Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Peralihan aset berupa tanah melalui lelang merupakan penjualan barang yang sudah banyak diminati masyarakat di Indonesia. Tetapi ternyata tanah yang menjadi obyek lelang sebelumnya telah terikat Akta Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli (PPJB) yang telah masuk boedel Pailit dan dalam hal tersebut penjualannya dilakukan dengan lelang eksekusi. Pada dasarnya setiap pembeli termasuk pembeli lelang yang beritikad baik harus mendapatkan perlindungan hukum. Akan tetapi pada kenyataannya masih terdapat pembeli lelang yang mendapatkan gugatan atas obyek barang lelang yang dibelinya. Dalam tesis ini membahas akibat hukum terhadap peralihan aset-aset berupa tanah melalui lelang eksekusi yang terkait Boedel Pailit yang sebelumnya telah terikat Akta Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli (PPJB) berdasarkan KUHPerdata dan Undang-Undang Kepailitan serta perlindungan hukum bagi pembeli lelang yang beritikad baik berdasarkan pertimbangan hukum para hakim dalam putusan Mahkamah Agung RI Tingkat PK Nomor: 43 PK/PDT/2011. Metode Penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis-normatif yang dilakukan dengan studi dokumen dan tipologi eksplanatoris dan preskriptif. Kesimpulannya terhadap aset-aset tersebut berdasarkan Pasal 34 Undang-Undang Kepailitan, tidak dapat lagi bahkan dilarang ditindaklanjuti menjadi akta jual beli dan berdasarkan Pasal 185 Undang-Undang Kepailitan bahwa tahapan penjualan boedel pailit harus melalui lelang sedangkan mengenai perlindungan terhadap pembeli lelang yang beritikad baik peralihan hak melalui pelelangan sudah sesuai dengan ketentuan hukum dan tidak bisa dibatalkan dan segala akibat hukum yang timbul daripadanya tersebut sah menurut hukum. Sehingga atas dasar itu telah diterbitkanlah Risalah Lelang sebagai alat bukti pemindahan hak yang kuat sebagaimana dinyatakan dalam Pasal 41 PP No. 24 Tahun 1997.

---

The transition of land assets through an auction sale of goods which have attracted many people in Indonesia. But it turned out to be the object of an auction of land previously been tied Deed of Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) which has entered boedel Bankrupt and in terms of the sales made by the auction execution.Basically each buyer including auction buyers with good intention should get legal protection. But in fact there are buyers bidding to get the suit on the object bought auction goods. In this thesis discusses the legal consequences of the transfer of assets such as land through auctions related execution Boedel Bankrupt previously been bound Deed of Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) based on the Civil Code and the Bankruptcy Act and legal protection for good faith purchasers auction under consideration law judges in the Supreme Court ruling PK Levels No. 43 PK / PDT / 2011. Research methodology that is used is normative juridical, with library research technique, and eksplanatoris and preskriptif research type. In conclusion to these assets is based on Article 34 of the Bankruptcy Act, can no longer even be banned actionable deed of sale and on the basis of Article 185 Bankruptcy Act that stage boedel sales must go through a bankruptcy auction, while the protection of good faith purchaser auction switchover right through auction is in conformity with the provisions of the law and can not be canceled and all legal consequences arising therefrom is lawful. So on that basis has published Minutes of the Auction as evidence a strong transfer of rights as stated in Article 41 of Regulation No. 24 of 1997."

