scholarly journals PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN PENGADILAN NEGERI PELALAWAN NOMOR 19.PID.SUS.LH/2016/PN.PLW DAN PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 2284 K/PID.SUS.LH/2016 TENTANG TANGGUNG JAWAB PIDANA IR. FRANS KATIHOKANG BIN RUBEN KATIHOKANG SEBAGAI MANAGER OPERASIONAL YANG MENGAKIBATKAN KERUSAKAN LINGKUNGAN HIDUP

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Novrika Novrika
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Forest Fires ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Environmental Crime ◽  
Assessment Model ◽  
District Court ◽  
Competency Assessment ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Court Involved

ABSTRAKTujuan penulisan artikel ini yakni untuk mengetahui pertimbangan putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pelalawan Nomor 19.Pid.Sus.LH/2016/PN.Plw terhadap pelaku tindak pidana yang berkedudukan sebagai manager operasional yang di dakwa dengan perbuatan yang mengakibatkan kerusakan lingkungan hidup dan untuk mengetahui pertimbangan putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2284 K/Pid.Sus.LH/2016 terhadap pelaku tindak pidana yang berkedudukan sebagai manager operasional yang di dakwa dengan perbuatan yang mengakibatkan kerusakan lingkungan hidup serta perbandingan antara keduanya. Metode penelitian ini penulis menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif atau yang dikenal dengan istilah legal research, yang menekankan pada studi dokumen kepustakaan yang berhubungan dengan permasalahan dan tujuan penelitian ini. Pendekatan yang digunakan yakni berupa pendekatan asas hukum dan perbandingan hukum. Kesimpulan berdasarkan penelitian ini penulis uraikan berupa perbandingan putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pelalawan dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung, bahwa terdapat Perbedaan pertimbangan hakim terkait unsur kesengajaan, unsur sarana dan prasarana pencegahan kebakaran hutan, Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Pelalawan berpendapat bahwa unsurnya tidak terbukti, sedangkan Hakim Mahkamah Agung berpendapat sebaliknya. Majelis Hakim Pengadilan Negeri Pelalawan baik ketua ataupun masing-masing anggota majelisnya tidak memiliki sertifikasi Hakim lingkungan hidup sebagaimana diatur Keputusan Mahakamah Agung Nomor 134/KMA/SK/IX/2011, tanggal 5 September 2011, tentang setifikasi Hakim Lingkungan Hidup. Sedangkan Hakim Mahkamah Agung telah memiliki sertifikat lingkungan sesuai yang dikehendaki oleh Keputusan Mahakamah Agung tersebut. Hal ini menjadi masukan penulis terkait penegasan model pertimbangan kompetensi hakim dalam mengadili perkara tindak pidana lingkungan hidup di Indonesia. Kata kunci: putusan; tindak pidana lingkungan hidup; kompetensi hakimABSTRACTThe purpose of remembering this article includes the discussion of the decision of the Pelalawan District Court Number 19.Pid.Sus.LH / 2016 / PN.Plw against opposing the follow-up of those who are located as operational managers charged with research related to the Supreme Court Number 2284 K / Pid.Sus. LH / 2016 against executors of criminal acts who are domiciled as operational managers who are charged with the perpetrators who oppose environmental destruction and reverse the transition. This research method uses normative legal research methods or known as legal research, which are agreed upon in the study of library documents relating to the topic and purpose of this study. The advice used consists of legal principles and replaces law. The conclusion of this court involved a description of the decisions of the Pelalawan District Court and the Supreme Court Decision, which refers to court considerations relating to intentions, lack of facilities and infrastructure that can address forest fires, District Court Judges. The Panel of Judges of the Pelalawan District Court or their respective chairpersons did not have the certification of Environmental Judges agreeing to the Supreme Speech Decree Number 134 / KMA / SK / IX / 2011, dated September 5, 2011, concerning the certification of Environmental Judges. While the Chief Justice has an environmental certificate according to what is desired by the Supreme Court's Decision. This is an input that is proposed to affirm the judge's competency assessment model in judging cases of environmental crime in Indonesia.Keywords: decision; environmental crime; judge’s competency.

