Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisa keabsahan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal yang dibuat oleh Pejabat Pendaftar dan Pencatat Baliknama Kapal dengan mendiskripsikan karakteristik grosse akta hipotek atas kapal sebagai sarana proteksi perjanjian kredit dan juga menganalisa peluang-peluang yang dihadapi oleh pemegang hak jaminan hipotek atas kapal dalam menghadapi tantangan-tantangan yang berpotensi menjadi masalah dikemudian hari. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif, dengan tipologi penelitian bersifat eksplanatoris, sedangkan data yang digunakan adalah data hukum primer, sekunder dan tersier dan menggunakan analisis kualitatif, serta logika berfikir induktif dengan mendasar bahwa keabsahan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal haruslah memperhatikan ketentuan-ketentuan suatu ketetapan yang sah. Dari penelitian ini, ada beberapa hal yang dapat terjawab. Pertama, Akibat hukum yang timbul apabila suatu grosse akta hipotek atas kapal tidak memenuhi ketentuan-ketentuan keabsahan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal adalah penerbitan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal menjadi cacat hukum sehingga menyebabkan akta hipotek atas kapal tersebut menjadi batal demi hukum dan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal menjadi tidak memiliki kekuatan eksekutorial. Kedua, Tantangan-tantangan yang dihadapi oleh Kreditor selaku pemegang hak jaminan hipotek atas kapal diantaranya adalah penyelesaian perkara melalui proses pengadilan dalam praktiknya dinilai tidak efektif; Lembaga eksekusi atas kekuasaan sendiri menjadi tidak lebih efisien daripada eksekusi berdasarkan grosse akta hipotek atas kapal. Peluang dalam menjawab tantangan-tantangan tersebut, adalah: pelaksanaan eksekusi objek jaminan hipotek atas kapal yang baik, dan terupayanya efisiensi serta efektifitas dalam prosedur eksekusi jaminan hipotek atas kapal.

---

ABSTRACTThis study aims to analyze the validity of the deed of mortgage on vessels made ​​by Registrant and Registrar Officials for Vessels Transfer of Title by describing the characteristics of the deed of mortgage on vessels as means of protection for loan agreement and by analyzing the opportunities faced by holders of mortgage on vessels insurance to deal with challenges that could potentially be problematic in the future. This study uses normative method and the typology is explanatory; while the data included are data of primary, secondary and tertiary law by using qualitative analysis, and the logic of inductive thinking considering that the validity of the deed of mortgage on vessels must observe the terms of legal provisions. From this study, there are several things that may be answered. First, the legal consequences that arise when a deed of mortgage on vessel does not meet the terms of the validity is that the publishing of deed of mortgage on vessels may be legally defective, causing the mortgage on vessels deeds become null, and deed of mortgage on vessels becomes powerless in terms of executorial. Second, the challenges faced by the creditor as collateral mortgage holders on vessels including the settlement through the court process considered practically ineffective; Institute for the execution of the power itself becomes less efficient than the execution of the deed of mortgage on vessels. Opportunities in responding to these challenges are: the execution of the good mortgage collateral objects on the vessels, and efficiency and effectiveness in the execution procedure collateral mortgage on the vessels."

