Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"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."

"Konvensi New York 1958 mengharuskan setiap negara peserta untuk mengakui dan melaksanakan putusan arbitrase internasional. Akan tetapi, Konvensi New York 1958 juga memungkinkan pengecualian atas pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional, salah satunya ketertiban umum. Pada hakikatnya, hukum perdata internasional menentukan hukum perdata negara mana yang akan diberlakukan bilamana terdapat unsur asing di dalamnya. Tetapi, keberlakuan hukum asing tersebut dapat dikesampingkannya apabila membawa hasil yang tidak memuaskan para pencari keadilan. Ketertiban umum sendiri tidak memiliki definisi yang ajek, seragam, dan berlaku universal sehingga penentuanya berada di tangan hakim.  Di Indonesia, pihak-pihak yang bersengketa menggunakan berbagai macam dalil ketertiban umum sebagai alasan untuk menolak pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase, khususnya putusan arbitrase internasional. Skripsi ini akan meneliti putusan-putusan pengadilan Indonesia mengenai putusan arbitrase internasional dengan dalil ketertiban umum dalam sepuluh tahun terakhir dengan melihat pertimbangan hakim dan teori-teori ketertiban umum dalam hukum perdata internasional.

---

The New York Convention 1958 requires each contracting state to recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards. However, the 1958 New York Convention also allows exceptions to recognize and enforce foreign arbitral awards, one of them is public order. In essence, private international law determines which private state law will be applied if there is a foreign element in it. However, the application of these foreign laws can be excluded if they bring results that do not satisfy the justice seekers. Public order itself does not have a definite, uniform, and universally definition so that it determines by the judge. In Indonesia, the parties to the dispute use various kinds of public order as a reason to refuse the enforcement of the arbitral award, especially the international arbitral award. This thesis will examine the Indonesian court decisions regarding international arbitral awards with the argument of public order in the last ten years by looking at judges' considerations and public order theories in private international law."

"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"

"Forum Arbitrase merupakkan forum penyelesaian sengketa yang acapkali dipilih oleh para pihak untuk menyelesaikan sengketa perjanjian perdagangan karena alasan-alasan efektivitas dan biayanya yang murah. Namun dengan perkembangan perekonomian dunia yang diiringi dengan kebebasan para pihak dalam hal menerapkan Pilihan Forum, hasil penyelesaian sengketa demikian berpotensi untuk mengandung unsur-unsur asing sebagai akibat dari para pihak yang tunduk pada sistem hukum yang berbeda, terletak pada wilayah hukum yang berbeda, dan/atau bahkan memilih forum Arbitrase asing yang tunduk pada ketentuan hukum yang berlainan dari pihak dalam perjanjian perdagangan tersebut. Kemudian dalam keberlakuannya, putusan Arbitrase dapat dimintakan permohonan pembatalannya ke pengadilan negeri. Meskipun demikian, Indonesia yang memiliki ketentuan hukum Arbitrase nya sendiri, yakni UU No, 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (UUAAPS), serta negara anggota New York Convention on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (Konvensi New York 1958), menjadi subjek terhadap dua ketentuan pembatalan putusan Arbitrase yang berbeda. Dalam pengaturannya, ketentuan pembatalan UUAAPS hanya dapat berlaku bagi putusan Arbitrase nasional, sedangkan Konvensi New York 1958 berlaku bagi Putusan Arbitrase Internasional. Kendati demikian, suatu putusan Arbitrase dapat mengandung unsur asing, dan hal ini seringkali mengundang interpretasi yang turut berpengaruh pada penerapan UUAAPS dan Konvensi New York 1958. Kenyataan ini merupakan salah satu ruang lingkup kajian Hukum Perdata Internasional karena dalam hal penentuan kewenangan oleh pengadilan negeri dalam perkara pembatalan putusan Arbitrase yang mengandung unsur asing, timbul pertanyaan “Pengadilan negara manakah yang berwenang untuk mengadili pembatalan putusan Arbitrase yang mengandung unsur asing tersebut?” Melalui penelitian yuridis-normatif, skripsi ini akan menganalisis praktik kewenangan mengadili oleh pengadilan negeri di Indonesia sehubungan dengan penerapan pasal-pasal pembatalan Arbitrase yang ada