"Perjanjian kredit dibuat harus berlandaskan pada itikad baik dari para pihak sehingga perjanjian dapat dilindungi oleh hukum. Dalam pelaksanaan suatu perjanjian kredit tidak selalu berjalan lancar dan tidak jarang para pihak melakukan pembaharuan perjanjian dan terdapat kreditor lain yang mengajukan debitor pailit. Ini timbul menjadi suatu permasalahan baru berkaitan dengan perjanjian pembaharuan yang telah mendapat putusan actio pauliana akibat debitor pailit namun tidak dilaksanakan. Penelitian ini akan membahas dari segi asas itikad baik serta toeri keadilan yang dikemukan oleh John Rawls dan Aristoteles. Metode penulisan yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah metode penelitian normatif. Analisis yang dilakukan yaitu Terdapatnya suatu perjanjian pembaharuan yang dibuat oleh para pihak yang mana berangkat dari hal yang tidak beritikad baik sebab sudah jelas bahwa debitor sudah tidak mampu melaksanakan kewajibannya dan untuk menghindari tanggung jawab hukum, maka dilakukan pengalihan kepada pihak ketiga. Perikatan yang timbul antara pihak ketiga dengan debitor dilandaskan dengan tindakan tidak beritikad baik yang membuat pihak ketiga tidak terlindungi oleh hukum meskipun unsur-unsur perjanjian telah dipenuhi dalam suatu perjanjian pembaharuan yang dibuat. Upaya kurator untuk membatalkan perjanjian pembaharuan yaitu dengan cara mengajukan gugatan actio pauliana. Perlakuan itikad baik dari para pihak dalam hal perjanjian pembaharuan yang telah dibatalkan oleh gugatan actio pauliana bergantung pada kondisinya masing-masing. Keadilan distributif akan muncul pada saat para pihak, terutama debitor, pihak ketiga, kurator serta kreditor mendapatkan pemenuhan atas hak dan kewajibannya yang diperoleh sesuai dengan porsinya masing-masing yang telah ditentukan, tanpa adanya kekurangan atau kelebihan, meskipun beberapa hal dalam ketentuan hukum Indonesia masih belum terdapat pengaturannya baik secara implisist maupun eksplisit. Contohnya yaitu pihak ketiga yang tidak dapat melakukan pendaftaran piutangnya karena tidak adanya itikad baik dalam pembuatan suatu perjanjian yang pengaturannya tidak sama dengan Amerika Serikat. Pihak ketiga masih diberi kesempatan untuk mendaftarkan piutangnya dengan bantuan debitor.

---

Credit agreement must be based on the good faith of the parties so that it can be protected by law. In the implementation it does not always run smoothly and is not uncommon for parties to renew the agreement with other creditor to avoid bankruptcy. This creates a problem related to the renewal agreement that cannot be implemented because of actio pauliana decision. This research will discuss in terms of the principle of good faith and the theory of justice by John Rawls and Aristotle. The writing method used in this research is normative. The analysis carried out is by seeing a renewal agreement made by the parties which departs not from good faith because it is clear that the debtor is unable to carry out his obligations and avoiding legal responsibility, a transfer is made to a third party. The agreement that is based on an act of bad faith which makes the third party unprotected by law even though the elements of the agreement have been fulfilled in a renewal agreement made. Curator's attempt to cancel the renewal agreement was by filing an actio pauliana lawsuit. The good faith treatment of the parties in the case of a renewal agreement that has been canceled by actio pauliana's lawsuit depends on their respective conditions. Distributive justice will emerge when the parties, especially debtors, third parties, curators and creditors, may obtain fulfilment of their rights and obligations in their respective portion, although some matters in the provisions of Indonesian law are still there is no regulation either implicitly or explicitly. An example is a third party that cannot register its receivables because there is no good faith in making an agreement whose arrangements are not the same as the United States. Third parties are still given the opportunity to register their receivables with the help of debtors."

"Fokus dari penelitian ini adalah berkaitan dengan tanah yang berstatus bekas hak barat (dalam hal ini tanah eigendom) yang dimohonkan haknya melalui jual beli. Berdasarkan ketentuan di dalam Peraturan Menteri Keuangan Republik Indonesia Nomor 2/PMK.06/2020 tentang Penyelesaian Aset Bekas Milik Asing/Tionghoa terhadap tanah- tanah yang harus diselesaikan terlebih dahulu status hukum menjadi barang milik negara atau daerah maka selanjutnya hak atas tanah dapat dipindahkan kepada pihak ketiga melalui jual beli yang dilakukan di hadapan pejabat pembuat akta tanah. Pembuatan akta jual beli yang telah dilangsungkan sesuai dengan prosedur berdasarkan ketentuan undang-undang mempunyai kekuatan pembuktian yang sempurna, melekat kepada pihak pembeli. Apabila di kemudian hari terjadi sengketa atas tanah tersebut maka pihak pembeli dapat dinyatakan sebagai beritikad baik karena tidak mengetahui adanya cacat terhadap objek yang dimilikinya. Permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini ialah tentang mekanisme yang harus ditempuh untuk memperoleh tanah yang masih berstatus aset bekas milik asing/tionghoa berdasarkan ketentuan hukum yang berlaku di Indonesia. Selain itu juga perlindungan hukum bagi pembeli beritikad baik yang mengajukan permohonan hak melalui jual beli tanah di hadapan pejabat pembuat akta tanah. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif di mana data dikumpulkan melalui studi pustaka (studi dokumen) dan dianalisis secara kualitatif. Dari penelitian ini dapat dinyatakan bahwa untuk menjamin kepastian hukum seharusnya penerapan prinsip kehati- hatian oleh suatu anggota instansi pemerintahan sangat diperlukan. Di samping itu, dibutuhkan pula adanya kerjasama antar instansi pemerintahanyang satu dengan lainnya agar tidak menyebabkan kerugian bagi pembeli tanah yang sudahmelakukan jual beli sesuai dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan yang berlaku di Indonesia.

