Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"The authors, each of whom is an experienced practitioner in the field of international arbitration, draw on experience in a wide variety of national jurisdictions. In addition to drafting chapters independently, each has made invaluable contributions to other authors? chapters. Authoritative case law research was further provided by dozens of contributors with expertise in specific jurisdictions worldwide. The analysis thoroughly covers the major issues that have arisen in the application of the Convention, including the following: the use of reservations made by Contracting States; the distinctions between recognition and enforcement and between recognition sought at the seat of the arbitration and outside the seat; the role of the courts in reviewing arbitral awards and, in particular, the Convention?s focus on safeguarding due process standards; the ?more favourable rights? principle embodied in Article VII(1); the relevance of forum shopping and asset spotting to the application of the Convention; and the role of formalities and formalism"

"Tesis ini membahas penggunaan Ketertiban Umum (Public Policy) untuk membatalkan putusan arbitrase asing yang diatur di dalam Pasal V (2) Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award 1958. Pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase merupakan hal krusial karena eksekusi putusan merupakan esensi diadakannya arbitrase. Tiap-tiap negara memberlakukan Ketertiban Umum (Public Policy) secara berbeda, termasuk Indonesia yang belum memiliki konsensus melihat lingkup Ketertiban Umum (Public Policy). Antara Pengadilan Negeri dan Mahkamah Agung memiliki konsepsi berbeda mengenai Ketertiban Umum (Public Policy) Indonesia. Hal ini menjadi sebuah problema dimana pihak yang dikalahkan menggunakan alasan Ketertiban Umum (Public Policy) untuk menunda atau membatalkan eksekusi putusan.

---

This thesis is aimed to prescribe the practice of using Public Policy doctrine to annul foreign arbitral awards as were allowed under Article V (2) of the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Award 1958. The enforcement of an award is crucial and essential to arbitration proceedings. Different states will treat Public Policy differently, including Indonesia whom has yet to reach a consensus in defining what Public Policy should be used in foreign arbitration award enforcement. There are still discrepancy between Indonesian District Court and Supreme Court on the matter of what constitutes as Indonesian Public Policy. These discrepancies created a gaping loophole which are exploited by the party (parties) to delay or to annul the enforcements of the foreign arbitration award. "

"Indonesia has been being a member of the 1958 New York Convention since 1981, namely upon issuance of the Presidential Decree No. 34 of 1981. Priori to talkiing intó force of the Regulation of the Supreme Court of the Republic Indonesìa No. 1 of .1990 on Procedures for EnforcemenL of Foreign Arbit awards, there were still constrâints lor the foreign Business plâyers in terìr enforcement of arbitral awards in lndonesia, The Supreme Court âs the higest judicial institution in lndonesia holds that internationâl arbitral awards can not be enforced ill lndonesja. After the Indonesian Supreme Court has issued such a regulation, enforcement of international arbitral awards in Indonesia began to be enforceable, because the procedural law that governs the for execution of arbitral awards has been clear ln order to regulâte the international arbitral award problems in the hjerarchy of legislation, on October 12, 1999, the Law on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution was promulgated. In that Law there is a special part discussing the International Arbitration. This study Examines the development of international arbitral award enforcement in lndonesia before Indonesia becoming member of the .1958 New York Convention, until nowâdays, by analyzing the international arbitral awards that were decìded by the Supreme Court of the Republic of lndonesia after the coming into effect of the Arbitration Law."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase asing di Indonesia. Indonesia telah mengaksesi Konvensi New York 1958 sejak 1981 yang berarti Indonesia tunduk pada konvensi untuk mengakui dan melaksanakan putusan dari arbitrase asing. Selanjutnya Indonesia membuat Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 1990 tentang Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Asing sebagai peraturan pelaksana dan mengisi kekosongan dari peraturan hukum. Pada tahun 1990 dibuat Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa yang memuat peraturan mengenai arbitrase asing. Meskipun telah terdapatnya aturan yang mengatur mengenai putusan arbitrase asing akan tetapi pelaksanaan dari putusan arbitrase asing belum berjalan dengan baik. Indonesia dianggap sebagai “unfriendly arbitration state” yang terkadang sulit untuk melaksanakan putusan arbitrase, terutama yang melibatkan pihak asing. Pelaksanaan ini menjadi penting sebab penyelesaian sengketa kerap menjadi pilihan utama bagi investor asing. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah doktrinal terhadap bahan hukum serta dilakukan studi putusan dengan Nomor Putusan 26/PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, Putusan Nomor 88 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2014, Putusan Nomor 795 K/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017. Putusan Nomor 154 K/Pdt/2018. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Indonesia telah memiliki ketentuan hukum mengenai putusan arbitrase asing. Pada studi putusan menunjukkan terdapat satu putusan yang ditolak dan tiga putusan yang diterima untuk diakui akan tetapi pihak yang kalah dalam putusan tersebut mengajukan upaya hukum sehingga putusan arbitrase asing tidak berjalan. Efektivitas dari putusan arbitrase belum berlaku efektif.

