scholarly journals KONTRAK PERSEROAN TERBATAS YANG MENGANDUNG TINDAKAN ULTRA VIRES

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Yoel Bello ◽  
Zulkifli Makkawaru ◽  
Abd. Haris Hamid
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
District Court ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Right

Kegiatas usaha perseroan terbatas dilaksanakan oleh organ perseroan terbatas yaitu Direksi perseroan terbatas, Direksi dapat mewakili perseroan terbatas untuk melakukan kontrak dengan pihak terkait. Tindakan mewakili Perseroan Terbatas oleh Direksi harus sesuai dengan aturan sebagaiman dalam Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas atau yang telah ditentukan dalam Anggaran Dasar Perseroan Terbatas. Apabilan tidakan Direksi Perseroan Terbatas  melaksanakan Kontrak yang dapat merugikan Perseroan karena bertentangan dengan Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan Terbatas atau yang telah ditatur dalam Anggaran Dasar Perseroan Terbatas maka kontrak yang dibuat mengandung Ultra Vires. Jika Direksi melakukan tindakan Ultra Vires maka sesuai dengan Pasal 61 Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas, kepada Pemegang sahan berhak mengajukan Gugatan terhadap Perseroan ke Pengadilan Negeri. Limited liability companies are carried out by Directors of limited liability companies. The directors can represent limited liability companies to enter into contracts with related parties. The act of representing a Limited Liability Company by the Board of Directors must be in accordance with the provisions in Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies or those stipulated in the Articles of Association of Limited Liability Companies. If the actions of the Board of Directors of a Limited Liability Company implement a Contract that could be detrimental to the Company because it is contrary to Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies or those stipulated in the Articles of Association of Limited Liability Companies, the contracts made contain Ultra Vires. If the Board of Directors carries out Ultra Vires actions, in accordance with Article 61 of Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies, the shareholders have the right to file a lawsuit against the Company to the District Court.

scholarly journals PENCATATAN PERUBAHAN DIREKSI DI KEMENTERIAN TERKAIT SEBAGAI DASAR PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KEWENANGAN DIREKSI

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 369
Author(s):  
Maleakhi W. Sitompul
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Provisions ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Right ◽  
A Company

Research on the recording of changes to directors in the relevant Ministry, namely the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, aims to examine whether the authorized Directors in a company are Directors registered at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. In addition, it is also to examine whether the provisions of Law no. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and / or the Company's Articles of Association is sufficient to resolve disputes of authority in the event of a dispute regarding the composition and number of directors in a company, which one has the right to act against other parties. Disputes regarding the composition and authority of the Board of Directors in a limited liability company often become disputes in court, even though Indonesia's positive legal provisions have provided clear and firm rules about who the Board of Directors can represent in and out of court. Based on research, it can be seen that the starting point is from the provisions in Law No. 40 of 2007 Articles 29 and 98, changes in the members of the board of directors can only be effective for third parties, as from the date the changes are recorded in the Company Register by the Minister of Law and Human Rights in accordance with Law No. 40 of 2007 Articles 29 and 98.

scholarly journals ANALISIS YURIDIS PEMBERHENTIAN ANGGOTA DIREKSI DENGAN TANPA DIDAHULUI ADANYA PEMBELAAN DIRI DALAM RUPS [JURIDIC ANALYSIS REGARDING TERMINATION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS WITHOUT SELF DEFENSE IN THE GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS]

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 133
Author(s):  
Felicia Darlene
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
General Meeting ◽  
Company Law ◽  
District Court ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Self Defense ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Bahasa Indonesia

