Search

This article describes the integration of lawsuits in breach of law or breach of contract which often found in court examination practice. First issue will analyze whether the integration of lawsuits can be conducted between breach of law and breach of contract claims pursuant to Indonesian Civil Procedures. The second issue will analyze the legal consideration of judges who reject the integration of lawsuits between breach of law and breach of contract claims pursuant to Indonesian Civil Procedures There are some of opinions of judges or expert against the integration of lawsuits between breach of law and breach of contract claims. A jurisprudence states that the integration of lawsuit between breach of law and breach of contract claim in lawsuit is violating the code of conduct since both shall be examined respectively. HIR, RBG and RV does not strictly stipulate and prohibit the integration of lawsuit, however, pursuant to Jurisprudence of The Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia No. 1875K/Pdt/1984 dated April 24, 1986, “the integration of lawsuits between the breach of law and breach of contract claims cannot be conducted since it is violating the civil procedures and accordingly it shall be examined respectively. In accordance with such jurisprudence, the Judex Jurist is authorized to declare that the integration of lawsuits between the breach of law and breach of contract claims is unacceptable lawsuit (NO/niet oontvankelijk verklaard).

Abstract The development of buying and selling both conventional and online transactions has an impact on the need for effective dispute resolution when there is a loss to consumers. Fast, simple, and low-cost consumer dispute resolution is needed to speed up the way the dispute is resolved. This article is part of the results of fundamental research conducted in a normative juridical method. The results showed that consumer dispute resolution in the court with a small claim value was not balanced with the mechanism of proceedings in the court, while the power of the decision through BPSK resolution was not final and binding. Small Claims Procedures are solutions that integrate informal and formal mechanisms as one of the concrete steps to achieve legal certainty in resolving consumer disputes in Indonesia. Abstrak Perkembangan jual beli baik transaksi secara konvensional maupun online berdampak pada kebutuhan penyelesaian sengketa yang efektif ketika terjadinya kerugian pada konsumen. Penyelesaian sengketa konsumen secara cepat, sederhana, dan berbiaya ringan diperlukan dengan mempercepat cara penyelesaian sengketa. Artikel ini merupakan bagian dari hasil penelitian fundamental yang dilakukan secara yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa penyelesaian sengketa konsumen di pengadilan dengan nilai gugatan yang kecil tidak seimbang dengan mekanisme beracara di pengadilan, sementara itu penyelesaian melalui BPSK kekuatan putusannya tidak bersifat final and binding. Small Claims Procedures merupakan solusi yang memadukan mekanisme informal dan formal sebagai salah satu langkah konkret dalam rangka tercapainya kepastian hukum dalam penyelesaian sengketa konsumen di Indonesia.

In bankruptcy law also known terms of peace, peace in bankruptcy law is one way to end an ongoing bankruptcy process. This article aims to know devoted to peace after the verdict of bankruptcy declaration, which will examine the implementation of peace in the Commercial Court of Jakarta and examine the factors that become obstacles for the parties to implement peace. This article is part of the research that has been done, with the normative juridical method that is not only limited to the research of the library but also require field research to obtain the primary data. Primary data were obtained from the Jakarta Commercial Court by interviewing commercial judges. Secondary data were obtained from library research by examining primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Based on the results of field research, it is found that the mechanism of peace is rarely used by the parties, as long as the Commercial Court of Jakarta stands only 2 (two) signed peace treaties. The barriers that occur in practice so that peace can not be achieved by both parties in the Jakarta Commercial Court consists of several factors such as the absence of roles of judges and institutions, the absence of obligation to reconcile, the factors of the parties (HR) to reach an agreement, the existence procedures and mechanisms, the result of a peace agreement that gives less legal effect, thus providing a great opportunity for the debtor to violate a mutually agreed agreement is a constraint in practice so that peace will be difficult to achieve and utilized by the parties as a procedural procedure in solving the bankruptcy case.