---

The focus of this research is related to land with former western rights status (in this case eigendom land) whose rights are applied for through buying and selling. Provisions in the Regulation of the Minister of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia Number 2/PMK.06/2020 concerning Settlement of Foreign/Chinese-Owned Former Assets on land that must be resolved first with legal status becoming state property, then land rights can be transferred to third parties through a sale and purchase agreement. carried out before the official making the land deed. The making of the sale and purchase deed that has been carried out in accordance with the procedures based on the provisions of the law has perfect evidentiary power, in accordance with the buyer. If later there is a dispute over theland, the buyer can be declared as having good faith because he is not aware of any defects in the desired object. The problem raised in this research is about the mechanism that must be achieved to obtain land that is still a foreign-owned asset based on the legal provisions in force in Indonesia. In addition, there is also legal protection for buyers with good intentions who submit applications through the sale and purchase of land in the presence of land certificate officials. To answer these problems, a normative juridical research method was used in which data were collected through literature study and analyzed qualitatively. From this research, it can be stated that to ensure legal certainty, the application of the precautionary principle by a member of a government agency is very necessary. In addition, there is also a need for cooperation between government agencies with one another so as not to cause harm to land buyers who have made salesand purchases in accordance with the provisions of the laws and regulations in force in Indonesia."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai penerapan prinsip utmost good faith sebagai salah satu prinsip yang mendasar dan penting dalam perjanjian asuransi, khususnya dengan objek Produk Asuransi yang Dikaitkan Dengan Investasi. Prinsip utmost good faith mengatur bahwa tertanggung dan penanggung harus memberikan informasi yang benar saat membuat perjanjian asuransi. Pada skripsi ini pembahasan dibagi menjadi tiga. Pertama, pembahasan mengenai pengertian asuransi ditinjau dari hukum positif Indonesia. Kedua, pengertian prinsip utmost good faith dalam asuransi ditinjau dari Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Dagang, penerapan prinsip tersebut secara umum, serta dikaitkan dengan PAYDI yang mengkombinasikan antara kebutuhan proteksi serta investasi. Ketiga, pembahasan mengenai pelanggaran prinsip utmost good faith yang dilakukan oleh PT AXA Mandiri Financial Services selaku penanggung dalam perjanjian asuransinya dengan Rais Torodji dan Rachmawaty selaku tertanggung. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis-normatif, dimana data penelitian berasal dari studi kepustakaan dan undang-undang terkait. Hasil penelitian ini menyatakan bahwa prinsip utmost good faith merupakan sebuah prinsip yang harus dilaksanakan dalam setiap perjanjian asuransi. Penanggung bertanggung jawab untuk menyediakan informasi yang jelas dan lengkap bagi Tertanggung mengenai produk asuransi yang dijualnya, khususnya pada PAYDI yaitu informasi mengenai ilustrasi investasi dan risiko investasi. Dalam hal ini, Perjanjian asuransi antara PT AXA Mandiri Financial Service dengan Rais Torodji dan Rachmawaty adalah perjanjian yang batal demi hukum karena penanggung tidak melaksanakan kewajiban penerapan prinsip utmost good faith. Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jambi No 7/PDT.G.S/2020/PN JMB merupakan putusan yang benar meskipun Majelis Hakim tidak memberikan pertimbangan pada pelanggaran prinsip utmost good faith yang diatur dalam Pasal 251 KUHD sebagai salah satu prinsip asuransi dalam pertimbangan hukumnya.

---

This thesis discusses the application of the principle of utmost good faith as one of the fundamental and important principles in insurance agreements, especially with the object of Investment-Linked Products. The principle of utmost good faith stipulates that the insured and the insurer must provide the correct information when making an insurance agreement. In this thesis, the discussion is divided into three. First, the discussion regarding the meaning of insurance in terms of Indonesian positive law. Second, the understanding of the principle of utmost good faith in insurance is reviewed from the Commercial Code, the application of this principle in general, and related to PAYDI which combines the needs of protection and investment. Third, the discussion regarding the violation of the principle of utmost good faith committed by PT AXA Mandiri Financial Services as the insurer in its insurance agreement with Rais Torodji and Rachmawaty as the insured. This research uses a juridical-normative method, where the research data comes from a study of literature and related laws. The results of this study state that the principle of utmost good faith is a principle that must be implemented in every insurance agreement. The Insurer is responsible for providing clear and complete information to the Insured regarding the insurance products it sells, especially on PAYDI, namely information on investment illustrations and investment risks. In this case, the insurance agreement between PT AXA Mandiri Financial Service and Rais Torodji and Rachmawaty is an agreement that is null and void because the insurer does not carry out the obligation to apply the principle of utmost good faith. Jambi District Court's decision No 7/PDT.G.S/2020/PN JMB is the correct decision even though the Panel of Judges did not give consideration to the violation of the principle of utmost good faith as regulated in Article 251 of the Criminal Code as one of the principles of insurance in its legal considerations."