scholarly journals PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM KONSUMEN ATAS PENERAPAN KLAUSULA BAKU

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 91
Author(s):  
Muhamad Syamsudin
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Consumer Protection ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
Legal Questions ◽  
The Supreme Court

ABSTRAKKajian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh putusan kasasi Mahkamah Agung yang memutus berbeda dengan putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen, yang dikuatkan oleh Pengadilan Negeri Surabaya terkait dengan gugatan pelanggaran klausula baku oleh pelaku usaha jasa kebugaran milik PT X. Permasalahannya adalah: 1) Apakah isi klausula baku yang tercantum dalam perjanjian anggota jasa kebugaran milik PT X dapat dibenarkan berdasarkan Pasal 18 Undang-Undang Perlindungan Konsumen?; 2) Apakah dasar pertimbangan hakim Mahkamah Agung sudah tepat dan mencerminkan nilai-nilai keadilan bagi para pihak jika dibandingkan dengan Putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen dan Pengadilan Negeri Surabaya? Kajian ini merupakan penelitian hukum normatif dengan metode pendekatan kasus dan perundang-undangan. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa klausula baku dalam perjanjian keanggotaan jasa kebugaran milik PT X telah melanggar ketentuan Pasal 18 ayat (1) huruf a, c, e, f, dan g Undang-Undang Perlindungan Konsumen. Konsekuensinya adalah batal demi hukum. Putusan Mahkamah Agung tidak tepat dan cermat dalam mempertimbangkan fakta-fakta hukum dan penerapan hukumnya. Ditinjau dari substansinya, Putusan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen yang dikuatkan oleh Pengadilan Negeri Surabaya lebih memenuhi rasa keadilan dan melindungi konsumen jika dibandingkan dengan Putusan Mahkamah Agung.Kata kunci: perlindungan konsumen, klausula baku, perjanjian keanggotaan. ABSTRACTThe background of this study is related to the Supreme Court Decision which is contradicted the Decision of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK) upheld by the Surabaya District Court in relation to the lawsuit regarding the violation of the standard clause by PT X. The legal questions are: 1) Does the standardized clause contained in the membership agreement of PT X violate the Article 18 of the Consumer Protection Law?; 2) Are the considerations of the Supreme Court Judge appropriate and do they reflect the justice values for the parties when compared with the decision of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency and the Surabaya District Court? This study is a normative legal research done with case study and legislation review. The results indicate that the standardized clause in the membership agreement of PT X has violated the provisions of Article 18 paragraph (1) letters a, c, e, f, and g. The consequences is null and void. The Supreme Court failed to consider and employ the legal facts in the ruling. By the content, the Decision of BPSK strengthened by the Surabaya District Court is likely more justifiable and protective compared to the Supreme Court Decision.Keywords: consumer protection, standardized clause, membership agreement.

scholarly journals Urgensi Pembentukan Peradilan Khusus Pemilu dalam rangka Mewujudkan Integritas Pemilu

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Iwan Rois ◽  
Ratna Herawati
Keyword(s):  
Law Enforcement ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Research Method ◽  
District Court ◽  
Election Law ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
High Court ◽  
Provincial Level ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
General Elections

