scholarly journals PENERAPAN ASAS NEBIS IN IDEM DALAM PERKARA PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM OLEH MAHKAMAH AGUNG ATAS UPAYA HUKUM LUAR BIASA “PENINJAUAN KEMBALI”

Author(s):  
Hariadi

This study aims to find out how the Supreme Court decidescases of unlawful acts with the principle of nebis in idem andthe basis for consideration of the Supreme Court justicesexamining and deciding Case Number 405 PK / Pdt / 2017,related to the principle of nebis in idem. This research is a typeof normative law, with a normative juridical approach, namelydoctrinal law research which refers to legal norms. emphasizessecondary sources of material, both regulations and legaltheories, and examines legal principles that are scientifictheoretical in nature and can be used to analyze the problemsdiscussed. The method of analysis of normative legal researchis in the form of a prescriptive method, namely a method ofanalysis that provides an assessment (justification) of theobject under study whether it is true or false, or what shouldbe according to law.

2017 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 54-66
Author(s):  
Denty Suci Mareta Femylia ◽  
Muchammad Chasani ◽  
Muchammad Chasani

Putusan Pengadilan Nomor 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim memutuskan terdakwa telah melakukan kejahatan berat berupa pembunuhan dengan sengaja. Melihat kejahatan yang dilakukannya, maka pantas baginya mendapatkan hukuman yang setimpal yaitu 15 tahun. Masalah dalam penelitian ini adalah apa yang menjadi dasar pertimbangan seorang hakim dalam memutus perkara seperti nomor putusan 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim, dan bagaimana penerapan putusannya dalam kasus ini. Metode penelitian hukum yang digunakan adalah yuridis sosiologis. Sasaran dari penelitian adalah norma-norma hukum positif yang mengatur tentang putusan ultra petita khususnya di Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Timur. Hasil Penelitian yang diperoleh, bahwa Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Timur memutus ultra petita karena dalam kasus ini, Jaksa menuntut terdakwa dengan menggunakan Pasal 338 KUHP dengan ancaman hukumannya adalah 14 tahun sedangkan hakim dalam vonisnya menggunakan Pasal 340 KUHP dengan menjatuhkan hukuman kepada terdakwa yaitu dengan 15 tahun penjara. Penerapannya adalah terdakwa mengajukan Peninjauan Kembali ke Mahkamah Agung dengan hasil putusannya adalah terdakwa Ferry Surya Prakasa divonis dengan 8 tahun penjara. Simpulan yang diperoleh dari penelitian ini adalah putusan majelis hakim atas Perkara Nomor: 537/Pid/B/2007/PN.Jkt.Tim, bahwa hakim seharusnya dapat memutus perkara tidak dari faktor yuridisnya saja melainkan dapat memutus perkara tersebut dengan memperhatikan dari faktor nonyuridisnya. Terkait dengan penerapannya bahwa terdakwa dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri, Pengadilan Tinggi dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung telah memutus 15 tahun penjara dan dalam peninjauan kembali divonis dengan 8 tahun penjara.Judgment of the Court Number 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim decided the defendant had committed a serious crime of intentional murder. Seeing the crime he committed, it was fitting for him to get a 15-year sentence. The problem to be studied in this research are what is the basic consideration of a judge in deciding case such as decision number 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim, and how the application of decision in this case. The approach used in the research is socio legal research. The objectives of the research are the poitive legal norms that regulate the Ultra petita Decision especially in the East Jakarta District Court. The result of the research shows that the East Jakarta District Court made decision of ultra petita verdict exceeded the prosecutor's demand, because in this case, the prosecutor demanded the defendant using Article 338 of the Criminal Code with the penalty of 14 years While the judge in his sentence using Article 340 of the Criminal Code by sentencing the defendant to 15 years imprisonment. Its application is the defendant filed a Judicial Review to the Supreme Court with the result of the verdict is defendant Ferry Surya Prakasa with 8 years in prison. The conclusion of this research is the decision of the panel of judges on the Case Number: 537 / Pid / B / 2007 / PN.Jkt.Tim, that the judge should be able to decide the case not from juridical factor but can decide the case by considering from the nonyuridis factor. In relation to its application that the defendant in the District Court, High Court and Supreme Court rulings have terminated 15 years of imprisonment and are under review with a term of 8 years imprisonment.


2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Akhmad Firdiansyah ◽  
Wachid Hasyim ◽  
Yonathan Agung Pahlevi