"Tulisan ini menganalisis bagaimana penerapan dari Prinsip Utmost Good Faith diterapkan di Indonesia terkait penutupan serta klaim dari suatu polis asuransi jiwa kredit di Indonesia. Tulisan ini disusun dengan menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal. Prinsip Utmost Good Faith telah menjadi suatu prinsip umum yang secara international dipahami dan dipergunakan dalam halnya suatu pengisian formulir pengajuan dari penutupan polis asuransi. Prinsip ini berkembang di Inggris sejak kasus Boehm v Carter yang diputuskan oleh Lord Mansfield. Sejak kasus tersebut adanya kewajiban melakukan pembukaan sebelum kontrak. Perkembangan akan prinsip ini tak luput pula masuk ke Indonesia melalui Kitab Undang- Undang Hukum Dagang yakni pada Pasal 251 yang diadopsi oleh Belanda dari Inggris terkait kewajiban pemberian informasi atau fakta yang sebenar-benarnya diberikan oleh calon tertanggung. Fakta material sifatnya penting untuk diungkapkan kepada Penaggung untuk mengetahui keadaan dari objek asuransi. Hal ini kemudian menciptakan suatu pembebanan yang sifatnya sepihak kepada calon tertanggung untuk memberikan segala informasi atau fakta yang dimintakan oleh calon penanggung tanpa adanya suatu pembatasan jenis fakta apa yang dapat dimintakan serta apa klasifikasi fakta atau informasi yang dimintakan. Konstruksi ini kemudian menciptakan suatu ketidakseimbangan serta prinsip ini dijadikan sebagai suatu alasan penolakan klaim asuransi. Salah satunya di Indonesia adalah pada putusan nomor 98/Pdt.G/2020/PN Skt. Pada putusan tersebut Majelis Hakim luput dalam mempertimbangkan dua hal yakni Polis Asuransi itu sendiri sebagai suatu perjanjian serta KUHD pasal 251. Serta Fakta yang tidak diungkapkan oleh Tertanggung merupakan suatu Fakta Material yang sepatutnya dipertimbangkan pula oleh Majelis Hakim.

---

This article analyzes how Utmost Good Faith principle applied in Indonesia regarding closure and claims of credit life insurance policy in Indonesia. This article prepared using doctrinal research methods. The Utmost Good Faith principle has become a general principle that is internationally understood and used when filling out the application form for closing an insurance policy. This principle developed in England since the Boehm v Carter case decided by Lord Mansfield. Since this case, there has been an obligation to disclose before the contract. The development of this principle has also entered Indonesia through Commercial Code in Article 251 which was adopted by Netherlands from England regarding the obligation to provide information or facts that are actually provided by the prospective insured. Material facts are important to disclose to the Insurer to determine the condition of the insurance object. This then creates a unilateral burden on the prospective insured to provide all information or facts requested by the prospective insurer without any restrictions on the types of facts that can be requested and what classification of facts or information requested. This construction then creates an imbalance and this principle is used as a reason for rejecting insurance claims. One of them in Indonesia is decision number 98/Pdt.G/2020/PN Skt. In this decision, the Panel of Judges failed to consider the Insurance Policy as an agreement and Article 251 Commercial Code and the facts that were not disclosed by the Insured were material facts which should also be considered Panel of Judges."