"[PT Pegadaian (Persero) dalam memenuhi kebutuhan masyarakat dalam memperoleh dana yang mereka butuhkan, berusaha untuk meningkatkan layanan dengan menambah program kegiatannya. Selama ini PT Pegadaian (Persero)hanya dikenal dengan produk jasa gadai. Salah satu bentuk penyaluran pinjaman yang sekarang dijalankan oleh PT Pegadaian (Persero) yaitu perjanjian utang piutang dengan jaminan fidusia. Konsekuensi yuridisnya, PT Pegadaian (Persero) harus mengikuti ketentuan yang diamanatkan dalam UUJF. Perjanjian jaminan fidusia agar mempunyai kepastian hukum bagi kreditur dan debitur, harus dibuatdengan akta notaris. Perjanjian jaminan fidusia tersebut harus didaftarkan di kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia, supaya apabila terjadi wanprestasi oleh debitur, kreditur tetap dapat menjalankan ketentuan yang diatur dalam UUJF. Sehubungan dengan hal tersebut, penulis melakukan penelitian tentang pelaksanaan jaminan fidusia pada PT Pegadaian (Persero) ditinjau dari fungsi PT Pegadaian (Persero) sebagai lembaga gadai dan untuk mengetahui akibat hukumnya perjanjian jaminan fidusia yang tidak didaftarkan apabila terjadi waprestasi. Untuk mencapaitujuan tersebut, penelitian dilakukan dengan metode deskriptif analisis dengan menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif. Data hasil penelitian dianalisis denganmenggunakan metode kualitatif. Hasil penelitian diketahui bahwa perjanjian jaminan fidusia pada PT Pegadaian (Persero) dengan nilai penjaminan diatas Rp.10.000.000,- (sepuluh juta rupiah), dibuat dengan akta jaminan fidusia dihadapan notaris dan didaftarkan pada Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia. Sedangkan nilai penjaminan dibawah Rp. 10.000.000,- (sepuluh juta rupiah) hanya dibuat denganperjanjian jaminan fidusia yang dibuat dibawah tangan dan tidak didaftarkan pada Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia. Perjanjian jaminan fidusia yang tidak didaftarkan pada Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia, apabila debitur wanprestasi dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi kreditur dapat menerapkan Pasal 15 dan Pasal 29 UUJF. Perjanjian jaminan fidusia yang tidak didaftarkan pada Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia dalam pelaksanaan eksekusinya, kreditur harus mengajukan gugatan kepada pengadilan dan dapat menerapkan Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata juncto Pasal 365 KUHP. Sebab lain perjanjian jaminan fidusia yang tidak didaftarkan pada Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia adalah karena biayanya yang mahal dan jarak Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia yang sangat jauh, karena hanya ada di Ibukota Propinsi DKI Jakarta. Seharusnya,Kantor Pendaftaran Fidusia mempunyai kantor perwakilannya pada setiap Kabupaten/ Kotamadya di Indonesia.

---

In Meeting the Needs of communities for acquiring the funds that they need, PT Pegadaian (Persero) works hard to improve its services by adding up its programs of activities. All this time, at PT Pegadaian (Persero) as known for pand service products. One of the on the go loan programs from PT Pegadaian (Persero) is promissory notes receivable by fiduciary transfer of ownership. As a

juridical consequence, PT Pegadaian (Persero) should follow the provisions as mandated by the Fiduciary Act (UUJF). To be able to have a legal certainty for the debtor and the creditor, the agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership should be made in notarial decree. The agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership should be registered in Fiduciary Registering Office, so that in case of default done by the debtor, the creditor may use the provisions in the UUJF. Inconnection with that, the writer researched the unregistered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership by PT Pegadaian (Persero) to find out the implementation of fiduciary transfer of ownership in PT Pegadaian (Persero) related to the function of PT Pegadaian (Persero) as a pand institution and to find

out legal consequences on unregistered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership toward the return and in the case of default. To achieve the objective above, the study was conducted with the analytical descriptive method using normative juridical approach. Data of the research was analyzed by using qualitative method. Based on the research, the result revealed that agreement of

fiduciary transfer of ownership of PT Pegadaian (Persero) with the value of guarantee above Rp. 10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then made with the fiduciary deed before a notary and registered at Fiduciary Registration Office. If the value of guarantee below than Rp.10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then only be made with agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership and not be registered. In a registered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership, if the debtor are in default in the implementation of the execution, the creditor can apply Article 15 and Article 29 of UUJF. In a unregistered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership, to the execution, the creditor must must file a lawsuit to the court and could apply Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 365 of the Book of Criminal Law. There is a factor when an agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership is not registered, its is due to expensive cost and great distance of Fiduciary Registration Office, because its only located in the Provincial Capital. The Fiduciary Registration Office shoulc have representatives in every Regency/City.

