Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Tesis ini memberikan analisa pada kata ?menuntut? dalam hal penjualan barang gadai secara tertutup sebagaimana Pasal 1156 KUH Perdata. Istilah ?menuntut? pada ketentuan Pasal 1156 KUH Perdata tersebut rancu dan menimbulkan perbedaan pendapat di antara para ahli hukum, yaitu apakah tuntutan penjualan barang gadai melalui cara lain selain penjualan umum (lelang) harus ditempuh melalui jurikdisi voluntair atau jurisdiksi contentiosa. Sebagian ahli hukum mengartikan istilah ?menuntut? sebagai gugatan, sehingga termasuk pada jurisdiksi contentiosa, sedangkan lainnya mengartikan istilah ?menuntut? sebagai permohonan yang termasuk pada jurisdiksi voluntair.

Penulis dalam hal ini membuat analisa hukum berdasarkan sumber sengketa perdata yang berkenaan dengan penjualan benda gadai berupa 7.420 (tujuh ribu empat ratus dua puluh) lembar saham milik Beckket PTE. LTD. (Pemberi Gadai) pada PT Swabara Mining & Energy oleh Deutsche Bank Aktiengesllschaft (Penerima Gadai) secara tertutup sebagai pelaksanaan eksekusi gadai berdasarkan Share Pledge Agreement sebagaimana Akta No. 5 tertanggal 5 November 1997, dibuat di hadapan Agus Hashim Ahmad, S.H., Notaris di Jakarta.

---

Abstract
This Thesis offers an analysis on the word "claim" in terms of sales of goods which has been put under pledge as Article 1156 of the Indonesian Civil Codes. The term "claim" in the provisions of Article 1156 of the Indonesian Civil Code is ambiguous and lead to a differences of opinion among legal experts, as whether the claim to request the sale of such goods by any other way other than public sale (auction), should go through contentiosa or voluntair jurisdiction. Several legal experts interpret the term "claim" as a lawsuit, thus under the contentiosa jurisdiction, while others interpret the term "claim" as a request that is included the jurisdiction voluntair.

In this case, the Author made legal analysis based on the source of civil disputes relating to the private sale of a pledged object in form of 7420 (seven thousand four hundred twenty) shares owned by Beckket PTE. LTD. (the Pledgor) on PT Swabara Mining & Energy, which committed by Deutsche Bank Aktiengesllschaft (Pledgee) as the implementation of a the pledge execution under the Deed of the Share Pledge Agreement No. 5 dated 5 November 1997, made before Agus Hashim Ahmad, SH, Notary in Jakarta.

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Gadai saham sebagai salah satu bentuk jaminan pada dasarnya berfungsi untuk menjamin terwujudnya pemenuhan kewajiban debitur kepada kreditur, sehingga gadai saham akan timbul dan berakhir seiring dengan timbul dan berakhirnya perjanjian utang piutang yang merupakan perjanjian pokoknya. Hal ini sesuai dengan sifat dari jaminan gadai yaitu bersifat accesoir. Kitab Undang- Undang Hukum Perdata tidak mengatur secara khusus mengenai akibat hukum dari sifat accesoir jaminan gadai. Hal inilah yang kemudian menyebabkan terjadinya permasalahan dengan timbulnya perbedaan interpretasi berkaitan dengan sifat accesoir dari jaminan gadai dimana, sebagian pihak berpendapat sebagai perjanjian tambahan, klausula perjanjian gadai saham tidak diperbolehkan mengatur jangka waktu pengakhiran gadai saham sebelum utang lunas. Sedangkan sebagian pihak lainnya beranggapan sepanjang disepakati kedua belah pihak, perjanjian gadai saham bebas memuat klausula pengakhiran gadai saham mengingat adanya asas kebebasan berkontrak. Berdasarkan putusan MA Nomor :240 PK/PDT/2006 memberikan kemungkinan untuk mengatur klausula pengakhiran gadai saham sebelum utang lunas dan pengaturan mengenai keabsahan eksekusi gadai saham yang dilaksanakan setelah berakhirnya perjanjian gadai saham. Metode penulisan yang digunakan adalah ekplanatoris dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif. Data yang digunakan adalah sumber data sekunder berupa studi dokumen. Tesis ini akan berusaha untuk membahas dan menganalisa secara terperinci mengenai sifat accesoir dari perjanjian gadai saham beserta akibatnya dan keabsahan eksekusi gadai saham yang dilaksanakan setelah perjanjian gadai saham berakhir menurut ketentuan peraturan perundanganundangan yang berlaku.