ABSTRACT In accordance with the mandate of Article 23A of the 1945 Constitution, all tax stipulations must be based on the law. To carry out the mandate in accordance with Article 17 of the Customs Law Number 17 of 2006, the Director General of Customs and Excise is given the attributive authority to issue reassignment letter on Customs Tariff and / or Value for the calculation of import duty within two years starting from the date of customs notification carried out through a mechanism of audit or re-research. To examine the application of these legal norms, there are currently Supreme Court (MA) Judgment (PK) decisions that accept PK applications from PK applicants and question the legality of issuing SPKTNP by the Director General of BC. This study uses explosive qualitative analysis to analyze the issuance of SPKTNP by the Director General of BC. The results of this study indicate that the Supreme Court is of the view that the issuance of SPKTNP by the Director General of BC is a legal defect, while DGCE considers the issuance of SPKTNP by the Director General of BC according to the provisions.Key words: official decision, reassignment letter, DCGE  ABSTRAKSesuai amanah Pasal 23A Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 Segala penetapan pajak harus berdasar undang-undang. Untuk menjalankan amanah tersebut sesuai Pasal 17 Undang-Undang Kepabeanan Nomor 17 Tahun 2006 Direktur Jenderal Bea dan Cukai (Dirjen BC) diberikan kewenangan atributif untuk menerbitkan Surat Penetapan Kembali Tarif dan/atau Nilai Pabean (SPKTNP) guna penghitungan bea masuk dalam jangka waktu dua tahun terhitung sejak tanggal pemberitahuan pabean yang dilakukan melalui mekanisme audit atau penelitian ulang. Untuk meneliti penerapan norma hukum tersebut dewasa ini terdapat putusan Peninjauan Kembali (PK) Mahkamah Agung (MA) yang menerima permohonan PK dari pemohon PK dan mempermasalahkan legalitas penerbitan SPKTNP oleh Dirjen BC. Penelitian ini mengunakan analisis kualitatif eksplotarif untuk menganalisis penerbitan SPKTNP oleh Dirjen BC. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa MA berpandangan penerbitan SPKTNP oleh Dirjen BC adalah cacat hukum, sedangkan DJBC beranggapan penerbitan SPKTNP oleh Dirjen BC telah sesuai ketentuan.Kata Kunci: penetapan pejabat, SPKTNP, Direktur Jenderal Bea dan Cukai.


Legal Studies ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gregory Allan ◽  
Stephen Griffin

AbstractThe landmark Supreme Court judgment in Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd provides a significant reassessment of the law relating to a court's ability to circumvent corporate personality. The Supreme Court considered that the application of ordinary legal principles (‘the concealment principle’) should ordinarily override a court's ability to apply an equitable veil-piercing doctrine (‘the evasion principle’). Whilst accepting the primacy of the concealment principle, this paper disputes the correctness of the Supreme Court's implied assertion that, in cases concerning ‘one-man type’ companies, the concealment principle should be advanced through application of agency-derived principles. Rather, this paper contends that the concealment principle should be progressed by adopting solutions derived from the law of constructive trusts and associated principles of equity. To an objective of providing a doctrinally sound framework for the development of the law in the post-Prest era, this paper further suggests that the constituent elements of the evasion principle could be consistent with the operation of a distinct species of constructive trust. Moreover, it is argued that, in future, this ‘evasion trust’ should, in complete abrogation of the equitable piercing doctrine, be developed so as to apply in all cases exhibiting intentional and fraudulent abuses of the incorporation process.


2019 ◽  
pp. 160-195
Author(s):  
James Holland ◽  
Julian Webb

This chapter examines the use of case law to solve legal problems. In the study and practice of law we seek to analyse legal principles; and the ‘principles’ in English law are derived from pure case law or from case law dealing with statutes. The discussions cover the idea of binding precedent (stare decisis); establishing the principle in a case; the mechanics of stare decisis; whether there are any other exceptions to the application of stare decisis to the Court of Appeal that have emerged since 1944; whether every case has to be heard by the Court of Appeal before it can proceed to the Supreme Court; precedent in the higher courts; other courts; and the impact of human rights legislation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 311-332
Author(s):  
Khiyaroh Khiyaroh

The Plenary Meeting of the Supreme Court is a system established to maintain the unity of the application of the law and the consistency of the judge's decision. This system is carried out every year and starts in 2011. In the plenary meeting of the Supreme Court there is a division of rooms according to the abilities of each judge divided into five rooms. Namely the criminal chamber, civil chamber, state administration room, religious chamber, and military room. In the case of the plenary chambers of religion there are a number of things that are regulated every year and there are some rules that have been reformulated. With the existence of the plenary chamber of the Supreme Court of Religion, the rules in it partly reflect the purpose of family law legislation. But there are rules that are actually on the contrary to the goals of family law legislation. This paper aims to find out how the role of SEMA as a result of the Plenary Meeting of the Supreme Court of the Supreme Court has been in accordance with the objectives of Law No.1 of 1974 concerning marriage. This research is a library research with a juridical approach by looking at the legal rules and legal principles, and is analytic descriptive. The results obtained are the rules in the SEMA as the results of the plenary meeting of religious chambers are not all in line with the objectives of the Indonesian marriage law.  Keywords: Supreme Court, Plenary Chamber, Purpose of Family Law.