;In Meeting the Needs of communities for acquiring the funds that they

need, PT Pegadaian (Persero) works hard to improve its services by adding up its

programs of activities. All this time, at PT Pegadaian (Persero) as known for pand

service products. One of the on the go loan programs from PT Pegadaian

(Persero) is promissory notes receivable by fiduciary transfer of ownership. As a

juridical consequence, PT Pegadaian (Persero) should follow the provisions as

mandated by the Fiduciary Act (UUJF). To be able to have a legal certainty for

the debtor and the creditor, the agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership

should be made in notarial decree. The agreement of fiduciary transfer of

ownership should be registered in Fiduciary Registering Office, so that in case of

default done by the debtor, the creditor may use the provisions in the UUJF.

Inconnection with that, the writer researched the unregistered agreement of

fiduciary transfer of ownership by PT Pegadaian (Persero) to find out the

implementation of fiduciary transfer of ownership in PT Pegadaian (Persero)

related to the function of PT Pegadaian (Persero) as a pand institution and to find

out legal consequences on unregistered agreement of fiduciary transfer of

ownership toward the return and in the case of default. To achieve the objective

above, the study was conducted with the analytical descriptive method using

normative juridical approach. Data of the research was analyzed by using

qualitative method. Based on the research, the result revealed that agreement of

fiduciary transfer of ownership of PT Pegadaian (Persero) with the value of

guarantee above Rp. 10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then made with the

fiduciary deed before a notary and registered at Fiduciary Registration Office. If

the value of guarantee below than Rp. 10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then

only be made with agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership and not be

registered. In a registered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership, if the

debtor are in default in the implementation of the execution, the creditor can apply

Article 15 and Article 29 of UUJF. In a unregistered agreement of fiduciary

transfer of ownership, to the execution, the creditor must must file a lawsuit to the

court and could apply Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 365 of the

Book of Criminal Law. There is a factor when an agreement of fiduciary transfer

of ownership is not registered, its is due to expensive cost and great distance of

Fiduciary Registration Office, because its only located in the Provincial Capital.

The Fiduciary Registration Office shoulc have representatives in every Regency/

City.

Keywords : Fiduciary, PT Pegada, In Meeting the Needs of communities for acquiring the funds that they

need, PT Pegadaian (Persero) works hard to improve its services by adding up its

programs of activities. All this time, at PT Pegadaian (Persero) as known for pand

service products. One of the on the go loan programs from PT Pegadaian

(Persero) is promissory notes receivable by fiduciary transfer of ownership. As a

juridical consequence, PT Pegadaian (Persero) should follow the provisions as

mandated by the Fiduciary Act (UUJF). To be able to have a legal certainty for

the debtor and the creditor, the agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership

should be made in notarial decree. The agreement of fiduciary transfer of

ownership should be registered in Fiduciary Registering Office, so that in case of

default done by the debtor, the creditor may use the provisions in the UUJF.

Inconnection with that, the writer researched the unregistered agreement of

fiduciary transfer of ownership by PT Pegadaian (Persero) to find out the

implementation of fiduciary transfer of ownership in PT Pegadaian (Persero)

related to the function of PT Pegadaian (Persero) as a pand institution and to find

out legal consequences on unregistered agreement of fiduciary transfer of

ownership toward the return and in the case of default. To achieve the objective

above, the study was conducted with the analytical descriptive method using

normative juridical approach. Data of the research was analyzed by using

qualitative method. Based on the research, the result revealed that agreement of

fiduciary transfer of ownership of PT Pegadaian (Persero) with the value of

guarantee above Rp. 10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then made with the

fiduciary deed before a notary and registered at Fiduciary Registration Office. If

the value of guarantee below than Rp. 10.000.000,- (ten millions rupiah), then

only be made with agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership and not be

registered. In a registered agreement of fiduciary transfer of ownership, if the

debtor are in default in the implementation of the execution, the creditor can apply

Article 15 and Article 29 of UUJF. In a unregistered agreement of fiduciary

transfer of ownership, to the execution, the creditor must must file a lawsuit to the

court and could apply Article 1365 of the Civil Code juncto Article 365 of the

Book of Criminal Law. There is a factor when an agreement of fiduciary transfer

of ownership is not registered, its is due to expensive cost and great distance of

Fiduciary Registration Office, because its only located in the Provincial Capital.

The Fiduciary Registration Office shoulc have representatives in every Regency/

City.

Keywords : Fiduciary, PT Pegada]"