Ditemukan 1912 dokumen yang sesuai dengan query
Epstein, David G.
West Publishing Company, 1993
346.07 EPS b
Buku Teks Universitas Indonesia Library
Epstein, David G.
St. Paul, Minn: West Pub., 1995
346.73 EPS b
Buku Teks Universitas Indonesia Library
346.07 Eps b
Buku Teks Universitas Indonesia Library
346.07 Eps b
Buku Teks Universitas Indonesia Library
Andreas Prayuda Aprindo
"Perlindungan yang diberikan oleh hukum bagi Kreditur atau perbuatan debitur yang dapat merugikan kreditur adalah melalui lembaga actio pauliana. Actio Pauliana dilakukan oleh kreditur untuk melindungi budel pailit dari perbuatan debitur yang tidak diwajibkan untuk dilakukannya atau dilarang sebelum putusan pailit diucapkan. Mengingat pentingnya penerapan actio pauliana sebagai instrument perlindungan bagi para kreditur maka, berdasarkan latar belakang penelitian ini menghasilkan tiga (3) permasalahan yang dibahas, yakni: 1) Bagaimanakah sistem pembuktian terhadap suatu tindakan debitur dapat dinyatakan memenuhi syarat-syarat berlakunya actio pauliana 2). Bagaiamana perlindungan hukum terhadap kreditur maupun pihak ketiga terkait lembaga actio pauliana? 3). Apa yang menjadi kelemahan-kelemahan actio pauliana dalam memberikan perlindungan hukum kepada kreditur?
Adapun metode penelitian yang digunakan di dalam penelitian ini yakni menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang bersifat deskriptif analitis adalah penelitian hukum kepustakaan yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan-bahan hukum, asas-asas hukum serta peraturan hukum yang ada hubungannya dengan pokok bahasan. Teknik pengumpulan data dilakukan dengan cara library research dan field research.
Berdasarkan penelitian hukum dapat disimpulkan sebagai berikut: (1) Sistem pembuktian dalam actio pauliana adalah sistem pembuktian terbalik dimana dalam hal ini membebankan pembuktian terhadap perbuatan hukum debitur yaitu debitur pailit apabila perbuatan hukum debitur tersebut dilakukan dalam waktu sebelum putusan pailit diucapkan. Sebaliknya, jika kurator menilai bahwa perbuatan hukum tersebut merugikan kepentingan kreditur atau harta pailit, maka yang wajib membuktikan adalah kurator dengan membuktikan bahwa perbuatan hukum tersebut tidak wajib dilakukan oleh mereka dan perbuatan hukum tersebut merugikan harta pailit. (2) Perlindungan hukum terhadap kreditur maupun pihak ketiga terkait lembaga actio pauliana yaitu kreditur mempunyai hak untuk mengajukan pembatalan kepada pengadilan terhadap perbuatan hukum yang dilakukan oleh debitur sebelum dinyatakan pailit yang mengakibatkan kerugian bagi kreditur dan bagi pihak ketiga memberikannya hak untuk tampil sebagai Kreditur konkuren untuk mendapatkan hak-haknya. (3) Kelemahan-kelemahan actio pauliana dalam memberikan perlindungan hukum kepada kreditur ketidakjelasan pengadilan mana yang berwenang memutus perkara actio pauliana, pembuktiannya yang tidak sederhana, tidak adanya tolak ukur itikad baik dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004, legal standing kurator yang lemah, dan kemungkinan pengalihan aset ke pihak lain sehingga mempersulit kurator dalam melakukan pembuktian.
