Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Hasil Pencarian

Ditemukan 2 dokumen yang sesuai dengan query
cover
Yovita Pradita Abimanyu
"[Perjanjian kerjasama tentang penanggungan utang ini merupakan dasar dari penjaminan pemberian kredit yang diberikan oleh Bank Rakyat Indonesia dan juga menjadi dasar bagi Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia agar dapat bertindak sebagai penanggung dalam penjaminan kredit yang diberikan oleh Bank rakyat Indonesia. Analisis ini akan dilakukan dengan menggunakan ketentuan penanggungan utang
dalam Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata, dimana akan dilihat mengenai keberlakuan dari ketentuan penanggungan utang dalam perjanjian kerjasama penanggungan utang antara Bank Rakyat Indonesia dengan Perum Jaminan Kredit
Indonesia. Dalam Buku III KUHPerdata memiliki asas kebebasan berkontrak, dimana dengan adanya asas ini maka para pihak bebas menentukan isi dari perjanjian yang
ingin dibuatnya selama tidak bertentangan dengan hukum, kepatutan dan norma yang berlaku. Namun, tidak banyak yang mengetahui keberadaan perjanjian kerjasama penjaminan kredit sehingga tidak diketahui mengenai isi dari perjanjian tersebut telah sesuai atau tidak bertentangan dengan ketentuan dalam KUHPerdata dan Peraturan lain yang berlaku. Adapun terdapat perbedaan mendasar antara perjanjian kerjasama penanggungan utang dengan ketentuan dalam KUHPerdata yaitu pada pihak yang
menjadi penanggung hanya boleh Perusahaan Penjaminan yang telah membuat MoU dengan Kementerian Keuangan seperti Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia. Dengan demikian analisis ini diperlukan agar dapat menjadi acuan hukum bagi usaha-usaha yang hendak melakukan peminjaman kredit melalui penjaminan pemberian kredit, sehingga mereka mengetahui ketentuan yang berlaku.