"[ABSTRAKTesis ini meneliti dan mengkaji pembatalan perjanjian secara sepihak yang dilakukan dengan tidak berdasarkan pada itikad baik. Itikad baik adalah salah satu asas klasik dalam hukum perjanjian yang terkandung pula dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Asas itikad baik harus diterapkan sejak tahap prakontraktual sampai dengan pascakontraktual. Di dalam tahap prakontraktual, kedua belah pihak memiliki kewajiban untuk menjelaskan dan meneliti fakta material yang terkait dengan pembuatan perjanjian. Dalam hal suatu ketiadaan itikad baik pada tahap pembuatan perjanjian telah membawa para pihaknya dalam suatu hubungan kontraktual yang diikat dengan perjanjian, maka jelas bahwa dikemudian hari perjanjian tersebut senantiasa dapat dibatalkan. Kecakapan bertindak seseorang dalam suatu perjanjian adalah hal yang harus diteliti sebelum ditandatanganinya suatu perjanjian. Tipe penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif yaitu penelitian hukum yang mengacu kepada kaidah-kaidah atau norma-norma hukum yang terdapat dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Pelanggaran asas itikad baik dalam tahap pembuatan perjanjian menjadi suatu hal yang sulit untuk dibuktikan, oleh karena itu dibutuhkan suatu peraturan yang tegas untuk mewajibkan pihak-pihak dalam perjanjian untuk menjelaskan dan meneliti fakta material yang terkait dengan perjanjian. Hal ini dimaksudkan agar terpenuhinya syarat sah perjanjian sebagaimana diatur dalam pasal 1320 KUHPerdata. Pemutusan perjanjian secara sepihak yang memenuhi unsur perbuatan melawan hukum diharapkan dapat menciptakan kekonsistenan hakim dalam menerapkan hukum. Hal ini agar tercipta kejelasan dan kepastian hukum bagi para pihak yang terlibat dalam suatu perjanjian agar selalu beritikad baik dalam menjalankan suatu perjanjian baik dalam tahap prakontrak, pelaksanaan kontrak maupun pascakontrak.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis examines and assesses unilateral termination of the agreement which is not based on good faith. Good faith is one of the classic principles of contract law also contained in Indonesian Civil Code. The principle of good faith should be applied since pre-contractual phase until post-contractual. In the pre-contractual phase, both parties have an obligation to explain and examine the material facts related to the making of the agreement. In the case of an absence of good faith in the pre-contractual phase has brought the party in an contractual relationship which bound to the agreement, then obviously that the agreement in the future can always be canceled. The ability of a person in an agreement is something that should be examined before signing of the agreement. This type of research is normative juridical, which refers to the rules or norms of law contained in regulations. Violation of the principle of good faith in the process of making the agreement becomes a difficult thing to prove, and therefore required a strict regulation to require the parties to the agreement to explain and examine the material facts relating to the agreement. This meant that the conditions are met the legitimate agreement as provided for in article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Unilateral termination of the agreement which meets the elements of the tort is expected to create the consistency of judges in applying the law. It is to create the clarity and legal certainty for the parties involved in an agreement to always have a good faith in carrying out an agreement in the pre- contract phase, contractual phase and post-contract phase.;This thesis examines and assesses unilateral termination of the agreement which is not based on good faith. Good faith is one of the classic principles of contract law also contained in Indonesian Civil Code. The principle of good faith should be applied since pre-contractual phase until post-contractual. In the pre-contractual phase, both parties have an obligation to explain and examine the material facts related to the making of the agreement. In the case of an absence of good faith in the pre-contractual phase has brought the party in an contractual relationship which bound to the agreement, then obviously that the agreement in the future can always be canceled. The ability of a person in an agreement is something that should be examined before signing of the agreement. This type of research is normative juridical, which refers to the rules or norms of law contained in regulations. Violation of the principle of good faith in the process of making the agreement becomes a difficult thing to prove, and therefore required a strict regulation to require the parties to the agreement to explain and examine the material facts relating to the agreement. This meant that the conditions are met the legitimate agreement as provided for in article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Unilateral termination of the agreement which meets the elements of the tort is expected to create the consistency of judges in applying the law. It is to create the clarity and legal certainty for the parties involved in an agreement to always have a good faith in carrying out an agreement in the pre- contract phase, contractual phase and post-contract phase.;This thesis examines and assesses unilateral termination of the agreement which is not based on good faith. Good faith is one of the classic principles of contract law also contained in Indonesian Civil Code. The principle of good faith should be applied since pre-contractual phase until post-contractual. In the pre-contractual phase, both parties have an obligation to explain and examine the material facts related to the making of the agreement. In the case of an absence of good faith in the pre-contractual phase has brought the party in an contractual relationship which bound to the agreement, then obviously that the agreement in the future can always be canceled. The ability of a person in an agreement is something that should be examined before signing of the agreement. This type of research is normative juridical, which refers to the rules or norms of law contained in regulations. Violation of the principle of good faith in the process of making the agreement becomes a difficult thing to prove, and therefore required a strict regulation to require the parties to the agreement to explain and examine the material facts relating to the agreement. This meant that the conditions are met the legitimate agreement as provided for in article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Unilateral termination of the agreement which meets the elements of the tort is expected to create the consistency of judges in applying the law. It is to create the clarity and legal certainty for the parties involved in an agreement to always have a good faith in carrying out an agreement in the pre- contract phase, contractual phase and post-contract phase.;This thesis examines and assesses unilateral termination of the agreement which is not based on good faith. Good faith is one of the classic principles of contract law also contained in Indonesian Civil Code. The principle of good faith should be applied since pre-contractual phase until post-contractual. In the pre-contractual phase, both parties have an obligation to explain and examine the material facts related to the making of the agreement. In the case of an absence of good faith in the pre-contractual phase has brought the party in an contractual relationship which bound to the agreement, then obviously that the agreement in the future can always be canceled. The ability of a person in an agreement is something that should be examined before signing of the agreement. This type of research is normative juridical, which refers to the rules or norms of law contained in regulations. Violation of the principle of good faith in the process of making the agreement becomes a difficult thing to prove, and therefore required a strict regulation to require the parties to the agreement to explain and examine the material facts relating to the agreement. This meant that the conditions are met the legitimate agreement as provided for in article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Unilateral termination of the agreement which meets the elements of the tort is expected to create the consistency of judges in applying the law. It is to create the clarity and legal certainty for the parties involved in an agreement to always have a good faith in carrying out an agreement in the pre- contract phase, contractual phase and post-contract phase., This thesis examines and assesses unilateral termination of the agreement which is not based on good faith. Good faith is one of the classic principles of contract law also contained in Indonesian Civil Code. The principle of good faith should be applied since pre-contractual phase until post-contractual. In the pre-contractual phase, both parties have an obligation to explain and examine the material facts related to the making of the agreement. In the case of an absence of good faith in the pre-contractual phase has brought the party in an contractual relationship which bound to the agreement, then obviously that the agreement in the future can always be canceled. The ability of a person in an agreement is something that should be examined before signing of the agreement. This type of research is normative juridical, which refers to the rules or norms of law contained in regulations. Violation of the principle of good faith in the process of making the agreement becomes a difficult thing to prove, and therefore required a strict regulation to require the parties to the agreement to explain and examine the material facts relating to the agreement. This meant that the conditions are met the legitimate agreement as provided for in article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Unilateral termination of the agreement which meets the elements of the tort is expected to create the consistency of judges in applying the law. It is to create the clarity and legal certainty for the parties involved in an agreement to always have a good faith in carrying out an agreement in the pre- contract phase, contractual phase and post-contract phase.]"