The protection provided by law for creditors or debtor actions that can harm creditors is through the Pauliana Action Agency. Actio Pauliana is carried out by the creditor to protect the bankrupt bankrupt from the actions of the debtor that are not required to be carried out or prohibited before the bankruptcy decision is pronounced. Given the importance of implementing actio pauliana as an instrument of protection for creditors, based on the background of this study, three (3) issues were discussed, namely: 1) How can the system of proof for an act of a debtor be declared to fulfill the requirements for the validity of actio pauliana 2). How is the legal protection for creditors and third parties related to the actio pauliana institution? 3). What are Actio Pauliana's weaknesses in providing legal protection to creditors?The research method used in this research is using a normative juridical method which is descriptive analytical in that it is a legal research of literature which is carried out by examining legal materials, legal principles and legal regulations that are related to the subject matter. Data collection techniques were carried out by means of library research and field research.Based on legal research, it can be concluded as follows: (1) The evidentiary system in actio pauliana is a reversed evidentiary system which in this case imposes a burden of proof on the legal actions of the debtor, namely the bankrupt debtor if the debtor's legal actions were carried out before the bankruptcy decision was pronounced. Conversely, if the curator considers that the legal action is detrimental to the interests of creditors or bankrupt assets, then it is the curator who is obliged to prove by proving that the legal action is not obligatory to be carried out by them and the legal action is detrimental to the bankrupt assets. (2) Legal protection for creditors and third parties related to the actio pauliana institution, namely the creditor has the right to submit an cancellation to the court of legal actions carried out by the debtor before being declared bankrupt which results in losses for the creditor and for third parties gives him the right to appear as a concurrent creditor for get their rights. (3) Actio pauliana's weaknesses in providing legal protection to creditors is unclear which court has the authority to decide on the actio pauliana case, the evidence is not simple, there is no good faith benchmark in Law Number 37 of 2004, weak legal standing of curators, and the possibility of transferring assets to other parties, making it difficult for the curator to prove."
Jakarta: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2023
T-pdf
UI - Tesis Membership Universitas Indonesia Library
Oleck, Howard L.
New York: Central Book Company, 1959
332.31 OLE d
Buku Teks Universitas Indonesia Library
Teuku Faizal Asikin Karimuddin
"[Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui dan menganalisa apakah penanggung utang dapat dimohonkan pailit oleh kreditur dengan berdasarkan pada utang-utang debitur utama pada saat terjadi wanprestasi serta prosedur pengajuan
permohonan pailit apabila penanggung utang dapat dipailitkan oleh kreditur berdasarkan pada utang debitur utama yang wanprestasi. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitan hukum yuridis normatif, dengan cara menganalisa norma-norma hukum yang berlaku dalam peraturan perundang-undangan dibidang kepailitan. Bahwa penanggung utang dapat diajukan pailit oleh kreditur dengan didasarkan pada sisa utang yang belum dibayarkan oleh debitur utama, dan pengajuan pailit tersebut dilakukan dengan cara terlebih dahulu mempailitkan
debitur utama. sisa utang yang belum terbayarkan setelah dilakukan pemberesan utang debitur utama merupakan utang yang masih harus ditanggung dan menjadi kewajiban bagi penanggung untuk melunasinya. Bahwa setelah dilakukan penelitian lebih lanjut dapat disimpulkan bahwa penanggung utang dapat dipailitkan oleh kreditur dengan didasarkan pada sisa utang debitur utama berdasarkan perjanjian pokok. Hal mana menunjukkan bahwa kewajiban pembayaran sisa utang tersebut berpindah pada penanggung dengan segala akibat hukumnya. Permohonan pailit terhadap penanggung.
The purpose of this research are to know and analyze where creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor, and the procedures of bankruptcy lawsuit if the creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor. The legal research method to analyze the data are normative law (yuridis normatif), by analyze prevailing legal norms on bankruptcy sector. The Creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor base on outstanding debt of main debtor, and the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor are filed after prior filed the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. The guarantor is responsible to pay the outstanding debt after the debt settlement of main debtor. After doing the research we are in conclusions that the guarantor are able to be filed of bankruptcy by the creditor base on outstanding debt of main debtor. Were the obligation to pay the outstanding debt are switch to the guarantor with all law consequences. The bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor are filed after prior filed the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. Unfortunately the Indonesian civil code regulates the exception of those regulations that made the differences of the procedure to file the bankruptcy lawsuits. Therefore we suggest for making the specific regulation for submitting the bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor. The purpose of this research are to know and analyze where creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor, and the procedures of bankruptcy lawsuit if the creditor are able to file thebankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor. The legal research method to analyze the