Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

" ABSTRAKPenelitian ini membahas mengenai ganti rugi immateriil bagi badan hukum karenaadanya perbuatan melawan hukum. Fokus penelitian adalah mengetahui apakahganti rugi immateriil dapat diberikan bagi badan hukum serta bagaimana gantirugi immateriil diberikan bagi badan hukum dalam putusan-putusan pengadilan,dan kemudian mengelaborasi dua fokus diatas untuk melihat bagaimanapenggantian ganti rugi yang sepatutnya diminta oleh badan hukum. Metodepenelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif. Penulisan skripsi inimenggunakan metode penelitian kepustakaan dengan data sekunder sebagai sumber datanya. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa badan hukum tidaksepatutnya menerima ganti rugi immateriil.

---

ABSTRACTThis study discusses the immaterial compensation for a legal entity due to an actof tort. The focus of this research is to find out whether the immaterialcompensation should be given for the legal entity, and also to know how theimmaterial compensation being granted to legal entity in court verdicts, and thenelaborating the two focuses over to see what is the ideal compensation should beclaimed by legal entity. The method used is normative. The writing of this methodwas with secondary data such as research literature as a source of data. Theresults showed that the legal entity should not receive immaterial compensationdue to the absence of mental and psychological condition in legal entity."

"There are many conditions that could be determined as valid defenses in court decisions. Some have been specified in the Indonesian Criminal Code but others appear from legal practices. In the verdict number 583/Pid.B/2010/PN Jkt Sel., panel judges concluded that the accused was nonpunishable due to the existence of valid defenses related to legal justice, moral justice, and social justice. This article scrutinize those reasons of the valid defense and comes to the conclusion that judges failed to support their arguments. The author refer to "error jurist" as a more appropriate rationale that should be established in the judges' arguments."