A cooperation agreement of debt guarantee is the basis of the guarantee credit granted by Bank Rakyat Indonesia and also the basis for Perum Jaminan kredit
Indonesia in order to act as a guarantor in a debt guarantee given by Bank Rakyat Indonesia. This analysis will be done using debt guarantee provisions in the
Indonesian Code of Civil Law, which will be seen on the enforceability of the debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Code of Civil Law in the agreement about the
guarantee of debt between Bank Rakyat Indonesia with Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia. In Book III of the Civil Code, which has the principle of freedom of contract, where the presence of this principle made the parties are free to determine the contents of the agreements as long as its content did not violate the law, propriety
and norms. However, not many are aware of the existence of credit guarantee cooperation agreement, which is the basis of guaranteed debt lending, is not known about the contents of the agreement and of course so many people does not know if the content of its agreement match with the provisions of the Civil Code and other applicable regulation. As there is a fundamental difference between debt guarantee agreement and debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Civil Code, which is the parties that allowed to be the guarantor are the Company that has made a MoU agreement with the Ministry of Finance such as Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia. Thus this analysis is required in order to become the legal reference for businesses that want to borrow credit through the provision of credit guarantees, so that they know the provisions in force.;A cooperation agreement of debt guarantee is the basis of the guarantee credit granted by Bank Rakyat Indonesia and also the basis for Perum Jaminan kredit Indonesia in order to act as a guarantor in a debt guarantee given by Bank Rakyat Indonesia. This analysis will be done using debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Code of Civil Law, which will be seen on the enforceability of the debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Code of Civil Law in the agreement about the guarantee of debt between Bank Rakyat Indonesia with Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia. In Book III of the Civil Code, which has the principle of freedom of contract, where the presence of this principle made the parties are free to determine the contents of the agreements as long as its content did not violate the law, propriety
and norms. However, not many are aware of the existence of credit guarantee cooperation agreement, which is the basis of guaranteed debt lending, is not known about the contents of the agreement and of course so many people does not know if the content of its agreement match with the provisions of the Civil Code and other applicable regulation. As there is a fundamental difference between debt guarantee agreement and debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Civil Code, which is the parties that allowed to be the guarantor are the Company that has made a MoU agreement with the Ministry of Finance such as Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia. Thus this analysis is required in order to become the legal reference for businesses that want to borrow credit through the provision of credit guarantees, so that they know the provisions in force., A cooperation agreement of debt guarantee is the basis of the guarantee credit
granted by Bank Rakyat Indonesia and also the basis for Perum Jaminan kredit
Indonesia in order to act as a guarantor in a debt guarantee given by Bank Rakyat
Indonesia. This analysis will be done using debt guarantee provisions in the
Indonesian Code of Civil Law, which will be seen on the enforceability of the debt
guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Code of Civil Law in the agreement about the
guarantee of debt between Bank Rakyat Indonesia with Perum Jaminan Kredit
Indonesia. In Book III of the Civil Code, which has the principle of freedom of
contract, where the presence of this principle made the parties are free to determine
the contents of the agreements as long as its content did not violate the law, propriety
and norms. However, not many are aware of the existence of credit guarantee
cooperation agreement, which is the basis of guaranteed debt lending, is not known
about the contents of the agreement and of course so many people does not know if
the content of its agreement match with the provisions of the Civil Code and other
applicable regulation. As there is a fundamental difference between debt guarantee
agreement and debt guarantee provisions in the Indonesian Civil Code, which is the
parties that allowed to be the guarantor are the Company that has made a MoU
agreement with the Ministry of Finance such as Perum Jaminan Kredit Indonesia.
Thus this analysis is required in order to become the legal reference for businesses
that want to borrow credit through the provision of credit guarantees, so that they
know the provisions in force.]
"
Depok: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia , 2016
S61886
UI - Skripsi Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library
cover
Dinda Komalla Rizqinia
"Skripsi ini menganalisa pertanggungjawaban dari corporate guarantor terhadap insolvensi special purpose vehicle yang didirikan olehnya di luar wilayah Indonesia berdasarkan kasus pada Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Jakarta Pusat mengenai permohonan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang oleh The Bank of New York Mellon terhadap PT Bakrieland Development Tbk. Dalam kasus ini, PT Bakrieland Development Tbk sebagai corporate guarantor mengajukan berbagai argumen atau dalil untuk mengesampingkan hubungan pertanggungjawabannya saat special purpose vehicle yang ia dirikan masuk kedalam posisi tidak mampu membayar. Pada akhirnya, Majelis Hakim menjatuhkan amar bahwa Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat tidak memiliki kewenangan untuk memeriksa perkara akibat pilihan hukum para pihak. Seluruh dalil-dalil yang diajukan oleh corporate guarantor untuk mengesampingkan hubungan pertanggungjawaban antara pihaknya tidak memiliki kedudukan hukum, sehingga tidak dapat mengesampingkan pertanggungjawabannya dalam hubungan penanggungan utang terkait. Pengadilan Niaga pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat juga telah seharusnya mengakui memiliki kompetensi dalam memeriksa perkara, demi mencapai keadilan dan melindungi hak-hak para kreditor yang merupakan para investor asing.

This thesis will analyze the accountability of a corporate guarantor towards the insolvency of its special purpose vehicle offshore, based on a case in Commercial Court Decision in regards of the suspension of payment application brought by The Bank of New York Mellon against PT Bakrieland Development Tbk. In this case, PT Bakrieland as the corporate guarantor brought several defenses to disregard its accountability upon the insolvency position of its special purpose vehicle. The Commercial Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction over the case due to the choice of law by both parties. All defenses brought by the corporate guarantor to disregard its accountability did not have legal standing, therefore can not and should not take effect in doing such act. Commercial Court in District Court of Jakarta Pusat should acknowledge its competence and jurisdiction over the case, in order to reach justice and protect the rights of creditors, which are foreign investors.
"
Depok: Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, 2018
S-Pdf
UI - Skripsi Membership  Universitas Indonesia Library