Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
A dan B membina suatu hubungan bersama yang tidak terikat dalam suatu perkawinan yang sah. Hasil hubungan tersebut melahirkan anak luar kawin bernama X. X lahir berdasarkan Akta Kelahiran Nomor 924/U/PROP/2000 dengan tertulis bahwa A dan B adalah orang tua darinya. X di dalam Akta Kelahiran tersebut seharusnya tertulis nama ibunya saja yaitu B. Selain itu juga ada Penetapan 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG yang menetapkan bahwa X adalah anak kandung dari A dan B. Bagaimana pengaturan anak luar kawin dan akta kelahiran menurut peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku di Indonesia? mengapa terdapat akta kelahiran yang masih memerlukan penetapan dari Pengadilan Negeri? Penulis mempergunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif didukung dengan wawancara. Data Penelitian yang diperoleh Penulis bahwa A dan B tidak pernah terikat dalam perkawinan yang sah. X adalah benar anak luar kawin Akta kelahiran X dikatakan tidak terdaftar di Kantor Catatan Sipil DKI Jakarta. Penulis berpendapat seharusnya Akta Kelahiran X hanya tertulis nama ibunya saja berdasarkan Pasal 43 ayat (1) KUHPer. Masalah pembuktian kebenaran akta tersebut harus melalui suatu proses pembuktian di Pengadilan dan siapa yang mendalilkan dialah yang harus membuktikan ketidakbenaran akan isi akta tersebut. Bentuk perlindungan hukum yang bisa diberikan kepada X sebagai anak luar kawin adalah pengakuan anak. Kantor Catatan Sipil dan Pengadilan Negeri haruslah lebih teliti dalam melaksanakan ketentuan pengakuan anak luar kawin sesuai dengan yang telah diatur di dalam peraturan perundang-undangan.

---

ABSTRACT
A and B building a relationship that not bound together in legal marriage. The result of these relationships childbearing outside marriage named X. X was born by a Birth Certificate number 924/U/PROP/2000 in writing that A and B are the parent of X. X in the birth certificate should be written B name. There was also 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG stipulate that X is the biological child of A and B. How to setup the child outside marriage and birth certificates according to the legislation in force in Indonesia? Why the certificate of birth still Required Determination from district court? The writer use this issue using the method normatif of law analism and its support by interview. The data tell that A and B never been married in legal marriage and X is correct the children outside marriage. The certificate of birth of X not registered in civil registry office of DKI Jakarta. The writer assume that the parent of X in the certificate of birth is B base on Chapter 43 paragraph (1) KUHPer. The problem validating certificates must be proceed by court and the person who substantiate must be prove uncorrectly on the content of the certification. Form of legal protection that can be given to X as a child outside marriage is recognized endorsment. Civil registry Office and the District Court should be more careful in carrying out the provisition of recognition in accordance with the child outside of marriage that has been set in the legislation.;A and B building a relationship that not bound together in legal marriage. The result of these relationships childbearing outside marriage named X. X was born by a Birth Certificate number 924/U/PROP/2000 in writing that A and B are the parent of X. X in the birth certificate should be written B name. There was also 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG stipulate that X is the biological child of A and B. How to setup the child outside marriage and birth certificates according to the legislation in force in Indonesia? Why the certificate of birth still Required Determination from district court? The writer use this issue using the method normatif of law analism and its support by interview. The data tell that A and B never been married in legal marriage and X is correct the children outside marriage. The certificate of birth of X not registered in civil registry office of DKI Jakarta. The writer assume that the parent of X in the certificate of birth is B base on Chapter 43 paragraph (1) KUHPer. The problem validating certificates must be proceed by court and the person who substantiate must be prove uncorrectly on the content of the certification. Form of legal protection that can be given to X as a child outside marriage is recognized endorsment. Civil registry Office and the District Court should be more careful in carrying out the provisition of recognition in accordance with the child outside of marriage that has been set in the legislation.;A and B building a relationship that not bound together in legal marriage. The result of these relationships childbearing outside marriage named X. X was born by a Birth Certificate number 924/U/PROP/2000 in writing that A and B are the parent of X. X in the birth certificate should be written B name. There was also 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG stipulate that X is the biological child of A and B. How to setup the child outside marriage and birth certificates according to the legislation in force in Indonesia? Why the certificate of birth still Required Determination from district court? The writer use this issue using the method normatif of law analism and its support by interview. The data tell that A and B never been married in legal marriage and X is correct the children outside marriage. The certificate of birth of X not registered in civil registry office of DKI Jakarta. The writer assume that the parent of X in the certificate of birth is B base on Chapter 43 paragraph (1) KUHPer. The problem validating certificates must be proceed by court and the person who substantiate must be prove uncorrectly on the content of the certification. Form of legal protection that can be given to X as a child outside marriage is recognized endorsment. Civil registry Office and the District Court should be more careful in carrying out the provisition of recognition in accordance with the child outside of marriage that has been set in the legislation.;A and B building a relationship that not bound together in legal marriage. The result of these relationships childbearing outside marriage named X. X was born by a Birth Certificate number 924/U/PROP/2000 in writing that A and B are the parent of X. X in the birth certificate should be written B name. There was also 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG stipulate that X is the biological child of A and B. How to setup the child outside marriage and birth certificates according to the legislation in force in Indonesia? Why the certificate of birth still Required Determination from district court? The writer use this issue using the method normatif of law analism and its support by interview. The data tell that A and B never been married in legal marriage and X is correct the children outside marriage. The certificate of birth of X not registered in civil registry office of DKI Jakarta. The writer assume that the parent of X in the certificate of birth is B base on Chapter 43 paragraph (1) KUHPer. The problem validating certificates must be proceed by court and the person who substantiate must be prove uncorrectly on the content of the certification. Form of legal protection that can be given to X as a child outside marriage is recognized endorsment. Civil registry Office and the District Court should be more careful in carrying out the provisition of recognition in accordance with the child outside of marriage that has been set in the legislation., A and B building a relationship that not bound together in legal marriage. The result of these relationships childbearing outside marriage named X. X was born by a Birth Certificate number 924/U/PROP/2000 in writing that A and B are the parent of X. X in the birth certificate should be written B name. There was also 07/Pdt.P/2003/PN.KTG stipulate that X is the biological child of A and B. How to setup the child outside marriage and birth certificates according to the legislation in force in Indonesia? Why the certificate of birth still Required Determination from district court? The writer use this issue using the method normatif of law analism and its support by interview. The data tell that A and B never been married in legal marriage and X is correct the children outside marriage. The certificate of birth of X not registered in civil registry office of DKI Jakarta. The writer assume that the parent of X in the certificate of birth is B base on Chapter 43 paragraph (1) KUHPer. The problem validating certificates must be proceed by court and the person who substantiate must be prove uncorrectly on the content of the certification. Form of legal protection that can be given to X as a child outside marriage is recognized endorsment. Civil registry Office and the District Court should be more careful in carrying out the provisition of recognition in accordance with the child outside of marriage that has been set in the legislation.]

