issuing privileges of the former. We consider whether changes in risk preferences occurred subsequent to the act, or whether extended liability was a sufficient deterrent. We conclude that when legal differences were removed, lower transaction costs for unlimited liability banks (ULBs) spurred aggressive competition, reflected in narrower interest spreads relative to limited liability banks (LLBs). ULBs also took on greater leverage and held less liquidity, which supports the Coasean interpretation that the shareholder liability regime mattered little. After 1897, ULB shareholders continued to receive higher dividends, enjoyed substantially superior returns on equity, and maintained an array of corporate governance controls to shield themselves against their additional risk.

scholarly journals Application of the Principle of Piercing the Corporate Veil in Resolving Corporate Responsibility Cases in Indonesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 65-71
Author(s):  
Sandra Dewi
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Piercing The Corporate Veil ◽  
Personal Assets ◽  
Unlimited Liability

This research aims to explain the application of the Principle of Piercing The Corporate Veil in resolving corporate responsibility cases in Indonesia. The method used in this research is normative legal research, using a statutory approach. The results of the research explain that based on Article 3 paragraph (1) of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, it is stated that the shareholders of the company aren’t personally responsible for the agreements made on behalf of the company and aren’t responsible for the company's losses exceeding the shares they own. However, the doctrine in corporate law recognizes the existence of the Principle of Piercing the Corporate Veil which can break through the limited liability of the company's shareholders into unlimited liability up to their personal assets. Although the Principle of Piercing the Corporate Veil has been regulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, there have been major cases in which the shareholders of the company were responsible up to their personal assets but only limited responsibility for the shares they owned. These major cases include the PT Lapindo Brantas case in 2006 and the PT Bank Century case in 2008.

Limited Liability Leverage (L³): A New Measure of Leverage

CFA Digest ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 41 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-94
Author(s):  
Natalie Schoon
Keyword(s):  
Limited Liability
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document