scholarly journals Pertanggungjawaban Direktur atas Kewenangan Mewakili Perseroan Terbatas yang telah Habis Masa Kepengurusannya

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-80
Author(s):  
Eduard Rudy Suharto

The Board of Directors is the only organ of the company that has power, authority and is fullyresponsible for managing the company solely for the interests of a company, in accordancewith the company's goals and objectives, and has the power, authority and responsibility torepresent the company both inside and outside the court with the provisions of the articles ofassociation that have been made. Directors in the Company have a term of office as stated inthe Deed of Establishment of a Limited Liability Company. If the term of office of the Board ofDirectors is exhausted, then it must be done by the GMS. If the Board of Directors does nothold a GMS, then the position of the Board of Directors is not valid before the Law and doesnot have an interest in representing the Company either inside or outside the Court.Keywords : Directors, RUPS, Court

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 369
Author(s):  
Maleakhi W. Sitompul

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.


Yurispruden ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 86
Author(s):  
Abdul Rokhim

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


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 12-16
Author(s):  
Desak Made Setyarini ◽  
Ni Luh Mahendrawati ◽  
Desak Gde Dwi Arini

Abstract-Directors in a limited liability company can be likened to a life for the company. The Board of Directors in carrying out their duties in managing a limited liability company has the possibility to carry out acts against the law both civil and criminal in nature. However, acts against the law can be directly carried out by the company through its organs, or vice versa, acts against the law are carried out by employees and the company is responsible. Based on this, the problem is obtained: 1) what forms of unlawful actions by the Board of Directors in managing a limited liability company (Corporation)? 2) What is the responsibility of the Directors who commit illegal acts? This research method uses normative legal research, with literature studies of primary and secondary legal materials. Based on research findings, it is known that: 1) Forms of unlawful acts carried out by directors: using company money/ wealth for personal gain, company information for personal gain, conducting related parties transactions with companies, prohibiting competition with the company 2) Directors' responsibility for illegal acts is regulated in Law No. 40 of 2007 the directors are responsible for managing the company where the management has to be done by each member of the board of directors, in good faith and full of responsibility. From this, it is necessary to optimize the implementation and supervision of the Corporation Law which substantially provides protection to business stakeholder and other public rights. Keyword: Accountability of Directors, Limited Liability Companies, Action against the Law Abstrak-Direksi di dalam perseroan terbatas dapat diumpamakan sebagai nyawa bagi perseroan. Direksi dalam menjalankan tugasnya mengelola perseroan terbatas memiliki kemungkinan untuk melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum baik bersifat perdata maupun pidana. Akan tetapi, perbuatan melawan hukum itu dapat langsung dilakukan oleh perusahaan melalui organ-organnya, atau sebaliknya perbuatan melawan hukum itu dilakukan oleh pegawai dan perusahaan wajib mempertanggungjawabkan. Berdasarkan hal tersebut maka didapatlah permasalahan yakni 1) Bagaimana bentuk perbuatan melawan hukum yang dilakukan oleh Direksi di dalam mengurus perseroan terbatas? 2) Bagaimana tanggung jawab Direksi Perseroan Terbatas yang melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum? Metode penelitian ini menggunakan penelitian hukum normatif, dengan studi kepustakaan dari bahan hukum primer dan sekunder. Berdasarkan temuan penelitian diketahui bahwa: 1) Bentuk perbuatan melawan hukum yang dilakukan oleh direksi: mempergunakan uang/ kekayaan perseroan untuk kepentingan pribadi, informasi perseroan untuk kepentingan pribadi, melakukan transaksi dengan perseroan, larangan bersaing dengan perseroan 2) Pertanggungjawaban direksi atas perbuatan melawan hukum diatur dalam UU No. 40 Tahun 2007 direksi bertanggung jawab atas pengurusan perseroan dimana pengurusan itu wajib dilaksanakan setiap anggota direksi dengan itikad baik dan penuh tanggung jawab. Dari hal tersebut sebaiknya Perlu optimalisasi pelaksanaan dan pengawasan UUPT yang secara substansial memberikan perlindungan kepada pelaku bisnis dan hak-hak publik lainnya. Kata Kunci: Pertanggungjawaban Direksi, Perseroan Terbatas, Melawan Hukum


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 27-33
Author(s):  
Anis Mashdurohatun ◽  
Lenny Mutiara Ambarita ◽  
Gunarto