---

As one of the dispute resolution forums, arbitration, is often chosen by the parties to resolve commercial agreement disputes due to its effectiveness and cost efficiency. However, as the world’s economy develops, accompanied by the freedom in implementing the choice of forum, the results of such dispute resolution potentially contain foreign elements due to the parties being subject to different legal systems, being located in different jurisdictions, and/or even choosing a foreign arbitration which has different legal system from the parties involved in the commercial agreement. Notwithstanding aforementioned explanation, arbitration award can be requested for its annulment to the district court. Nevertheless, Indonesia with its own Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Arbitration Law), while also participating as the member states of the New York Convention on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention 1958), is subject to two different provisions for arbitral award annulment. For example, the provisions for the arbitral award annulment in UUAAPS is only applicable for national arbitral award, while the annulment provision in New York Convention 1958 applies to foreign arbitral award. However, an arbitral award may contain foreign elements, which often results in different interpretations in its implementation and influences the application of the Arbitration Law and the New York Convention 1958. This event falls within the scope of Private International Law’s studies because it raises the question of "Which district court has the authority to adjudicate the annulment of arbitral awards containing the foreign elements?" Through normative-juridical research, this undergraduate thesis will analyse the practice of Indonesian district court’s authority in adjudicating the annulment of said arbitral award in relation to the application of existing arbitration annulment regulations."

"ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan dan menganalisis peraturanpembatalan putusan arbitrase internasional disertai praktek yang dilakukanlembaga peradilan di Indonesia berdasarkan teori-teori HPI. Penulismempergunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan studi kepustakaan.Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengaturan mengenai pembatalan putusanarbitrase internasional dalam UU Arbitrase belum jelas dan lengkap. Hal tersebutdapat dilihat dalam perdebatan mengenai pengaturan pelaksanaan putusanarbitrase internasional dan alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Lembagaperadilan di Indonesia pun pada prakteknya masih inkonsisten dalam menerapkanaturan-aturan tersebut. Sebagai contoh ialah kasus antara Yemen Airwaysmelawan PT Comarindo Tama Tour&Travel dan kasus antara PTPertamina(Persero) dan PT Pertamina EP melawan PT Lirik Petroleum

---

ABSTRACTThis research aimed to describe and analyze the regulation about annulment of

international arbitral award with the practice of Indonesian Court in accordance

with International Private Law. Author use juridical-normative research method

with literature studies. The research shows that the regulation about annulment of

international arbitral award in Law of Arbitration has not been clear and

sufficient. It can bee seen from the articles about the enforcement of international

arbitral award and the ground for annulment of arbitral award. In accordance

with that, Indonesian Court has been inconsistent to implement those regulations.

For examples is case between PT Comarindo Tama Tour&Travel v. Yemen

Airways and case between PT Pertamina (Persero) and PT Pertamina EP v. PT

Lirik Petroleum."

"Skripsi ini membahas penerapan frase ‘under the law of which’ dalam Pasal V (1) (e) Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 oleh Pengadilan Indonesia dalam Perkara Karaha Bodas. Penerapan oleh Pengadilan Indonesia ini akan dibandingkan dengan satu putusan dari Pengadilan India dan dua putusan dari Pengadilan Amerika Serikat. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif dengan desain deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian ini di antaranya menyarankan agar sebuah klausula arbitrase disusun dengan hati-hati dan para pihak yang berarbitrase memiliki itikad baik untuk melaksanakan suatu putusan arbitrase.

---

This study is to analyse the interpretation of the phrase ‘under the law of which in Article V (1) (e) Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 by Indonesian Court. The interpretation is compared to that of Indian and American Court. The researcher suggests that the parties to a contract draft their arbitration clause carefully and undertake to carry out the arbitral award with good faith. This is a quantitative and descriptive-analytical research."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis peraturan perundang-undangan terkait pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional dan prakteknya di lembaga peradilan di Indonesia berdasarkan aspek-aspek Hukum Perdata Internasional. Penulis menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan studi kepustakaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa ketentuan mengenai pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional dalam UU Arbitrase belum jelas dan memadai. Hal ini dapat dilihat dari berbagai aturan mengenai pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional dan alasan-alasan pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Lembaga peradilan di Indonesia pada prakteknya masih inkonsisten dalam menerapkan aturan-aturan tersebut. Contohnya adalah kasus antara PT Sumber Subur Mas, Yusman Tamara, Imelda Irawan melawan Transpac Capital Pte. Ltd., dan Transpac Industrial Holdings Limited ;dan kasus antara PT Daya Mandiri Resources Indonesia (d/h PT Risna Karya Wardhana Mandiri) dan PT Dayaindo Resources melawan Suek AG.

---

Arbitral Award with the practice of Indonesian Court in accordance with the aspects of Private International Law. The author uses a juridical-normative research method with an addition of literature studies.

This research shows that the regulation about the annulment of international arbitral award in Law of Arbitration has not been clear and sufficient. This can be seen from numerous rules about the annulment of International Arbitral Award and the grounds of the annulment of arbitral awards. The Indonesian Court has been inconsistent to implement these regulations.

The examples are the case between Transpac Capital Pte. Ltd., and Transpac Industrial Holdings Limited; and the case between PT Daya Mandiri Resources Indonesia (d/h PT Risna Karya Wardhana Mandiri) and PT Dayaindo Resources melawan Suek AG."

"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."