Abstrak :
[ABSTRAK
Perkawinan adalah ikatan lahir batin antara seorang pria dan seorang wanita dengan tujuan untuk membentuk keluarga yang bahagia dan kekal berdasarkan keTuhanan Yang Maha Esa. Penulis berasumsi bahwa salah satu tujuan perkawinan adalah untuk mendapatkan keturunan atau anak. Dalam penelitian ini pokok permasalahan yang penulis angkat adalah mengenai kedudukan anak luar kawin ditinjau dari Pasal 43 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan dan analisis terhadap Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor : 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim. Penulis menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif. Pasal 43 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan menyatakan bahwa anak luar kawin hanya memiliki hubungan hukum dengan ibu dan keluarga ibunya. Tindakan hukum yang dapat dilakukan anak luar kawin memiliki hubungan hukum dengan ayah dan keluarga ayahnya adalah melalui pengakuan terhadap anak luar kawin dan pengesahan anak luar kawin pada saat perkawinan kedua orangtuanya. Dalam Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor : 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim orang tua dari anak luar kawin tidak melakukan pengesahan terhadap anak luar kawin mereka pada saat perkawinan, sehingga meminta penetapan pengadilan negeri. Pengakuan dan Pengesahan Anak yang telah melebihi jangka waktu yang telah ditetapkan Pasal 49 dan Pasal 50 Undang-Undang Nomor 24 tahun 2013 tentang Perubahan Undang-Undang Nomor 23 tahun 2006 tentang Administrasi Kependudukan harus melalui Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri. Penulis setuju dengan pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor : 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim.