<em>One of the sectors being developed by the Indonesian government is economic growth, which impact on increasing Limited Liability Companies. Provisions that contain procedures for managing a Limited Liability Company are regulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies (UU PT), one of which is the procedure for dismissing members of the Board of Directors. Article 105 of the Company Law stipulates that the dismissal of a member of the Board of Directors is taken after the person concerned is given the opportunity to defend himself. Furthermore, regarding legal protection for the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors who violate the provisions of the Company Law. The Law on Judicial Power regulates the absolute competence of each judiciary. With absolute competence, each judicial body has different jurisdiction to judge. The method used in this study is normative juridical. The results and conclusions of this study are that the dismissal of members of the Board of Directors without any prior self-defense in the GMS is invalid if the members of the Board of Directors object to his dismissal. Legal protection for members of the Board of Directors who are dismissed not in accordance with the provisions of the Company Law is to file a lawsuit to the District Court.<br /><br /></em><strong>BAHASA INDONESIA ABSTRACT:</strong><p>Salah satu sektor yang sedang dikembangkan oleh pemerintah Indonesia adalah pertumbuhan ekonomi, yang berdampak pada meningkatnya Perseroan Terbatas. Ketentuan yang memuat tata cara pengurusan Perseroan Terbatas diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU PT), salah satunya adalah tata cara pemberhentian anggota Direksi. Dalam Pasal 105 UU PT diatur bahwa keputusan pemberhentian anggota Direksi diambil setelah yang bersangkutan diberi kesempatan untuk membela diri. Selanjutnya mengenai perlindungan hukum atas pemberhentian anggota Direksi yang melanggar ketentuan UU PT. Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman mengatur mengenai kompetensi absolut setiap peradilan. Dengan adanya kompetensi absolut, maka setiap badan peradilan mempunyai yurisdiksi mengadili yang berbeda-beda. Metode yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif. Hasil dan kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah pemberhentian anggota Direksi dengan tanpa didahului adanya pembelaan diri dalam RUPS adalah tidak sah jika anggota Direksi keberatan atas pemberhentian dirinya. Perlindungan hukum bagi anggota Direksi yang diberhentikan tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan UUPT adalah mengajukan gugatan ke Pengadilan Negeri.</p>

scholarly journals AKIBAT HUKUM KEPAILITAN PERSEROAN TERBATAS

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 109
Author(s):  
Erlina Erlina
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Business Activity ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Right ◽  
Business As Usual

Limited liability company declared bankrupt does not necessarily stop and disperse but still exist as legal entity. In certain circumstances still exist running its business as usual limited liability company does not happen bankruptcy and still able to do business activity. This is due to the company declared bankrupt have an economic value (economic value) is much higher than the value of the company's assets. Because the bankruptcy is actually destined for companies that have negative assets. Nevertheless, the decision to continue the bankruptcy company resulted in the power of the board of directors in a limited liability company. However, with the bankruptcy statement, the debtor by law lost the right to control and manage his property which was inserted into the bankruptcy property as of the date of the decision of bankruptcy.Keywords: Limited Liability Company, Bankruptcy, Receiver Perseroan terbatas yang dinyatakan pailit tidak serta merta berhenti dan bubar melainkan masih eksis sebagai badan hukum. Dalam keadaan tertentu masih eksis menjalankan usahanya seperti lazimnya perseroan terbatas tidak terjadi kepailitan dan tetap dapat melakukan kegiatan usahanya. Hal ini diakibatkan perseroan dinyatakan pailit mempunyai nilai ekonomis (economic value) yang jauh lebih tinggi dibanding nilai aset perusahaan tesebut. Oleh karena kepailitan sebenarnya diperuntukkan terhadap perusahaan yang mempunyai aset negatif. Namun demikian, keputusan untuk melanjutkan perseroan pailit mengakibatkan kekuasaan direksi dalam suatu perseroan terbatas.. Namun dengan adanya pernyataan pailit, debitor demi hukum kehilangan hak untuk menguasai dan mengurus harta kekayaannya yang dimasukkan  ke dalam harta pailit terhitung sejak hari putusan pernyataan pailit tersebut.Kata kunci : Perseroan Terbatas, Kepailitan, Kurator

scholarly journals PROGRESIFITAS HUKUM PENGEMBALIAN DEVIDEN SAHAM INTERIM PERSEROAN TERBATAS PADA UUPT NO.40 TAHUN 2007

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Bella Mutiara Wahab
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Stock Exchange ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Dividend Distribution ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Annual Book