This study aims to analyze the need to establish a special election court which has the authority to solve various election law cases in order to realize elections with integrity; and analyzing the formulation of election special justice in order to realize the integrity of the election. The research method used is the method of normative legal research and the implementation of this research collects data from various sources in order to get an answer to the issues that have been formulated. The results of the study shows that  the purpose of the need for the formation of special judicial elections; First, to meet the growing demands of increasingly complex justice in society and more election law enforcement so as to realize the integrity of the elections; Second, To handle the election law cases quickly and simply so as to obey the integrity of the election. Formulation; First, the election special justice to be able to work quickly and simply in handling election law cases, domiciled at the central and provincial level, then entering the District Court or the High Court; Secondly, the Guidelines for the election special judicial law shall be based on Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 Year 2017 on Procedures for the Settlement of Administrative Offenses of the General Elections in the Supreme Court. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis perlunya membentuk peradilan khusus pemilu yang mempunyai kewenangan menyelesaikan berbagai perkara hukum pemilu agar terwujud pemilu yang berintegritas; dan menganalisis formulasi pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu dalam rangka mewujudkan integritas pemilu. Metode penelitian yang digunakan ialah metode penelitian hukum normatif dan pelaksanaan dari penelitian ini mengumpulkan bahan hukum dari berbagai sumber guna mendapatkan suatu jawaban atas pokok-pokok permasalahan yang telah dirumuskan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tujuan perlunya pembentukan peradilan khusus pemilu; Pertama, Untuk memenuhi tuntutan perkembangan akan keadilan yang semakin kompleks dalam masyarakat dan lebih penegakan hukum pemilu sehingga mewujudkan integritas pemilu; Kedua, Untuk menangani perkara hukum pemilu dengan cepat dan sederhana sehingga mewudkan integritas pemilu. Formulasi; Pertama, Peradilan khusus pemilu agar bisa bekerja cepat dan sederhana dalam menangani perkara hukum pemilu, berkedudukan di tingkat pusat dan provinsi, selanjutnya masuk pada Pengadilan Negeri atau Pengadilan Tinggi; Kedua, Pedoman beracara pada peradilan khusus pemilu berdasarkan pada Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2017 tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Administratif Pemilihan Umum Di Mahkamah Agung.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN WASIAT WAJIBAH TERHADAP NON MUSLIM DITINJAU DARI KOMPILASI HUKUM ISLAM (KHI) STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 331/K/AG/2018/MA

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 267
Author(s):  
Liana Noviyanti ◽  
Mulati Mulati
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Islamic Law ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Court Ruling ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Supreme Court Ruling ◽  
Library Research ◽  
The Supreme Court

Islamic law has stated that every person of different religion cannot inherit each other, both Muslims inherit for non-Muslims and from non-Muslims inherit for Muslims, but in practice, Judges at the Supreme Court level implement mandatory wills, this is required which has been decided in the Supreme Court Decision Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA. This study aims to examine how to implement the mandatory non-Muslim wills in the Supreme Court ruling Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA based on the provisions of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), and what the Supreme Court Judges consider in implementing mandatory testaments against non-Muslims in the Supreme Court Decision Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA. This research is a normative legal research with the nature of qualitative research with the type of library research. Based on the studies that have been carried out, the Decision of the Supreme Court Number. 331 / K / AG / 2018 / MA does not include legal considerations in force in Indonesia concerning inheritance provisions and concerning the granting of an approved mandatory will set out in the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI). The application of mandatory wills in the Supreme Court Decision is contrary to the provisions of Islamic Law and the provisions of the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI). Article 209 paragraphs (1) and (2) concerning mandatory wills.

PENEGAKAN HUKUM OLEH HAKIM AGUNG REPUBLIK INDONESIA DALAM MENANGANI KASASI PERKARA KARTEL PUTUSAN KPPU YANG MENGGUNAKAN ALAT BUKTI TIDAK LANGSUNG (INDIRECT EVIDENCE)

2019 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-101
Author(s):  
Fransiska Lestari Simanjuntak
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Indirect Evidence ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Problem ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Court Judge ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Valid Evidence ◽  
The Republic

