Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"PT PANN adalah Badan Usaha Milik Negara yang memiliki lingkup usaha membantu perusahaan pelayaran dengan tujuan memperoleh fasilitas mendapatkan barang modal berupa kapal laut dengan cara leasing, sehingga nantinya setelah pembayaran angsuran atau cicilan leasing tersebut selesai dan lunas, maka kapal laut dapat dimiliki oleh perusahaan pelayaran. Cara pembiayaan leasing dilakukan karena perusahaan pelayaran tidak memiliki kemampuan finansial untuk membeli kapal. PT PANN digugat telah melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum dengan penyalah gunaan keadaan oleh PT. Caraka Trans Pasifik dan PT. Pelayaran Caraka Tirta Perkasa. Untuk itu maka rumusan masalah yang diteliti penulis adalah bagaimana penyalahgunaan keadaan terjadi dan dilakukan oleh PT. PANN sebagai kreditur dalam perjanjian leasing dan apakah dalil Perbuatan Melawan Hukum yang digunakan PT. Pelayaran Caraka Tirta sudah sesuai dengan unsur-unsur Perbuatan Melawan Hukum berdasarkan Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata yang dilakukan kreditur. Untuk itu maka diteliti putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat No. 606/Pdt.G/2015/PN.JKT.PST. Perjanjian leasing ditandatangani dalam bentuk perjanjian baku, diketahui bahwa posisi tawar Tergugat lebih tinggi dibanding Penggugat, hal ini merupakan penyalah gunaan keadaan dan disebut sebagai cacat kehendak oleh Prof. Cohen. Tergugat juga sengaja melakukan pembiaran dan tidak menarik kapal, dan Penggugat tetap diwajibkan membayar bunga dan denda, sehingga ini merupakan perbuatan melawan hukum. Ketentuan bunga ini melanggar undang-undang karena perusahaan leasing hanya diperbolehkan menarik keuntungan dari pembayaran sewa. Perjanjian leasing juga dilarang menggunakan kuasa mutlak. Penulis sependapat dengan Putusan Pengadilan bahwa PT PANN telah melakukan penyalah gunaan keadaan dan melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum. Perjanjian leasing tidak memenuhi ketentuan Pasal 1320 KUHPerdata karena causa yang tidak halal.

---

PT PANN is an Indonesian state owned enterprises which has a business to assist shipping company with the purpose of obtaining facilities by obtaining capital goods in the form of a seacraft by leasing, so that after the installment payment or the lease installment is completed and paid off, the ship can be owned by shipping company. The way of leasing rdquo is because shipping companies dont have the financial ability to buy seacraft. PT PANN has been sued of undue influence as a tort law by PT Caraka Trans Pasifik and PT Pelayaran Caraka Tirta Perkasa. Then the authors problem formulation research is how undue influence occurred by PT PANN as the creditor of lease agreement and wheter the argument of tort law used by PT Pelayaran Caraka Tirta Perkasa is accordance with the elements of tort law under the article 1365 of the Civil Code made by the creditor. Therefore, author choose to investigated courts decision number 606 Pdt.G 2015 PN.JKT.PST. The lease agreement is signed in the standard agreement form, which is known that the defendants bargaining position is higher than the plaintiff, that is an undue influence and that is reffered to defective by Prof. Cohen. The defendant also deliberately omitted and withdraw the seacraft, and the plaintiff is still required to pay the interest and penalties, so this is a tort law. This interests provision violates the law because the leasing company is only allowed to take advantage of the lease payment. The lease agreement is also prohibited from using absolute power. The author agrees with the courts decision that PT PANN has committed undue influence and committed against the law. The lease agreement does not comply with the provisions of article 1320 of the Civil Code due to the unlawful cause."

"ABSTRAKSkripsi ini mengungkapkan beberapa hal yang berhubungan dengan perjanjian pada umumnnya dan leasing pada khususnya dan Kontrak Tentang Sewa Dengan Pilihan Untuk Membeli, yang berlaku antara PT. PENGEMBANGAN ARMADA NIAGA NASIONAL dengan PT. PELAYARAN UMUM INDONESIA. Dalam perjanjian ini, para pihak menyepakati bahwa kapal akan dioperasikan oleh penyewa dan penyewa membayar sejumlah tertentu uang sewa kepada pemilik. Dalam jangka waktu sewa, penyewa mempunyai hak untuk, dengan persetujuan pemilik, merubah perjanjian menjadi Purchase in Instalments. Penyewa juga mempunyai hak untuk membeli kapal setelah berakhirnya masa sewa. Para pihak juga mengatur hal-hal kerugian - kerugian yang terjadi selama pengoperasian kapal, penyelamatan, per tanggungan kapal kepada perusahaan asuransi, kondisi standard polls pertanggungan dan lain-lain. Para pihak tidak mengatur hal-hal berkenaan dengan 'wanprestatie' serta 'overmacht' dan lain-lain. Hukum yang berlaku dalam kontrak ini adalah Hukum Indonesia."