"Tulisan ini menganalisis mengenai akibat hukum pelanggaran kewajiban penggunaan bahasa Indonesia dalam perjanjian yang melibatkan pihak Indonesia berdasarkan Pasal 31 ayat (1) Undang-Undang Nomor 24 Tahun 2009 (“UU 24/2009”) ditinjau dari hukum perjanjian. Baik UU 24/2009 maupun peraturan turunannya tidak mengatur mengenai akibat hukum dari pelanggaran Pasal 31 ayat (1) UU 24/2009 ini. Oleh karena itu, akibat hukumnya adalah tergantung putusan hakim dalam perkara di pengadilan. Penelitian ini bersifat yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif. Dalam analisisnya, analisis akibat hukum terhadap perjanjian dilakukan berdasarkan hukum perjanjian yang mencakup sifat hukum perjanjian, bentuk perjanjian, syarat sebab yang halal dari syarat sah perjanjian, konsep batal demi hukum, dan asas itikad baik serta penyalahgunaan keadaan. Hasil penelitiannya yaitu, terdapat perbedaan penafsiran antara pendapat ahli hukum dan putusan pengadilan tahun 2015 sampai tahun 2021. Karena terdapat perbedaan penafsiran tersebut, maka ditemukan tiga jenis putusan terkait perkara ini, yaitu putusan yang menyatakan perjanjian batal demi hukum, putusan yang menyatakan perjanjian berlaku sah dan mengikat, dan putusan yang menyatakan pengadilan tidak berwenang.

---

This paper analyzes the legal consequences of violating the obligation to use the Indonesian language in agreements involving Indonesian parties, based on Article 31 paragraph (1) of Law Number 24 of 2009 ("Law 24/2009") in the context of contract law. Both the Language Law and its implementing regulations do not specify the legal consequences of violating Article 31 paragraph (1) of this law. Therefore, the legal consequences depend on the judge's decision in court cases. This research is normative juridical and utilizes a qualitative approach. In the analysis, the legal consequences of the agreement are examined based on contract law, covering the nature of the contract, forms of the contract, valid conditions of the contract, the concept of voidable contracts, the principle of good faith, and the misuse of circumstances. The research findings indicate differences in interpretation between legal experts and court decisions from 2015 to 2021. Due to these differences in interpretation, three types of decisions related to this case are identified: decisions declaring the agreement void, decisions stating the agreement is valid and binding, and decisions asserting that the court lacks jurisdiction."