Business Competition Supervisory Commission (KPPU) is an institution authorized to handle unfair business competition violation. In fact, in several KPPU decisions it was revealed that KPPU prioritizes indirect evidence in handling cartel cases in Indonesia. KPPU's decision is not final and binding. Business actors who do not accept the decision of KPPU may file an objection at the District Court. The parties who do not accept the decision of the district court, may file an appeal in the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. The type of research is used in this research is normative legal research, that is research done by reviewing the rules of law applicable or applied to a certain legal problem. The result of the research shows that in the Supreme Court appeal, KPPU's decision was upheld and canceled by Supreme Court to KPPU's decision uses indirect evidence in handling cartel case. The basis of consideration of the Supreme Court Justices ruling the KPPU's decision in the case of the tire cartel and the cement cartel is the Chief Justice accepting and acknowledging the indirect evidence as valid evidence, since the evidence is sufficient and logical evidence, and there is no evidence the more powerful that can weaken the indirect evidence. While the consideration of the Supreme Court Judge overturning the KPPU's decision in the case of cartel fuel surcharger is not accepting and acknowledging indirect evidence as valid evidence, because the evidence is insufficient and illogical, and there is stronger evidence that can weaken the tool indirect evidence

scholarly journals Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Kreditor Terhadap Pelunasan Piutang Dari Harta Pailit

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hamdi Hamdi ◽  
Sulaiman S ◽  
Teuku Yudi Afrizal
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Capital Investment ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Mining Industry ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Debt Payment

The concept of legal protection in bankruptcy has so far been seen as a way out of the problem of accounts receivable debt which coincides with a bankrupt debtor, where the debtor no longer has the ability to repay the debts which are past due to their creditors, so that the steps to submit a request for the determination of bankruptcy status by the Court Commerce of the debtor is a possible step to resolve the bankruptcy case. Bankruptcy was originally regulated in Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (UUK and PKPU). Furthermore, if the parties submitting bankruptcy applications, the Commercial Court Judges at the District Court are required to examine and hear the case being submitted. The research method used is the normative legal research method or library research with the statute aprroach approach and the case aprroach approach. Based on the results of the study, it is known that the form of legal protection for creditors against paying off debts from bankrupt assets in the Supreme Court Decision Number 511 / K / Pdt. Yinchenindo Mining Industry (in bankruptcy) by law becomes a guarantee for its debts to preferred creditors, in this case the Head of the Second Foreign Capital Investment Service Tax Office. Furthermore, the UUK and PKPU also guarantee the rights of creditors in bankruptcy, especially the rights of preferred creditors who have a special position with peace efforts and the postponement of obligations to pay debts of bankrupt debtors to their creditors as stipulated in Article 222 of the UUK and PKPU. The concept of the distribution of bankrupt assets distributed to preferred creditors after deducting bankruptcy fees and compensation for curatorial services where the payment process is settled based on the principle of fairness and balance set forth in Article 265 of the UUK and PKPU, where the preferred creditor parties receive the remaining payment of the receivables amounting to 62.5% ( sixty two point five percent) of the bankruptcy assets.It is expected that the Judges of the Commercial Court and the Court of Appeals at the Supreme Court consider the rights of preferred creditors who pay off their receivables first. The Debtor should be able to immediately submit a request to postpone the debt payment obligation so that the remaining outstanding debt receivables cannot be paid off to the preferred creditors through the sale of free assets. Keywords: Protections of the law, creditor, Treasures of starc

Leading Decisions of the Supreme Court of Israel and Extracts of the Judgment

1997 ◽  
Vol 31 (4) ◽  
pp. 754-802 ◽  
Author(s):  
Omi
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Human Dignity ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Conditional Release ◽  
Basic Law ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
State Of Israel

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.

scholarly journals PENGATURAN TENTANG PENYELESAIAN KONFLIK NORMA ANTARA PERATURAN MENTERI TERHADAP UNDANG-UNDANG

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 1191
Author(s):  
Maria Virginia Usfunan
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Research Method ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Right ◽  
Legal Consequences ◽  
Laws And Regulations

Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengetahui bagaimana pengaturan tentang penyelesaian tentang konflik norma antara peraturan menteri terhadap undang-undang dan unruk mengetahui bagaimana sifat putusan mahkamah agung dalam hak uji material. Metode yang digunakan adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan konsep. Pengaturan tentang penyelesaian konflik norma antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, metode penyelesaian konflik norma itu dengan digunakannya asas lex superior derogate lex inferior ini, yang digunakan dengan terjadinya konflik norma antara UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan dengan Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 terkait pengaturan penyelesaian konflik norma antara peraturan menteri dengan Undang-Undang, maka berdasarkan asas tersebut yang digunakan adalah UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, sehingga Permenkumham Nomor 2 Tahun 2019 harus dikesampingkan. Maka, Pengaturan mengenai Penyelesaian Konflik Norma Antara Peraturan Menteri Terhadap Undang-Undang, menjadi kewenangan Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan Pasal 9 UU Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Dan Sifat Putusan Mahkamah Agung dalam Hak Uji Materiil dalam memberikan putusannya yang pada prinsipnya yang memiliki konsekuensi hukum aturan tersebut apabila terbukti secara sah dan meyakinkan bertentangan dengan aturan di atasnya maka aturan tersebut akan menjadi tidak sah serta tidak berlaku, dan menjadi tanggungjawab instansi terkait untuk mencabutnya. The purpose of the study is to find how adjustment of the settlement of norm conflicts between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution and to find out how the nature of the Supreme Court decision in the right of judicial review. The method used was normative legal research method with the legislation approach and concept approach. Adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution, the method of resolving norms conflicts by using the principle of lex superior derogate lex inferior, which was used in the norm conflicts between the Constitution on Laws and Regulations with Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 in relation to conflict resolution arrangements the norm between Ministerial Regulations and the Constitution, then based on the principle used was the Constitution on Laws and Regulations, so Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 2 of 2019 must be set aside. Thus, the adjustment on resolving norms of conflict between Ministerial Regulations toward the Constitution became authority of the Supreme Court based on Article 9 of the Constitution on Laws and Regulations. And the nature of the Supreme Court's Decision in the Right to Judge Material in providing its decision which in principle had legal consequences of the rule if it was proven legally and convincingly contrary to the rules above, the rule would be invalid and not applicable, and it was the responsibility of related agencies to revoke it.

scholarly journals Legal Protection For Brand Right Owner Famous For His Brand Immediate

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 222-229
Author(s):  
Chris Anggi Natalia Berutu ◽  
Sheila Elfira ◽  
Monica Sheren Tambuwun ◽  
Ericson Sebastian Sitohang
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Existing Data

Brand equality can cause harm to brand owners. Therefore, the legal protection of trademarks is very important. In this study, the authors will analyze the Supreme Court Decision No. 7K/pdt.sus-HKI/2016 whose purpose is that the consequences of the law of imitation of famous brands can be known and know the legal protection for owners of well-known brands if their brands are imitated. This research is descriptive and classified as normative legal research and uses existing data. Based on research, the famous brand ST. REGIS belonging to the plaintiff entered the list of registrants in Indonesia first, therefore the defendant's mark REGIS@the Peak at Sudirman has been registered with unfavorable conditions. The defendant's mark is essentially the same as the plaintiff's mark for similar and dissimilar services, as a result, the defendant's mark must be removed from the general register of marks. According to the law, Sheraton Internasional as the owner of the famous ST.REGIS brand won against REGIS@ the Peak at Sudirman.

TINJAUAN YURIDIS MENGENAI TINDAK PIDANA YANG DITUNTUT DENGAN PASAL 351 (3) KUHP STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN MA NO. 1043 K/PID/2016

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 25-62
Author(s):  
Rahmat Saputra
Keyword(s):  
Data Collection ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
Supreme Court Decision ◽  
Criminal Code ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Public Prosecutor ◽  
Literature Study ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Supreme Court

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

scholarly journals KONSEP PEMBUKTIAN SEDERHANA DALAM PERKARA KEPAILITAN

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document