AbstractProgressive law must place the law in a very close position with the law's community or stakeholders. This position is called responsive, progressive law and is always associated with stakeholders' reality and needs to create justice and happiness as law aspired itself. Also, progressive law emphasizes social integration to overcome public moral insularity.Starting from the viewpoint of progressive law, the author looks at the laws and regulations that discuss the return of interim dividends as stated in the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007, article 72, article 72 states that companies allow rules related to dividend distribution in a temporary (interim) way. The article is then interpreted as that if the company has positive profits, the company is allowed to distribute dividends before the company closes the book at the end of the year, provided that the board of directors officially announces the distribution with the approval of the GMS that the positive profits obtained by the company before closing the book will come as dividends interim. As a result, the company competes to distribute interim dividends to increase and show its credibility to investors. It was recorded on the Indonesian stock exchange (IDX) that in September 2020, 73 companies distributed interim dividends.However, article 72 paragraph 5 of the Limited Liability Company Law No. 40 of 2007 explains that if after the company distributes interim dividends to shareholders and at the end of the closing of the annual book the company suffers a loss, the shareholders must return the dividends they have received. If the shareholder does not return it, the directors and commissioners are jointly responsible for covering the company's losses.This viewpoint is the basis for finding the location of the value and form of legal progressivity regarding the mechanism of interim share dividends in limited liability companies as stated in UUPT No.40 of 2007 Article 72 using a normative research method with a conceptual approach. 

scholarly journals KEPUTUSAN BISNIS DAN TANGGUNGJAWAB DIREKSI DALAM PRINSIP FIDUCIARY DUTIES PADA PERSEROAN TERBATAS

2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-56
Author(s):  
Ali Muhayatsyah
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
General Principle ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Fiduciary Duty ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Fiduciary Duties ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Full Sense

The main party charged with fiduciary duty is the board of directors. In UUPT No. 40/2007 it does not specifically regulate fiduciary duty but rather regulates general principles. From the general principle of fiduciary duty, directors in managing the company must pay attention to the interests of the company above other interests; directors must act in accordance with the aims and objectives of the company (intra vires), and pay attention to the limitations and restrictions determined by the law and the articles of association of the company. In carrying out their duties as directors, they are required to have in good faith and in full sense of responsibility; Directors must carry out their duties diligently, carefully, and smartly and skillfully. Keywords: Directors, Fiduciary Duty, Business Judgment Rule, Limited Liability Company,   Abstrak Pihak utama yang dibebankan kewajiban fiduciary duty adalah direksi. Dalam UUPT Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tidak mengatur secara khusus mengenai fiduciary duty tetapi mengatur prinsip-prinsip umumnya. Dari prinsip umum fiduciary duty makadireksi dalam mengurus perseroan harus memperhatikan kepentingan perseroan di atas kepentingan lainnya;direksi harus bertindak sesuai dengan maksud dan tujuan perseroan (intra vires), serta memperhatikan batasan dan larangan yang ditentukan UU dan anggaran dasar Perseroan. Dalam melaksanakan tugas sebagai direksi, diharuskan memiliki itikad baik (in good faith) dan tanggung jawab (in full sense of responsibility); Direksi harus melaksanakan tugasnya dengan rajin (diligently), penuh kehati-hatian (carefully), dan pintar serta terampil (skillfully). Kata kunci: Direksi, Fiduciary Duty, Business Judgement Rule, Perseroan Terbatas,

scholarly journals Responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the Bankruptcy of the Limited Liability Company

2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 66
Author(s):  
Padriadi Wiharjokusumo ◽  
Novita Romauli Saragih
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Analysis ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Criminal Liability ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Full Responsibility ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Data Source