---

ABSTRACT
Pledge of shares as a form of security principally used to ensure the fulfillment of debtor?s obligation to creditor, therefore pledge of shares shall be effective and terminate at the same time with the loan agreement as the principal agreement. This is in accordance with the characteristic of pledge which is accesoir. The Indonesian Civil Code does not explicitly stipulate the legal consequences of the accesoir characteristic of pledge. This fact has caused different interpretations of the legal requirements of the accesoir characteristic of pledge, some parties are in the opinion that as an additional agreements, the article of pledge of shares agreement are not allowed to set the time of termination of pledge of shares before the debt is paid off. Meanwhile the other parties thought that, as long as the contract was agreed by both parties, the pledge of shares agreement is allow containing an article of termination before the debt is paid off according the principle freedom of contract. According to the decision of the Supreme Court Number: 240 PK/PDT/2006 give the possibility to adjust the article of pledge of shares agreement about the termination before the debt is paid off and the legality procedure of the execution after the pledge of shares agreement has expired. Research methodology used is explanatory with normative juridical approach. Used data is secondary data with the form of documents study. Used data is secondary data with the form of documents study. This thesis will attempt to discuss and analyze the detail about the accesoir characteristic of pledge of shares with its consequences and the legality of the execution after the pledge of shares agreement expired under the provisions of the prevailing law and regulations., Pledge of shares as a form of security principally used to ensure the fulfillment of debtor’s obligation to creditor, therefore pledge of shares shall be effective and terminate at the same time with the loan agreement as the principal agreement. This is in accordance with the characteristic of pledge which is accesoir. The Indonesian Civil Code does not explicitly stipulate the legal consequences of the accesoir characteristic of pledge. This fact has caused different interpretations of the legal requirements of the accesoir characteristic of pledge, some parties are in the opinion that as an additional agreements, the article of pledge of shares agreement are not allowed to set the time of termination of pledge of shares before the debt is paid off. Meanwhile the other parties thought that, as long as the contract was agreed by both parties, the pledge of shares agreement is allow containing an article of termination before the debt is paid off according the principle freedom of contract. According to the decision of the Supreme Court Number: 240 PK/PDT/2006 give the possibility to adjust the article of pledge of shares agreement about the termination before the debt is paid off and the legality procedure of the execution after the pledge of shares agreement has expired. Research methodology used is explanatory with normative juridical approach. Used data is secondary data with the form of documents study. Used data is secondary data with the form of documents study. This thesis will attempt to discuss and analyze the detail about the accesoir characteristic of pledge of shares with its consequences and the legality of the execution after the pledge of shares agreement expired under the provisions of the prevailing law and regulations.]