Jasa keuangan merupakan salah satu sektor yang banyak berperan dalam pembangunan ekonomi suatu negara. Otoritas Jasa Keuangan Indonesia sebagai lembaga independen pengatur dan pengawas di sektor jasa keuangan memiliki salah satu tugas penting untuk memberikan perlindungan terhadap konsumen di sektor jasa keuangan, salah satunya dengan mengatur prosedur penanganan pengaduan serta penyelesaian sengketa konsumen secara sederhana, cepat, dan biaya terjangkau. Sebagai tindak lanjutnya, OJK menerbitkan POJK Nomor 1/POJK.07/2014 tentang Lembaga Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa di Sektor Jasa Keuangan. Artikel ini dimaksudkan untuk menggambarkan bagaimana konsep alternatif penyelesaian sengketa sebagaimana diatur di dalam POJK No. 1/2014 dikaitkan dengan sistem penyelesaian sengketa perdata yang ada. Lebih lanjut lagi, akan diuraikan pula Lembaga Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa yang telah ditetapkan OJK untuk melaksanakan tugas dan peranannya dalam penyelesaian sengketa dibidangnya masing-masing serta tantangan yang dihadapi dalam mewujudkan perlindungan terhadap konsumen sektor jasa keuangan. Abstract Financial service is one of the essential sectors in economic development of a country. Indonesian Financial Services Authority (OJK) is an independent institution which regulates and supervises the financial services sector and has its important role in providing consumer protection in financial services sector, i.e. by regulating the procedure of consumer complaint and dispute settlement in simple, prompt, and affordable manners. Following up such role, OJK issued Regulation 1/POJK.07/2014 regarding Alternative Dispute Resolution Institution in Financial Services Sector. This article is intended to describe the concept of alternative dispute resolution as stipulated in Regulation of OJK No. 1/2014 in connection with the existing private dispute settlement system. Furthermore, this article also describes the institutions of alternative dispute resolution assigned by OJK to conduct their duty and role in dispute settlement for each respective sectors and its challenge to provide consumer protection in financial services sector.

Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha adalah suatu lembaga khusus yang dibentuk berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat untuk menegakkan hukum persaingan usaha. Tidak berkedudukan sebagai 'lembaga penegak hukum' yang sesungguhnya menyebabkan KPPU tidak memiliki daya paksa dalam hal pemanggilan para pihak maupun dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi. Selain itu, banyaknya putusan KPPU yang dibatalkan dalam proses upaya huku (yang disebut sebagai keberatan) yang diajukan pihak pelanggar pada akhirnya menyebabkan tidak terciptanya kepastian hukum bagi para pihak. Tulisan ini berupaya memperlihatkan gambaran pelaksanaan putusan persaingan usaha dalam praktik dalam tinjauan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat serta mengindentifikasi kendala-kendala dan upaya dalam penegakan hukum persaingan usaha di Indonesia agar tercipta kepastian hukum. Abtract The Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition (Komisi Persaingan Usaha) is a special institution established by Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Competition for enforcing competition law. Not functioning as a 'law enforcement agency' has led to KPPU to have no power to either forcibly summon the parties or execute its decisions. Moreover, a lot of KPPU's decisions are cancelled due to further legal action filed by the offender and thus undermining the legal centainty for the parties. The purpose of this article is to seek and analyze the enforcement of KPPU's decision in disputes regarding monopolistic practices and unfair competition as regulated in Law Number 5 of 1999. Furthermore, this article also aims to determine the obstacles in setting enforcement of competition law in order to not only establish legal certainty but also to achieve a healthy business climate in Indonesia.

Buku ini membahas mengenai persoalan kredit macet dalam masalah dunia perbankan yang dihubungkan dengan pengaturan yang ada dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UUPT). Buku ini terbagi dalam 6 bab, yang masing mempunyai pembahasan yang berbeda namun saling berkaitan. Bab 1 diberi judul Beberapa Hal dalam Hubungan dengan Kredit Macet, Bab 2 Menelaah Undang-Undang Perseroan, yang dalam hal ini adalah pembahasan dari UUPT, Bab 3 tentang Mengadili Keputusan Bisnis, Bab 4 adalah Pemeriksaan Pengadilan di Amerika dan Jepang, Bab 5 Keputusan Pemberian Kredit yang Memberikan Perlindungan Hukum dan Bab 6 yang merupakan bab terakhir berisi mengenai Intisari dan Saran dari penulis. Buku ini menarik untuk dijadikan bahan ulasan karena pembahasan mengenai dunia perbankan, khususnya masalah kredit macet serta tanggung jawab direksi, selaku organ perseroan yang menjalankan perusahaan, sangat menarik untuk diketahui karena masalah ini dialami oleh hampir setiap negara.