---

ABSTRACT
Marriage is born inner bond between a man and a woman with the aim to a form a happy family and eternal based on one supreme divinity. The authors assume that one of purposes of marriage is to obtain offspring or children. The issue that i use is on the position of illegitimate child in view of Article 43 of Law Number 1 year 1974 concerning marriage and analysis to determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM. The autor uses the methode of normative legal research. Article 43 of Law number 1 year 1974 on marriage states that an illegitimate child only has a legal relationship with mother and her family. Legal actions that can be done to an illegitimate child has a legal relationship with his father and his father?s family is throught the recognition and validation of an illegitimate child at the time of his parents marriage. If parents of an illegitimate child negligent conduct agains an illegitimate child endorsement, can be done in state court determination as described in Article 32 paragraph 2 of Law number 26 year 2006 concerning administration of residence. In determination of district court number: 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim an illegitimate child?s parents do not approve of the marriage of their children at the time of marriage, so requast a court warrant. Recognation and validation of child who has exceeded a predetermined time period Article 49 and Article 50 of Law Number 24 year 2013 concerning changes to the Law number of 2006 concerning administration of residence must go through a court warrant. Autors agrees with the legal considerations in determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM.;Marriage is born inner bond between a man and a woman with the aim to a form a happy family and eternal based on one supreme divinity. The authors assume that one of purposes of marriage is to obtain offspring or children. The issue that i use is on the position of illegitimate child in view of Article 43 of Law Number 1 year 1974 concerning marriage and analysis to determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM. The autor uses the methode of normative legal research. Article 43 of Law number 1 year 1974 on marriage states that an illegitimate child only has a legal relationship with mother and her family. Legal actions that can be done to an illegitimate child has a legal relationship with his father and his father?s family is throught the recognition and validation of an illegitimate child at the time of his parents marriage. If parents of an illegitimate child negligent conduct agains an illegitimate child endorsement, can be done in state court determination as described in Article 32 paragraph 2 of Law number 26 year 2006 concerning administration of residence. In determination of district court number: 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim an illegitimate child?s parents do not approve of the marriage of their children at the time of marriage, so requast a court warrant. Recognation and validation of child who has exceeded a predetermined time period Article 49 and Article 50 of Law Number 24 year 2013 concerning changes to the Law number of 2006 concerning administration of residence must go through a court warrant. Autors agrees with the legal considerations in determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM.;Marriage is born inner bond between a man and a woman with the aim to a form a happy family and eternal based on one supreme divinity. The authors assume that one of purposes of marriage is to obtain offspring or children. The issue that i use is on the position of illegitimate child in view of Article 43 of Law Number 1 year 1974 concerning marriage and analysis to determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM. The autor uses the methode of normative legal research. Article 43 of Law number 1 year 1974 on marriage states that an illegitimate child only has a legal relationship with mother and her family. Legal actions that can be done to an illegitimate child has a legal relationship with his father and his father?s family is throught the recognition and validation of an illegitimate child at the time of his parents marriage. If parents of an illegitimate child negligent conduct agains an illegitimate child endorsement, can be done in state court determination as described in Article 32 paragraph 2 of Law number 26 year 2006 concerning administration of residence. In determination of district court number: 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim an illegitimate child?s parents do not approve of the marriage of their children at the time of marriage, so requast a court warrant. Recognation and validation of child who has exceeded a predetermined time period Article 49 and Article 50 of Law Number 24 year 2013 concerning changes to the Law number of 2006 concerning administration of residence must go through a court warrant. Autors agrees with the legal considerations in determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM., Marriage is born inner bond between a man and a woman with the aim to a form a happy family and eternal based on one supreme divinity. The authors assume that one of purposes of marriage is to obtain offspring or children. The issue that i use is on the position of illegitimate child in view of Article 43 of Law Number 1 year 1974 concerning marriage and analysis to determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM. The autor uses the methode of normative legal research. Article 43 of Law number 1 year 1974 on marriage states that an illegitimate child only has a legal relationship with mother and her family. Legal actions that can be done to an illegitimate child has a legal relationship with his father and his father’s family is throught the recognition and validation of an illegitimate child at the time of his parents marriage. If parents of an illegitimate child negligent conduct agains an illegitimate child endorsement, can be done in state court determination as described in Article 32 paragraph 2 of Law number 26 year 2006 concerning administration of residence. In determination of district court number: 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.Jkt.Tim an illegitimate child’s parents do not approve of the marriage of their children at the time of marriage, so requast a court warrant. Recognation and validation of child who has exceeded a predetermined time period Article 49 and Article 50 of Law Number 24 year 2013 concerning changes to the Law number of 2006 concerning administration of residence must go through a court warrant. Autors agrees with the legal considerations in determination of district court number 55/Pdt.P/2014/PN.JKT.TIM.]