Abstrak :
Tesis ini dilatarbelakangi oleh maraknya pembuatan penjaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup untuk jaminan suatu hutang berdasarkan lembaga jaminan gadai selama ini, sementara berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia, pembuatan jaminan atas saham dapat juga dilakukan dengan menggunakan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Oleh karenanya hal itu menimbulkan pertanyaan bagi penulis, mengapa para pihak pada umumnya, atau penerima jaminan atas saham pada khususnya, lebih memilih lembaga jaminan gadai daripada menggunakan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Apakah keunggulan penggunaan lembaga jaminan gadai dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Apakah memang lembaga jaminan gadai memberikan perlindungan hukum yang lebih baik dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif. Oleh karena itu, lebih lanjut tesis ini akan membahas mengenai tinjauan yuridis mengenai konsep saham, lembaga jaminan gadai dan lembaga jaminan fidusia, prosedur gadai saham dan fidusia atas saham serta perbandingan perlindungan hukum yang diberikan oleh ketentuan perundang-undangan bagi pemegang jaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup berdasarkan konsep lembaga jaminan gadai dan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Hasil penelitian dalam tesis ini adalah bahwa lembaga jaminan gadai lebih baik digunakan untuk penjaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia. ......The background of this research is that nowadays there is so many granting of shares as debt collateral in the form of pledge of shares in the closed limited liability company, whereas based on Law No. 42 Year 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security, the granting of shares as debt collateral might be given in the form of fiduciary security. This fact, therefore, raise questions for the writer, why the concerned parties in general, or the grantee or the holder of the shares collateral in this matter, prefer to use security institution of pledge other than the security institution of fiduciary security. What the advantages of using the security institution of pledge other than the security institution of fiduciary security are. Whether security institution of pledge shall give legal protection better than the security institution of fiduciary security. The research method for this thesis is judicial normative. Therefore, further, this thesis shall discuss the legal review regarding the legal concept of shares, security institution of pledge and security institution of fiduciary security, the procedure of security institution of pledge of shares and security institution of fiduciary security upon shares, and also the comparative legal protection given by the laws and regulations to the holder of collateral upon shares in the closed limited liability company based on the security concepts of pledge and fiduciary security. The research result is that the security institution of pledge of shares shall be better than the security institution of fiduciary security upon shares.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Akhir-akhir ini, banyak sekali pengadilan yang menjatuhkan putusan volunter/ permohonan volunter terhadap status hak milikpun, pengadilan berani mengabulkannya secara deklaratoir. Dalam tesis ini akan dibahas mengenai apakah Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan berwenang untuk mengeluarkan putusan volunter yang menyatakan bahwa pemegang gadai berhak untuk menjual jaminan saham yang telah digadaikan secara tertutup dan menyatakan bahwa jual beli saham adalah sah, serta upaya hukum apa yang harus ditempuh oleh pemberi gadai dengan adanya penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan tersebut. Untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut, penulis melakukan penelitian kepustakaan yang bersifat juridis normatif. Penelitian ini akan berbentuk evaluatif; yaitu menjelaskan sebuah kasus penjualan jaminan gadai saham dengan akta notaris yang dilakukan oleh kreditur berdasarkan penetapan Pengadilan Negeri dan pengesahan akta jual beli saham melalui penetapan Pengadilan Negeri, padahal dalam ketentuan Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas dan Administrasi Pengadilan Buku II, dinyatakan bahwa tidak dibenarkan untuk mengabulkan suatu permohonan dan menetapkan seorang atau beberapa orang sebagai pemilik atau mempunyai hak atas suatu barang, sehingga bila debitur/pemasang gadai tidak setuju, maka harus diajukan gugatan dalam peradilan contensiosa, karena ada sengketa. Upaya hukum yang harus dilakukan oleh pemberi gadai dengan dikeluarkannya penetapan tersebut ialah dengan mengajukan permohonan pembatalan penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan tersebut pada Mahkamah Agung, hal ini sesuai dengan ketentuan Pasal 30 jo Pasal 43 (1)UU No. 5/2004 tentang perubahan atas UU No. 14/1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung dan/atau dengan cara mengajukan gugat perdata ke Pengadilan Negeri dan dalil gugatan bertitik tolak dari penetapan volunter yang dikeluarkan oleh Pengadilan Negeri tersebut.

Abstrak :
Gadai merupakan salah satu bentuk pemberian jaminan dalam rangka menjamin pelunasan fasilitas kredit. Permasalahan timbul saat penerima gadai bermaksud melelang objek gadai berupa saham berdasarkan Pasal 1155 KUHPerdata dimana penerima gadai tidak dipersyaratkan untuk melibatkan hakim melalui pelelangan namum dalam praktik hukum pejabat lelang mempersyaratkan penetapan pengadilan dalam rangka ekskusi gadai saham melalui lelang. Metode Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yang bersifat yuridis normatif, yakni penelitian yang memfokuskan pada penggunaan norma hukum tertulis serta ditopang dengan hasil dialog atau wawancara dengan narasumber dan informan yang berkompeten. Kesimpulan yang diraih adalah realitas pelaksanaan gadai saham yang berbeda antara hukum tertulis dan praktik hukum dimana dalam rangka eksekusi gadai saham melalui lelang maka pejabat lelang mempersyaratkan penetapan pengadilan sehingga menimbulkan multitafsir.Hukum gadai saham wajib memberikan manfaat hukum bagi dunia usaha agar lembaga gadai saham dapat berperan secara maksimal serta memberikan kontribusi bagi peningkatan perekonomian khususnya menghilangkan rasa takut bagi kreditor atas lembaga gadai saham. Adapun saran yang dapat diberikan adalah pembentuk Undang-undang dapat menyusun perundangundangan tentang gadai secara sistematis dan terperinci serta lengkap dalam rangka kepastian hukum serta perlindungan hukum sehingga jaminan gadai dapat mendukung transaksi dalam perekonomian. ......Pledge is one of the form of security in order to guarantee the full payment of credit facility. The legal issue occurred when the pledgee intends to have the auction on the the object of pledge which are shares based on Article 1155 of Civil Code whereby the pledgee is not required to involve the judge but in legal practice the auctioneer wolud require the court order in the framework of the execution of pledge of shares through auction. This research method is a normative juridical research, which focuses on the use of written legal norms and is supported by the results of dialogue or interviews with competent sources and informants. Conclusions reached understanding the reality of the implementation of execution of pledged shares through auction that is different between written law and legal practice, whereby the auctioner will require the court order which cause various of intepretations. The pledged shares law is obliged to provide legal benefits for the business world so that the pledged shares institution can play a maximum role and contribute to economic improvement in particular to eliminate the fear of the creditor to the pledged shares institution. There are suggestions that can be given. Legislators can compile legislation on pledge in a systematic and detailed and complete manner in the framework of legal certainty and legal protection so that the pledge can support transactions in the economy.