Article 97 paragraph (1) of the Company Law requires each member of the Board of Directors to be required in good faith and full responsibility to undertake the supervision of the company for the interests and business of the company. This implies the Board of Directors is liablefor each management and representation of the company in the company’s framework in pursuing its purposes and objectives.This  researchexaminesthe responsibilities of the board of Directors in the bankruptcy of the Limited Liability Company based on Law No. 40 of 2007. This research was conducted through a normative juridical approach.The  data  source  of  this  research  was  gained from the library study. Then  it  was  analyzed  using the qualitative  analysis  which depicts and dissects the significant information.The conclusion  of  this  research is  thatthe responsibilities of the Board of Directors in Bankruptcy Limited Liability Company based on Law No. 40 of 2007 comprises 2 (two) aspects, in particular; civil liability and criminal liability.

scholarly journals Pengaturan Kewenangan, dan Tanggung Jawab Direksi Dalam Perseroan Terbatas (Studi Perbandingan Indonesia dan Australia)

2013 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Shinta Ikayani Kusumawardani
Keyword(s):  
Comparative Study ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Comparative Method ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Fiduciary Duty ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Company Limited ◽  
Fiduciary Obligations ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
Comparative Results

Research on: The Rules Regarding  The Powers and Responsibilities Of Directors In A Limited Liability Company (Comparative Study of Indonesia and Australia). As for the issues discussed in this study related to the application of the authority of the board of directors in the management of a limited liability company under the principle of fiduciary duty Australia comparison of Indonesia can not be separated from the authority granted will cause responsibility that must be borne by the company’s board of directors in managing and also the characteristics of the type of responsibility of Directors This study uses normative juridical approach. Juridical Approaches to run whether the provisions of law relating to kewenagan concrete and responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the management Company Limited Comparative Study of Indonesia and Australia, while Normative is the cover of the principles of law, comparative law, the elements and factors related to authority and responsibility of the Company's Board of Directors in the management of one heart-to-day. This study on Duties and Responsibilities of Directors is normative legal research that emphasizes the study of literature. The purpose of this research is to know the duties and responsibilities of the Board of Directors of Limited Liability Company under the law. Data analysis was performed using the comparative method of qualitative. From the results of this analysis are expected to obtain an accurate picture and understanding of the duties and responsibilities of the Board of Directors of Limited Liability Company. To this effect, a comparison of the authority and responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the management of the Company as the Company's assessment of body organ is the comparison between the authority of the Board of Directors in Indonesia and in Australia the comparative results indicate that the system of regulation in Indonesia and Australia are more inclined to use the model and not a model enabling mandatory because it is based by the condition of the structure of capital ownership. Fiduciary obligations, particularly on legislation in both Indonesia and Australia appear as incomplete law and need to be interpreted by the fiduciary. The main essence of this comparison as the basis for further transplants Indonesia that fiduciary obligations may fruitfully dalamn Handling Company Limited.

scholarly journals Implementation of the Doctrine of the Business Judgment Rule on Bankruptcy Law in Indonesia

Yuridika ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Andika Wijaya
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Company Law ◽  
Bankruptcy Law ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Business Judgment Rule ◽  
Accounts Payable ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Oriented Research

One of the mechanisms that can be taken in resolving accounts payable to a limited liability company in bankruptcy. In the case of bankruptcy due to mistakes made personally by the Board of Directors and the Board of Commissioners, they must be responsible for debts held by limited liability companies. The company law regulates the way for the Board of Directors and Board of Commissioners to avoid liability for losses suffered by the company, through the doctrine of the Business Judgment Rule (BJR). In practice, the application of the BJR doctrine in bankruptcy law is characterized by differences in interpretation between law enforcers. Differences in interpretation occur because there is no clear provision in the Republic of Indonesia Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Delay of Obligations to Pay Debt (Law No. 37/2004) which limits the filing of bankruptcy applications to the personal Directors and Board of Commissioners. The research in this article is carried out by reform-oriented research methods, to make changes to Law No. 37/2004 to clarify the application of the BJR doctrine in bankruptcy law in Indonesia. With the implementation of legal reform, it is expected that there will be no difference in interpretation regarding the application of the BJR doctrine to bankruptcy law at the Commercial Court in Indonesia.