2020 ◽  
Vol 71 (3) ◽  
pp. OA35-OA48
Author(s):  
James C Fisher

This note discusses the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Singularis Holdings v Daiwa Capital Markets in the context of other recent decisions on corporate attribution and the illegality principle in English law. It particularly considers Daiwa’s implications for the relationship between the illegality doctrine and other legal principles in the wake of Patel v Mirza. The court employed a context-sensitive, teleological approach to attribution, one consequence of which was the conclusive consignment of the House of Lords’ decision in Stone & Rolls Ltd v Moore Stephens to irrelevance. It nonetheless privileges orthodox, pre-Patelian authority in the disposal of the case. The court’s approach suggests that Patel is perceived as the high-water mark for expansive, policy-sensitive understanding of the illegality principle, and that its disruptive potential is likely to be carefully constrained in future decisions of the Supreme Court.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-78
Author(s):  
Benny Leonard Saragih ◽  
Ediwarman Ediwarman ◽  
Muaz Zul

Difference in punishment or sentencing disparity is basically a natural thing because it can be said almost no case that is really the same. Disparity becomes a problem when the range of the sentence imposed differences between similar cases so large, giving rise to injustice and can give rise to suspicions in the community. Disparities in the Criminal (disparity of sentencing) is not the same as the application of criminal offenses against the same (same offense) or the criminal acts that are dangerous to be compared (offenses of comparable seriousness) without clear justification. Based on Law No. 16 of 2004 which replaced Law No. 5 of 1991 About the Prosecutor of the Republic of Indonesia is an institution in the field of prosecution of the main authority of the public prosecutor act prosecution about what is meant by the prosecution as well as the reference to the provisions of Article 1 point 7 and Article 137 Law No. 8 of 1981 on the Law of Criminal Procedure Code (Criminal Code). Research Methods in writing this thesis carried out by the method of normative law, namely analyzing and searching for answers to the problems raised by the substantive law / legal norms contained in the rules of law, the Supreme Court Regulation (PERMA), the Supreme Court Circular, and etc. Factors that cause the disparity criminal offense namely Legislation Provisions factors, internal factors and external factors.


Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 19-27
Author(s):  
O. N. Nizamieva

The article has analyzed the jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on family disputes that involve property issues, revealed features of implementation of functions of the highest court in this field. First, it is stated that the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation reviews decisions of lower courts mainly in cases where the application of family law rules is contradictory and unsettled. It is necessary to fill in a gap in family law, to resolve conflicts between certain legal norms, to choose between several possible interpretations of the law. Second, the judicial panels of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, making a determination on a particular case, clarify the meaning of legal norms, and sometimes under the guise of interpretation in fact correct ill-considered or outdated norms of family law. Third, the High Court reviews cases where there is a typical and widespread error in the application of a very clear and defined rule. Fourth, in individual legal acts it is possible to observe the concretization or change of the previously designated legal stances while maintaining the legislative rules in the same form. Using certain examples of cases considered by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on family disputes concerning property, the paper has demonstrated the mechanism of possible transformation of abstract, non-personified and doctrinally oriented provisions contained in the definitions of judicial boards of the Supreme Court to general legal regulators. The author has determined certain problems of legal regulation of property relations in the family that have not been settled by the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 129
Author(s):  
Sherly Ayuna Putri ◽  
Achmad Syauqi Nugraha

The verdict of Verstek is the ruling that where the defendant, although called legitimately, does not come on a given day, and does not tell others to be facing his deputy, the claim is accepted with a decision without the presence (Verstek). Resistance is a legal effort against the verdict that was dropped outside the presence of the defendant. Essentially the resistance was provided for the defendant who (in general) was defeated. The Verzet is governed in article 125 paragraph (3) and 129 HIR, article 149 clause (3) Jo. 153 RBg. The research method which is conducted in this study is normative juridical research that emphasizes on the science of law and conduct an inventory of positive law relating to the effectiveness of statutory regulations in the fi eld of legal and descriptive analytical describing and analyzing the problems based on the legislation governing the law of civil proceedings regarding the legal efforts of Verstek decision. Based on the results of the study obtained fi rst problem of Verstek decision to be fi led by the defendant on the decision of the District Court of Bale Bandung Case Number: 37/PDT. G/2018/PN. BLB and the state court ruling of the Simalungun case number: 36/PDT. G/2013/PN. LICENSE does not conform to the norm in article 125 HIR and section 149 RBg. The two remedies that can be done by the plaintiff or the appeal is to apply for the appeal with the reasons set out in article 30 paragraph (1) of Law No. 5 of 2004 concerning the Supreme Court, among other things relating to the judge is not authorized or exceeds the limits of authority and or wrong in implementing or violating applicable laws.


2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 63
Author(s):  
Lauren Brazier

This article analyses the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Ingram v Patcroft Properties Ltd concerning the legal effect of an unaccepted repudiation. The issue before the Court was whether, and when, a lease had been successfully cancelled by either party. This involved difficult questions of whether there is a "third choice" in the face of a repudiation, the extent to which a party must be ready and willing to perform if it wishes to cancel a contract, and whether the rules of the common law regarding these issues survived the enactment of the Contractual Remedies Act 1979. The article suggests that the Supreme Court did not adequately address these issues. A failure to pinpoint the precise issue in the case gave rise to a confusing judgment that did not fully address the relevant legal principles and their application under the Act. The article discusses those principles, the theoretical issues concerning their application under the Act, and addresses aspects of the judgment in Ingram v Patcroft Properties Ltd that will make the resolution of future cases more difficult. 


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document