Abstrak :
Sebagai pihak yang menguasai cabang-cabang produksi yang penting bagi negara, Pemerintah Indonesia mengadakan suatu kerja sama dengan para investor, dimana salah satu contohnya adalah kontrak karya yang dibuat antara Pemerintah Indonesia dengan PT. Newmont Nusa Tenggara. Analisis dilakukan dengan melihat kedudukan dari kontrak karya di dalam hukum perjanjian dan juga melihat kedudukan Pemerintah sebagai subjek hukum perdata, dengan pembahasan mendalam mengenai pelaksanaan dari klausul divestasi PT. Newmont Nusa Tenggara. Oleh karena itu, metodologi yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah pendekatan normatif dengan tipe penelitian sosiolegal, dengan tujuan memberikan pemahaman mengenai klausul divestasi yang timbul sebagai akibat terbentuknya kontrak karya dan memahami problematika beserta penyelesaian tersebut. Salah satu hasil dari penyelesaian sengketa ini adalah pengakuan perusahaan daerah sebagai pihak yang dapat melaksanakan proses divestasi dan saham yang akan didivestasikan berada dalam kondisi bebas dari gadai,

Abstrak :
Skripsi ini membahas mengenai ketentuan perikatan gadai saham bila dihadapkan dengan Undang-undang Nomor 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU 40/2007), khususnya mengenai ketentuan pemindahan hak atas saham dan keberlakuan hak memesan saham terlebih dahulu dalam eksekusi gadai saham. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan perbandingan, dan pendekatan kasus. Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa perikatan gadai saham tidak dapat mengecualikan ketentuan dalam UU 40/2007 dan hak memesan saham terlebih dahulu tetap berlaku oleh karena itu hak tersebut haruslah dihormati pada eksekusi gadai saham kecuali hak tersebut telah dilepaskan oleh si pemegang hak. ......This thesis describes the conformity of Share Pledge Agreements clauses to Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Company (Law 40/2007), specifically regarding the provisions on transfer of shares and the binding power of preemptive rights on the execution of pledged shares. This thesis is a normative legal study and employs statutes, a comparative approach, and a case study in its analysis. This thesis concludes that a Share Pledge Agreement cannot contradict the provisions set forth in Law 40/2007. Moreover, in the event the holders of preemptive rights have not discharged their rights, such rights are still in effect and maintain a binding power in the execution of pledged shares.

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Penjualan lelang eksekusi gadai saham melalui pelelangan umum harus dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas I di Kantor Pelayanan Kekayaan Negara dan Lelang (KPKNL). Namun pada prakteknya lelang terdapat lelang eksekusi gadai saham yang dilaksanakan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II dan dilakukan di Balai Lelang Swasta sebagaimana dituangkan dalam risalah lelang nomor RL-0XX/2011. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimanakah sebenarnya kewenangan pejabat lelang, khususnya Pejabat Lelang Kelas II, dalam melaksanakan lelang gadai atas saham serta bagaimanakah dampak pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang terhadap lelang yang telah dilaksanakan tersebut. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode yuridis normatif, yaitu dengan memperhatikan risalah lelang yang telah diterbitkan oleh Pejabat Lelang dan diperbandingkan terhadap ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku berkenaan dengan lelang. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dalam hal terjadi pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang dalam melaksanakan lelang, maka terhadap pejabat lelang tersebut akan dinyatakan melanggar ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang lelang dan izinnya sebagai Pejabat Lelang dapat dikenakan sanksi berupa pembebastugasan untuk jangka waktu tertentu. Pejabat Lelang tersebut juga berkewajiban untuk mengganti kerugian yang ditimbulkan. Selain itu, terhadap lelang yang dilaksanakan tanpa kewenangan pejabat lelang, maka lelang tersebut dianggap batal demi hukum. Namun prosedur pembatalan lelang yang batal demi hukum belum diatur lebih lanjut dalam ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan lelang yang ada saat ini.

---

ABSTRACT
Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia. ;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia. ;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia. , Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer’s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia. ]