---

This thesis discusses the recognition and implementation of foreign arbitration awards in Indonesia. Indonesia has acceded to the 1958 New York Convention since 1981, which means that Indonesia is subject to the convention to recognize and enforce awards from foreign arbitration. Furthermore, Indonesia made Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 1990 Concerning Procedures for Executing Foreign Arbitration Awards as implementing regulations and filling the gaps in legal regulations. In 1990 Law Number 30 of 1999 Concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution was enacted which contained regulations regarding foreign arbitration. Even though there are rules governing foreign arbitration awards, the implementation of foreign arbitration awards has not gone well. Indonesia is considered an “unfriendly arbitration state” where it is sometimes difficult to implement arbitration awards, especially those involving foreign parties. This implementation is important because dispute resolution is often the main choice for foreign investors. The research method used in this research is doctrine on legal materials and a decision study was carried out with Decision Number 26/PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, Decision Number 88 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2014, Decision Number 795 K/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017, Decision Number 154 K/Pdt/2018. The research results show that Indonesia has legal provisions regarding foreign arbitration awards. The study of decisions shows that there was one decision that was rejected and three decisions that were accepted to be recognized, but the party who lost the decision filed legal action so that the foreign arbitration award did not take effect. The effectiveness of the arbitration award has not yet become effective."

"ABSTRAKTesis menjelaskan mengenai tipu muslihat sebagai alasan pembatalan putusanarbitrase, dimana akan dibahas mengenai pengertian tipu muslihat dalam alasanpembatalan, apakakah alasan tipu muslihat dalam permohonan pembatalan putusanarbitrase harus dibuktikan dengan putusan pengadilan serta bagaimanakahpandangan hakim terhadap unsur tipu muslihat sebagai suatu alasan pembatalanputusan arbitrase. Metode penelitian yang dilakukan adalah dengan penelitianhukum normatif menggunakan bahan hukum primair berupa peraturanperundangan UU.Nomor 30/1999 dan bahan hukum sekunder berupa buku-bukutentang Arbitrase. Penelitian dilakukan dengan meneliti putusan MahkamahAgung RI mengenai sengketa antara PT.Nikko Securities Indonesia denganPT.Bank Permata untuk kasus pembatalan putusan arbitrase yang dibuat olehBadan Arbitrase Pasar Modal Indonesia (BAPMI). Dari hasil penelitian ditemukanbahwa alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase masih beragam dikalangan hakim baikdi tingkat Pengadilan Negeri maupun ditingkat banding Mahkamah Agung.

---

ABSTRACTThis thesis aims to explain Fraud as the reason for the annulment of the arbitralaward, which will be discussed on the understanding of fraud as a reason,whether arbitral award must be proved by the decision of the court or not andhow the judge opinion about fraud as a reason for the annulment of an arbitralaward . The research method is the normative legal research using the primarylegal materials in the form of legislation UU.Nomor 30/1999 and secondary legalmaterials such as books on Arbitration and other references . The study wasconducted by examining the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the disputebetween PT.Nikko Securities Indonesia and PT Bank Permata in case of annulmentof the arbitral award made by the Indonesian Capital Market Arbitration Board(BAPMI) . From the results of the study found that the reason for the annulement ofan arbitral award is varied among the judges at both the District Court andSupreme Court appeal level"