scholarly journals Application of the Principles of Business Judgment in the Authoritative Function of Directors of Limited Liability Company in Singaporean and Indonesian Legal Perspectives

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 93
Author(s):  
Daniel Hendrawan ◽  
Emilia Fitriana Dewi ◽  
Subiakto Sukarno ◽  
Isti Raafaldini Mirzanti
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Law ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Comparative Law ◽  
Corporate Law ◽  
Good Faith ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Difference

The purpose of this study is to analyze the functions and authority of the director of limited liability company in applying business judgment principles, by taking comparative law studies in Singapore's common law and in Indonesia's civil law. By taking emphasis on the authority of directors in representing limited companies both in and out, there are several authorities that are regulated in it. This study was conducted with a comparative law approach, with descriptive qualitative analysis. The results showed that sometimes directors act outside their authority and can harm a limited liability company. On the other hand, that there are actions of the board of directors that are in accordance with their authority but still harm the limited liability company. In this case, the shareholders often hold accountable. In corporate law there is a principle of business judgment where a director cannot be held accountable if the directors are proven to have good faith. The difference between Singapore law and Indonesian law in regulating the authority of directors is the good faith assessment held by directors.

scholarly journals TINDAKAN ULTRA VIRES DIREKSI DAN AKIBAT HUKUMNYA BAGI PERSEROAN TERBATAS

Yurispruden ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 86
Author(s):  
Abdul Rokhim
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Limited Liability ◽  
Third Parties ◽  
Legal Action ◽  
Limited Liability Company ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Entity ◽  
The Board Of Directors ◽  
The Law

ABSTRACTThe Actions of the Board of Directors are legally qualified as the actions of the Company as a legal entity if carried out by the authority and objectives of the Company as stated in the company's articles of association. The actions of directors that are carried out outside the authority or beyond the authority(ultra vires)cannot be qualified as the actions of the company. As a result, such legal action is not binding on the Company and only binds the Board of Directors personally with third parties. The problems examined are the limits of authority of the Board of Directors according to the UUPT and the doctrine and concept of ultra vires directors. Types of normative juridical research with conceptual approach and statute approach. The actions of the board of directors as long as it is carried out within the limits of the authority granted by the law and the articles of association of PT(intra vires)are legally viewed as the actions of PT as a legal entity. Actions of the Board of Directors that are carried out outside the authority or exceed their authority as stipulated in the laws and articles of association of PT(ultra vires)the Board of Directors must be personally responsible with third parties.Keywords: Ultra Vires Action; Board of Directors; Limited Liability Company ABSTRAKTindakan Direksi secara hukum dikualifikasi sebagai tindakan perseroan selaku badan hukum apabila dilakukan sesuai dengan kewenangan dan tujuan perseroan sebagaimana tercantum dalam anggaran dasar perseroan. Tindakan direksi yang dilakukan di luar kewenangan atau melampaui kewenangan (ultra vires) tidak dapat dikualifikasi sebagai tindakan perseroan. Akibatnya, tindakan hukum tersebut tidak mengikat perseroan dan hanya mengikat Direksi secara pribadi dengan pihak ketiga. Permasalahan yang diteliti yaitu batas-batas kewenangan Direksi menurut UUPT dan doktrin dan konsep ultra vires direksi. Jenis penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konsep (conceptual approach) dan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan (statute approach). Tindakan direksi sepanjang dilakukan dalam batas-batas kewenangan yang diberikan oleh undang-undang dan anggaran dasar PT (intra vires) secara hukum dipandang sebagai tindakan PT selaku badan hukum. Tindakan Direksi yang dilakukan di luar kewenangan atau melampaui kewenangannya sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang dan anggaran dasar PT (ultra vires) Direksi harus bertanggung jawab secara pribadi dengan pihak ketiga.Kata Kunci: Tindakan Ultra Vires; Direksi; Perseroan Terbatas

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document