data are normative law (yuridis normatif), by analyze prevailing legal norms on bankruptcy sector. The Creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor base on outstanding debt of main debtor, and the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor are filed after prior filed the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. The guarantor isresponsible to pay the outstanding debt after the debt settlement of main debtor. After doing the research we are in conclusions that the guarantor are able to be filed of bankruptcy by the creditor base on outstanding debt of main debtor. Were the obligation to pay the outstanding debt are switch to the guarantor with all law consequences. The bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor are filed after priorfiled the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. Unfortunately the Indonesian civil code regulates the exception of those regulations that made the differences of the procedure to file the bankruptcy lawsuits. Therefore we suggest for making the specific regulation for submitting the bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor.;The purpose of this research are to know and analyze where creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor, and the procedures of bankruptcy lawsuit if the creditor are able to file thebankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor. The legal research method to analyze the data are normative law (yuridis normatif), by analyze prevailing legal norms on bankruptcy sector. The Creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor base on outstanding debt of main debtor, and the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor are filed after prior filed the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. The guarantor isresponsible to pay the outstanding debt after the debt settlement of main debtor. After doing the research we are in conclusions that the guarantor are able to be filed of bankruptcy by the creditor base on outstanding debt of main debtor. Were the obligation to pay the outstanding debt are switch to the guarantor with all law consequences. The bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor are filed after priorfiled the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. Unfortunately the Indonesian civil code regulates the exception of those regulations that made the differences of the procedure to file the bankruptcy lawsuits. Therefore we suggest for making the specific regulation for submitting the bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor., The purpose of this research are to know and analyze where creditor are ableto file the bankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the defaultdebtor, and the procedures of bankruptcy lawsuit if the creditor are able to file thebankruptcy lawsuit against the guarantor base on debt of the default debtor. Thelegal research method to analyze the data are normative law (yuridis normatif), byanalyze prevailing legal norms on bankruptcy sector.The Creditor are able to file the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor base onoutstanding debt of main debtor, and the bankruptcy lawsuit to the guarantor arefiled after prior filed the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. The guarantor isresponsible to pay the outstanding debt after the debt settlement of main debtor.After doing the research we are in conclusions that the guarantor are able tobe filed of bankruptcy by the creditor base on outstanding debt of main debtor.Were the obligation to pay the outstanding debt are switch to the guarantor with alllaw consequences. The bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor are filed after priorfiled the bankruptcy lawsuit to the main debtor. Unfortunately the Indonesian civilcode regulates the exception of those regulations that made the differences of theprocedure to file the bankruptcy lawsuits. Therefore we suggest for making thespecific regulation for submitting the bankruptcy lawsuits to the guarantor.]"
Depok: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2016
T45127
UI - Tesis Membership Universitas Indonesia Library
Weintraub, Benjamin
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1965
332.75 WEI p
Buku Teks SO Universitas Indonesia Library
Paula Stelanova Landowero
"
ABSTRAKDalam Undang-Undang No 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) berlakulah asas paritas creditorium, dimana pembayaran atau pelunasan utang kepada kreditur dilakukan secara berimbang. Filosofi yang mendasari prinsip paritas creditorium adalah prinsip keadilan. Sebab, tidak adil bila debitur memiliki harta benda sementara utang debitur terhadap kreditur-krediturnya tidak terbayarkan. Namun demikian, timbul permasalahan apabila debitur yang diajukan permohonan pailit oleh kreditur separatis sedangkan debitur memiliki kreditur konkuren dengan hak tagih hutang yang memiliki jumlah lebih besar dibandingkan dengan kreditur separatis namun kemampuan debitur tidak dapat menyelesaikan seluruh hutang si kreditor konkuren. Sehingga permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana kedudukan kreditur konkuren dalam kepailitan jika memiliki tagihan utang lebih besar daripada kreditur separatis dan preferen dan bagaimana penerapan asas keadilan dengan permasalahan tersebut. Dengan kesimpulan kreditur konkuren dalam Undang-Undang Kepailitan di Indonesia harus tetap berbagi dengan para kreditor lainnya secara proporsional (pari passu), yaitu menurut perbandingan besarnya masing-masing tagihan, dan berdasarkan pendapat John Rawls tentang purity of heart dalam teori keadilannya, maka Undang-Undang Kepailitan telah memberikan perlindungan, namun demikian Hukum Kepailitan belum sepenuhnya memberikan keadilan kepada kreditur konkuren yang memiliki tagihan terbesar. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode peneltian hukum normatif yuridis.