This research aims to find out the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors in repurchasing shares in limited companies that have not been fair and to reconstruct the roles and responsibilities of the board of directors in repurchasing shares in limited companies based on fair values. This research is a sociolegal research, that is, an alternative approach that tests doctrinal studies of law. The word 'socio' in sociolegal represents the correlation between the context in which the law is located (an interface with a context within which law exists). It was found that the Board of Directors is jointly and severally liable for losses suffered by shareholders in good faith, arising from repurchases that are null and void due to the law. This does not provide fair/balanced legal protection for the parties. The fair values in buying shares are to provide balanced and proportional legal protection. Reconstruction of the roles and responsibilities of the Board of Directors in the repurchase of shares in a limited company based on fair values by carrying out reconstruction of Article 37 paragraph (3) and (5) of Law Number 40 Year 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies.


2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 205
Author(s):  
Abdul Rokhim

 Direksi menurut Undang-undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas memiliki dua kewenangan, yakni melakukan tindakan pengurusan  perusahaan dan mewakili perseroan baik di dalam maupun di luar pengadilan. Tindakan 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.Kata kunci: Tindakan Ultra Vires; Direksi; Perseroan Terbatas Directors according to Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company have two authorities, namely taking care of the company and representing the company both inside and outside the court. The actions of the Board of Directors are legally qualified as the actions of the company as a legal entity if they are carried out in accordance with the authority and objectives of the company as stated in the company's articles of association (company statute). The directors' actions that are carried out outside the authority or exceed the authority (ultra vires) cannot be qualified as a company action. As a result, these legal actions do not bind the company and only bind the Directors privately with third parties.Keywords: Ultra Vires Actions; the Directors; Limited Liability Company


2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Bella Mutiara Wahab

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. 


Author(s):  
Ali Muhayatsyah

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,


2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-82
Author(s):  
Yoel Bello ◽  
Zulkifli Makkawaru ◽  
Abd. Haris Hamid

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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 83
Author(s):  
Antonius Faebuadodo Gea ◽  
Hirsanuddin Hirsanuddin ◽  
Djumardin Djumardin

This research was conducted to find out how the directors' accountability mechanism caused by an error or negligence caused the limited company to go bankrupt and how the legal consequences on the bankruptcy of a limited liability company. This type of research was classified as a normative legal research or also called doctrinal research, namely research that examined the law as a separate system that was separate from various other systems in society so as to provide a boundary between the legal system with other systems. The approach method used was the statutory approach; and Conceptual Approach. In principle, the Board of Directors was not personally responsible for acts committed for and on behalf of the company based on its authority. The scope of conduct that would be personally accounted for by the directors of the company was negligence because the directors did not fulfill the contents of the agreement and mistakes because the directors commit acts against the law. Bankruptcy of a Limited Liability Company was the bankruptcy of itself, not the bankruptcy of its management, even though the bankruptcy was due to the negligence of its management. So that management should not be held liable jointly for any losses due to negligence and could only be held accountable if the company's assets were not sufficient to cover losses due to bankruptcy Article 90 paragraph (2) of the Limited Liability Company Law).


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-112
Author(s):  
Indriyani Kusumawati ◽  
Yeti Sumiyati

Unlawful acts cannot be separated by a violation of one's rights. This research is based on the phenomenon of directors who are penalized for unlawful acts committed by their employees. In 2021, PT Antam appealed to the court because the board of directors felt aggrieved by the judge's decision to impose damages on the directors of PT Antam. In fact, those who do illegal acts to the detriment of consumers are Eksi Anggraeni and the two employees, Misdianto and Ahmad Purwanto through the lure of discounts without the approval of the company. Limited Liability Companies Law implicitly regulates the concept of legal protection that is already known in some countries, namely the principle of Business Judgement Rule. This principle can be used by directors as a basis for legal protection to achieve justice. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to comprehend the responsibility of the board of directors for actions against employee law that stipulates discounts on the purchase of Antam gold unilaterally associated with the law of limited liability companies and review the application of the principles of Business Judgement Rule to directors who must be responsible for actions against the law of employees. The results of this study concluded that the directors of PT Antam cannot be held accountable. Furthermore, the application of the Business Judgement Rule principle has not been applied to this case, so legal protection to the board of directors is still ignored by the judge and has not shown justice.                  


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document