"ABSTRAKPenulisan hukum ini pada dasarnya melakukan analisa terhadap pengaturan dan penerapan asas itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi di Indonesia beserta perkembangannya dalam lingkup hukum perjanjian, pengaturan mengenai asas itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi di Jepang, Prancis, dan Inggris, dan juga analisis mengenai perspektif baru terhadap penerapan doktrin mitigasi dan asas itikad baik di Indonesia melalui perbandingan dengan pengaturan terkait doktrin mitigasi dan asas itikad baik di Jepang, Prancis, dan Inggris. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini berbentuk Yuridis-Normatif dengan tipe deskriptif. Hasil dari penelitian ini menggambarkan bahwa asas itikad baik dalam hukum perjanjian Indonesia bersumber ketentuan Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata Indonesia. Selanjutnya terkait doktrin mitigasi di Indonesia telah diatur dalam ketentuan berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan Indonesia. Selain itu, penelitian ini juga menggambarkan secara komprehensif mengenai pengaturan terkait asas itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi dalam hukum Jepang, Prancis dan Inggris yang masing-masing memiliki penerapan dan penasfiran yang berbeda dengan Indonesia. Dengan memperbandingkan ketentuan tersebut ditemukan berbagai perbedaan dan persamaan terkait pengaturan dan penerapan asas itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi di Indonesia, Jepang, Prancis dan Inggris yang dapat memberikan pemahaman dan penerapan baru terhadap itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi yang pengertian dan penerapannya masih belum diatur secara definitif sehingga menyebabkan interpretasi yang berbeda-beda. Berdasarkan hasil perbandingan tersebut, Pemerintah Indonesia khususnya bagi perancang dan pembuat Undang-Undang dirasa perlu untuk melakukan perincian terhadap pengaturan-pengaturan asas itikad baik dan doktrin mitigasi di Indonesia agar terdapat suatu pemahaman dan penerapan yang sama."

---

""ABSTRACT"This legal writing analyzes the regulation and application of good faith principle and duty to mitigate doctrine in Indonesia along with its development within the scope of the law of agreement, the regulation of good faith principles and the duty to mitigate doctrine in Japan, France and England, with analysis of new perspectives on it application in Indonesia by comparison with the regulation related to the duty to mitigate doctrine and the principle of good faith in Japan, France and England. The research method used in this research is Juridical Normative with descriptive type. This study illustrate that the principle of good faith in Indonesia 39 s treaty law stems from the Indonesian Civil Code. Furthermore, the duty to mitigate doctrine in Indonesia has been regulated in the provisions of various laws and regulations. This study also describes comprehensively the regulations related to good faith principles and the duty to mitigate doctrine in Japanese, French and English law which each have different application and interpretation with Indonesia. This study found differences and similarities concerning the regulation and application of good faith principles and the doctrine of mitigation in Indonesia, Japan, France and England that can provide new insights and applications in Indonesia whose definition and application is not yet definitively regulated causing different interpretations. Based on the results, the drafters and legislators of Indonesian Law, are deemed necessary to detail the regulations of good faith principles and the doctrine of mitigation in Indonesia in order to have a common understanding and application."

"Tesis ini menganalisis bagaimana kriteria anggota Direksi yang telah melaksanakan pengurusan PT dengan iktikad baik dan penuh tanggung jawab, secara khusus menilai kriteria tersebut pada Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Bandung No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG. Penelitian ini merupakan yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual, kasus dan perbandingan. Tesis ini menyimpulkan, sesuai dengan peraturan dan prinsip-prinsip hukum PT di Indonesia, anggota Direksi telah melakukan pengurusan PT dengan iktikad baik jika memenuhi setidaknya 5 (lima) kriteria: kejujuran/ketulusan anggota Direksi; tidak melanggar hukum yang berlaku;bertindak sesuai dengan norma dan kewajaran dalam bisnis; memiliki kompetensi dan bertindak sesuai kompetensi Direksi; tidak ada konflik kepentingan. Adapun kriteria penuh tanggung jawab anggota Direksi jika memenuhi setidaknya 5 (lima) kriteria: menjalankan tugas dan wewenang sesuai dengan Anggaran Dasar PT; sesuai dengan hukum dan norma yang berlaku; tidak melampaui wewenang sebagai Direksi; memberikan informasi yang akuntabel kepada segenap stakeholder; terbuka dalam mengambil keputusan PT. Dalam Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Bandung No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG, pertimbangan Majelis Hakim menyatakan apabila anggota Direksi dalam pengurusan PT tidak selaras dan bertentangan dengan kewajiban hukumnya sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Pasal 92 ayat (2) UUPT No.40 Tahun 2007, maka dapat dikategorikan tidak melakukan tugasnya dengan iktikad baik, sehingga dapat dipandang dan dipersamakan telah melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum. Oleh karena itu, Putusan No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG, yang menyatakan Tn. HC, selaku anggota Direksi tidak mempunyai iktikad baik dan tidak bertanggung jawab, telah sesuai dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan dan prinsip-prinsip hukum perseroan terbatas.