"Upaya mendapatkan prosedur sewa guna usaha/leasing kapal sangat diperlukan suatu aspek hukum yang disatu pihak mendukung investasi dan dilain pihak melindungi semua pihak agar terjamin rasa aman dalam menjalankan usahanya, sebagaimana yang diterapkan di PT. PANN MULTI FINANCE Jakarta, yang dalam penerapannya terkait dan merupakan satu kesatuan yang tidak dapat dipisahkan antara satu ketentuan dengan ketentuan lainnya menurut peraturan perundangundangan yang berlaku di Indonesia. Dalam praktek perjanjian sewa guna usaha/leasing kapal di PT. PANN MULTI FINANCE, yang kerap kali dilaksanakan adalah leasing kapal dengan kewajiban membeli, yang disebut dengan istilah "sewa guna usaha kapal dengan opsi beli (leasing of ship with obligation to purchase) yang merupakan jenis Finance Lease/Financial Lease. Dimana diberikan kewajiban kepada Lessee untuk membeli kapal yang dilease pada akhir perjanjian sesuai dengan nilai sisa dari harga kapal yang telah disepakati bersama. Perjanjian sewa guna usaha kapal dengan opsi beli mengandung perjanjian sewa menyewa dan perjanjian jual beli. Perjanjian sewa guna usaha/leasing kapal di PT. PANN MULTI FINANCE dari segi bentuknya merupakan perjanjian baku (standar) yang dimasukkan dalam golongan perjanjian baku (standar) umum. Karena perjanjian sewa guna usaha/leasing kapal di PT. PANN MULTI FINANCE, baik bentuk maupun isinya telah ditetapkan atau dipersiapkan secara sepihak oleh PT. PANN MULTI FINANCE sebagai pihak yang lebih kuat. Resiko atau overmacht dalam perjanjian sewa guna usaha/leasing kapal ada pada Lessee. Penulisan tesis ini menggunakan metode kepustakaan yang bersifat yuridis normatif yaitu pendekatan dengan menganalisa peraturan perundang-undangan yang terkait dengan penerapan hukum perjanjian dalam perjanjian sewa guna usaha/leasing. Pengumpulan data dan informasi dilakukan melalui studi literatur, selain itu dapat pula diperoleh melalui wawancara dengan narasumber yang berkaitan dengan pokok masalah yang terdapat dalam penulisan tesis ini."

"ABSTRAKSalah satu cara penyelesaian kepailitan adalah melalui perdamaian yang mengkonversikan utang menjadi saham, penyelesaian dengan model tersebut menimbulkan masalah terhadap bank, karena bank tidak dapat menjalankan perdamaian tersebut akibat keterikatan bank dengan Peraturan Bank Indonesia dan Peraturan Menteri Keuangan yang melarang bank melakukan penyertaan saham dalam perusahaan bukan di bidang keuangan. Tujuan penulisan ini untuk mengetahui Memberikan penjelasan yuridis tentang kedudukan Bank sebagai Kreditur Separatis Pemegang Hak Tanggungan dalam proses kepailitan menurut Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang dan Undang-undang Nomor 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan Atas Tanah Beserta Benda-benda yang berkaitan dengan Tanah, mengetahui Penyelesaian hak Kreditur Separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan dalam hal teijadi penyelesaian Kepailitan secara damai dengan mengkonversikan hutang kepada saham, mengetahui secara empiris akibat kepailitan terhadap Kreditur Separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan dengan menganalisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Perkara Nomor: 033/K/N/2006. Untuk megkaji permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif (yuridis normative) dengan kajian normatif mengambil sikap kritis normatif yang melancarkan kritik terhadap dogmatik hukum (peraturan per Undang-Undangan) dan praktek. Pokok permasalahan dalam penulisan Tesis ini adalah Bagaimana kedudukan Bank sebagai Kreditur Separatis Pemegang Hak Tanggungan dalam proses kepailitan menurut Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang dan Undang-undang No. 4 Tahun 1996 tentang Hak Tanggungan Atas Tanah Beserta Benda-benda yang berkaitan dengan Tanah, Bagaimana Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Bank sebagai Kreditur Separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan terhadap Kepailitan Debitur yang diselesaikan dengan Perdamaian yang mengkonversikan hutang menjadi saham Perusahaan pailit, Bagaimana Putusan Mahkamah Agung mengenai Kreditur Separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan dalam Perkara Nomor: 033/K/N/2006, hasil penelitian ini dapa disimpulkan bahwa perlindungan hukum dan jaminan yang dimuat dalam Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, ternyata belum cukup untuk menjamin kepentingan Bank sebagai Kreditur Separatis pemegang Hak Tanggungan.

---

ABSTRACTOne of the methods for the settlement of bankruptcy is through reconciliation which converts loan into shares, such model of settlement causes problems towards the bank, because bank cannot carry out such reconciliation due to the commitment of the bank towards the Regulations o f Bank Indonesia and the Regulations of the Minister of Finance which prohibit bank to engage in share participation in companies other than in the financial sector. The purpose of this essay is to find out how to provide juridical elucidation regarding the position of Bank as HT Holder Separatist Creditor in the bankruptcy process according to Law No. 37 of the Year 2004 regarding Bankruptcy and the Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation and Law Number 4 of the Year 1996 regarding HT over Land together with Goods related to Land, to find out how is the Settlement of rights of HT Holder Separatist Creditor in the case there is an amicable Bankruptcy settlement by converting debt into shares, to find out empirically what are the consequences of bankruptcy towards HT Holder Separatist Creditor by analyzing the Decision of Supreme Court on Case Number: 033/K/N/2006. To study such issues will be used normative law research method (juridical normative) with normative study that which taking the normative critical stance that criticizes dogmatic law (statutory regulations) and practices. The subject matters in composing this Thesis are: How is the position of Bank as HT Holder Separatist Creditor in the bankruptcy process according to Law No. 37 of the Year 2004 regarding Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation and Law No. 4 of the Year 1996 regarding HT over Land together with Goods related to Land, How is the Legal Protection towards Bank as HT Holder Separatist Creditor against the Bankruptcy of Debtor settled by Reconciliation which converts debt into shares in the bankrupt Company, How is the Decision of the Supreme Court regarding HT Holder Separatist Creditor in the Case Number: 033/K/N/2006. From the result of this research can be concluded that legal protection and warranty contained in Law No. 37 of the Year 2007 regarding Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation is not yet sufficient to secure the interest o f Bank as HT Holder Separatist Creditor."

"[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.]"