Perjanjian pinjaman sindikasi merupakan suatu perjanjian pinjaman yang melibatkan beberapa kreditur untuk memberikan dana besar kepada debitur, serta dapat diselesaikan dengan teori Hukum Perdata Internasional (HPI). Dalam penelitian hukum normatif, kehadiran elemen asing dalam perjanjian kredit sindikasi internasional memungkinkan penerapan teori HPI untuk menentukan hukum yang berlaku dan forum penyelesaian sengketa. Pokok kasus dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1345 K/PDT/2015 menunjukkan dapat digunakannya teori HPI dalam menentukan hukum yang berlaku dan forum yang berwenang berdasarkan kedudukan dan hubungan hukum antara pihak-pihak yang asing. Penggunaan hukum Indonesia oleh majelis hakim pokok sengketa dalam menentukan hukum yang berlaku dapat dipertimbangkan melalui teori proper law of the contract. Sementara itu, diskusi tentang kebebasan berkontrak dalam penyelesaian sengketa perjanjian kredit sindikasi internasional akan berhubungan dengan pelaksanaan penjaminan terhadap sindikasi dalam pokok sengketa. Prinsip kebebasan berkontrak adalah prinsip diakui dalam hukum kontrak internasional, namun terdapat pembatasan tertentu, terutama dalam hukum Indonesia. Penunjukan Pengadilan Negeri Cilacap dengan dasar Klausul 'Ketentuan Lainnya' serta Pasal 99 ayat (1) RV dalam pokok gugatan tingkat pertama menyebabkan kompleksitas hukum dalam menentukan forum yang berwenang. Kesalahan penerapan dasar hukum dan eksistensi klausul dengan ketentuan multi tafsir serta memiliki risiko forum shopping dapat memiliki implikasi hukum yang signifikan bagi para pihak.
"
Right of Land Management (HPL) as the controlling rights of the state whose authority is partially delegated to the holder. In the HPL it can be understood that there is a right of the state to control which contains public authority as in Article 2 Paragraph (2) of the Agrarian Law (UUPA). The substance of the HPL reflects the contents of the authority both in public and private which includes the authority to plan the designation and use of the land, use the land for the purpose of the carrying out the duties, and give the parts of the land to third parties. In order to carry out the construction of HPL used by third party, there was not in accordance with between law procedure and its aplication. In study of the Supreme Court Verdict Number 2425 K/Pdt/2015, there was a legal act between third party, PT. Hargas Industries Indonesia (HII) and HPL holder, PT. Kawasan Berikat Nusantara (KBN), namely in the case of legal actions that can be carried out by HPL holders with third party so that the HPL can be used, with the consequence of a legal relationship for third party in their business. This research was conducted using normative legal research methods, In this study it was found that PT. KBN gave part of its authority over HPL to PT. HII to be utilized in the form of Building Use Rights (HGB) by making land use agreements. However, in settling the dispute based on the ruling of this Supreme Court, the land use agreement that has been made between the two parties can not provide the guarantee of legal certainty of the HGB that is issued on it
"