---

This thesis analyzes how the criteria for members of the Board of Directors who have carried out the management of PT in good faith and full responsibility, specifically assess these criteria in the Bandung High Court Decision No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG. This research is a normative juridical research with conceptual, case and comparison approaches. This thesis concludes, in accordance with the regulations and legal principles of PT in Indonesia, members of the Board of Directors have managed the PT in good faith if they meet at least 5 (five) criteria: honesty/sincerity of members of the Board of Directors; do not violate applicable laws; act in accordance with the norms and fairness in business; have competence and act in accordance with the competence of the Board of Directors; no conflict of interest. The criteria for full responsibility for members of the Board of Directors if they meet at least 5 (five) criteria: carry out their duties and authorities in accordance with the Articles of Association of PT; in accordance with applicable laws and norms; does not exceed the authority as the Board of Directors; provide accountable information to all stakeholders; open in making decisions PT. In Bandung High Court Decision No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG, the consideration of the Panel of Judges stated that if a member of the Board of Directors in managing a PT is not in line with and contrary to their legal obligations as stipulated in Article 92 paragraph (2) of the Company Law No. 40 of 2007, it can be categorized as not performing their duties properly. good faith, so that it can be seen and equated with having committed an unlawful act. Therefore, Decision No. 94/Pdt/2015/PT/BDG, which states that Mr. HC, as a member of the Board of Directors does not have good faith and is not responsible, has complied with the provisions of the legislation and the legal principles of a limited liability company."

"Penelitian ini menganalisis bagaimana kriteria anggota Direksi yang telah melaksanakan pengurusan PT dengan iktikad baik dan penuh tanggung jawab. Penelitian merupakan yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual, kasus dan perbandingan. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan, sesuai dengan peraturan dan prinsip-prinsip hukum PT di Indonesia, anggota Direksi telah melakukan pengurusan PT dengan iktikad baik jika memenuhi 5 (lima) kriteria, yaitu: kejujuran/ketulusan anggota Direksi; tidak melanggar hukum yang berlaku; bertindak sesuai norma dan kewajaran dalam bisnis; memiliki kompetensi sebagai Direksi dan bertindak sesuai kompetensi tersebut; tidak ada konflik kepentingan. Adapun kriteria penuh tanggung jawab anggota Direksi jika memenuhi 4 (empat) kriteria, yaitu: menjalankan tugas dan wewenang sesuai Anggaran Dasar PT dan hukum yang berlaku; tidak melampaui wewenang; memberikan informasi yang akuntabel kepada segenap stakeholder; terbuka dalam mengambil keputusan PT. Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Bandung No.94/PDT/2015/PT.BDG yang menyatakan Direksi tidak mempunyai iktikad baik dan tidak bertanggung jawab, telah sesuai dengan peraturan dan prinsip-prinsip hukum PT. Hakim dalam pertimbangannya menilai Direksi tidak memenuhi kriteria menjalankan pengurusan dengan iktikad baik dan penuh tanggung jawab.

---

This study analyzes the criteria for members of the Board of Directors who have carried out the management of PT with good faith and full responsibility. The research is a normative juridical approach with a conceptual, case and comparison approach. This study concludes, in accordance with the regulations and legal principles of PT in Indonesia, members of the Board of Directors have managed the PT in good faith if they meet 5 (five) criteria, namely: honesty/sincerity of members of the Board of Directors; does not violate applicable laws; act according to the norms and fairness in business; have competence as a member of the Board of Directors and act according to that competence; no conflict of interest. The criteria for full responsibility for members of the Board of Directors if they meet 4 (four) criteria, namely: carrying out their duties and authorities in accordance with the Articles of Association of PT and applicable law; not exceed authority; provide accountable information to all stakeholders; open in making decisions PT. The decision of the Bandung High Court No.94/PDT/2015/PT.BDG which states that the Board of Directors does not have good faith and is not responsible, is in accordance with the regulations and legal principles of PT. The judge in his judgment considered that the Board of Directors did not meet the criteria for carrying out management in good faith and full of responsibility."