ABSTRACTParitas Creditorium Principle is applied in the in Bankruptcy Law No. 37 Year 2004. The philosophy of Paritas Creditorium Principle is a principle of justice. Therefore, it is not fair if the debtor has assets and property but the creditors have not been paid. However, problems arise if there is bankruptcy application while there is un-secured creditor which has larger claim than the secured and preferred creditors but the ability of the debtor's will not solve the entire debt of the un-secured creditors. Therefore the issues in this research are regarding the legal standing for un-secured creditors in the bankruptcy case if the un-secured creditor has and the application of the principle of justice on such issues. The conclusion of this research is that un-secured creditors in the Bankruptcy Law in Indonesia must share with the other creditors proportionally (pari-passu), according to the ratio of the amount of each receivables, and in according to John Rawls's purity of heart in his Theory of Justice, the Indonesia Bankruptcy Laws had given protection to un-secured creditor, yet fully protect the interests of unsecured creditors who has the largest receivable, in accordance of the principle of justice. This research is using research methods of jurisdiction normative."
Universitas Indonesia, 2013
T35285
UI - Tesis Membership Universitas Indonesia Library
Fransisca Octavia
"Kepailitan berakibat pada pemenuhan piutang para kreditor. Pemenuhan piutang para kreditor tergantung dari preferensi kreditor itu sendiri, serta pelaksana eksekusi dalam proses kepailitan. Kreditor pemegang Hak Tanggungan sebagai kreditor separatis merupakan kreditor yang memiliki hak untuk melakukan eksekusi sendiri dalam proses kepailitan. Namun demikian tidak semua kreditor separatis menggunakan haknya untuk melakukan eksekusi sendiri. Dengan demikian kurator lah yang melakukan eksekusi serta pembagian boedel pailit.
Eksekusi yang dilakukan sendiri oleh pemegang Hak Tanggungan sebagai kreditor separatis, dan eksekusi yang dilakukan oleh kurator membawa akibat hukum yang berbeda bagi pemegang Hak Tanggungan. Meskipun telah diatur di dalam Undang-Undang namun masih terdapat permasalahan dalam pelaksanaannya. Permasalahan yang muncul adalah terkait dengan besarnya pelunasan piutang, serta kedudukan kreditor separatis jika pelunasan piutangnya tidak terpenuhi.
Dalam tulisan ini, permasalahan tersebut diteliti dengan menggunakan studi kepustakaan, yaitu dengan mengkaji serta menganalisis putusan menggunakan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berkaitan dengan kepailitan dan Hak Tanggungan. Dengan menggunakan metode tersebut didapat kesimpulan bahwa, pemenuhan piutang kreditor pemegang Hak Tanggungan tergantung pada pelaksana eksekusi dalam proses kepailitan. Pelaksanaan eksekusi oleh kurator menyebabkan berkurangnya pelunasan piutang kreditor separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan oleh biaya kepailitan, imbalan jasa kurator, dan beban pajak. Selain itu dengan dilaksanakannya eksekusi oleh kurator, jika pelunasan piutang kreditor separatis tidak terpenuhi maka dengan sendirinya kreditor separatis akan berkedudukan sebagai kreditor konkuren.
Bankruptcy has an effect on creditors? receivables fulfillment. The fulfillment of creditors receivables is depends on the preferences of the creditor, and the executor in bankruptcy process. The secured creditor of Security Rights as separate creditor is a creditor who has rights to perform the execution on their own in bankruptcy process. However not all separate creditor using their rights to perform its own execution. Therefore the execution and the split of bankruptcy assets performed by the curator.The execution that performed by the secured creditor of Security Rights as separate creditor, and the execution that performed by the curator is bringing a different legal consequences. Although it has been set out in the law and regulation, it still causes an issue in implementation. The issue is related to the amount of the fulfillment of receivables, and the position of separate creditor if the receivables are not fulfilled.In this thesis, the said issue will be examined by literature study, by analyze the court decision based on law and regulation which related to the bankruptcy and the Security Rights. Using the literature study method, concluded that the receivable fulfillment of Security Rights is depends on the executor in bankruptcy process. Execution by the curator leads to reduce the receivable fulfillment of separate creditor by bankruptcy fee, curator fee, and taxes. If the receivables of separate creditor are not fulfilled, for the deficiency of its receivables, the separate creditor is become a concurrent creditor."
Depok: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2016
T46571
UI - Tesis Membership Universitas Indonesia Library