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Rencana Kerja dan Anggaran Tahunan (untuk selanjutnya disebut "RKAT") dalam perseroan terbatas adalah instrumen yang penting sebagai dasar dan arah dalam pengurusan perseroan. Tetapi pengaturan RKAT dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas tidak rinci. Pembuatan RKAT juga tidak diwajibkan dalam undang-undang tersebut. Tesis ini membahas mengenai permasalahan-permasalahan hukum terkait dengan RKAT tersebut: perihal pembuatan RKAT menjadi dokumentasi hukum yang mengikat dan isinya, perihal perubahan RKAT dan syarat-syaratnya. Hal-hal tersebut tidak diakomodir dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, tetapi telah terdapat beberapa putusan pengadilan antara lain putusan kasasi Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2740K/PID/2006 dan penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Bandung Nomor 169/Pdt.P/2016/PN.BDG yang mewajibkan organ perseroan membuat RKAT secara tertulis. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis-normatif dengan menggunakan analisis kualitatif atas data primer dan data sekunder. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa RKAT harus dibuat secara tertulis dan disetujui oleh dewan komisaris ataupun rapat umum pemegang saham, dan karenanya mengikat dan mempunyai kekuatan hukum.

---

ABSTRACT
Annual work plan and budget in a limited liability company is an important instrument as basis and guidance in managing the company. However, Law No. 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Company did not provide detailed regulation on it. Annual work plan and budget is not obliged to be made under the law. This thesis reviews legal issues related to the annual work plan and budget: concerning the inception of annual work plan and budget to become a binding legal document and its content, concerning amendment and terms for amendment of annual work plan and budget. Such matter is not accommodated in laws and regulations, but there were several court decision such as Supreme Court decision No. 2740K/PID/2006 and District Court of Bandung Stipulation No. 169/Pdt.P/2016/PN.BDG that oblige company organs to make annual work plan and budget in written. This research is a normative legal research with qualitative analysis on primary and secondary data. This research shows that annual work plan and budget must be made in written and approved by board of commissioners or the general meeting of shareholders, and therefore it shall be effective and binding.

Abstrak :
RUPS merupakan salah satu Organ dalam Perseroan Terbatas. Dlaam suatu tindakan hukum tertentu, Perseroan memerlukan persetujuan RUPSLB sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Dalam kasus Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat Nomor 425/PDT.P/2007/PN.JKT.BAR. SD selaku Direktur utama PT PJM dan pemilik 40% saham perseroan ingin mengalihkan sahamnya, sehingga untuk proses ini harus dilakukan melalui prosedur RUPSLB. Beberapa RUPSLB yang telah dilakukan tidak memenuhi kuorum sehingga tidak dapat dilaksanakan dan mengambil keputusan, hingga pada sebelum dilaksanakannya RUPSLB terakhir, Perseroan sudah melakukan permohonan penetapan kuorum sehubungan dengan RUPSLB tersebut ke Panitera Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat. Dalam permohonan pemohon, pemohon mengajukan beberapa alasan yang menjadi dasar permohonannya sehubungan dengan RUPSLB tersebut, dan pada putusannya Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat mengabulkan seluruh permohonan pemohon. Penelitian ini dilakukan berdasarkan metode penelitian kepustakaan yang bersifat yuridis normatif dengan cara mengkaji berbagai literatur seperti buku-buku cetak, dan turunan penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat yang dimaksud. Terhadap kasus Penetapan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat Nomor 425/PDT.P/2007/PN.J KT.BAR, dilakukan penelitian terhadap beberapa hal, yakni apakah alasan permohonan pemohon sah untuk mengajukan penetapan pengadilan RUPSLB ketiga ke Pengadilan Negeri, dan apakah notaris dapat hadir dan membuat berita acara RUPS berdasarkan penetapan yang dikeluarkan oleh Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Barat. Pemohon melampaui dari apa yang ditetapkan sehingga, dalam proses permohonan pengadilan tidak dapat menetapkan hal-hal diluar kewengan yang diatur dalam UUPT, dan terhadap notaris yang hadir dalam RUPSLB tersebut maka notaris memiliki wewenang untuk memberikan penyuluhan hukum dan notaris hanya bertanggung jawab atas kebenaran formil dari akta tersebut, bukan atas kebenaran materilnya.

---

General Meeting Of Shareholder are one of three limited liability company organs. On several particular legal pretence, the company require the general meeting of shareholders consent based on law number 40 of 2007. The west Jakarta District Court?s order (Penetapan Pengadilan) case number 425/PDT.P/2007/PN.JKY.BAR.PERSEROAN, Mr. SD as the president director of PJM Company and as the owner of 40% of share in the company desire to sell his share, therefore it require an extraordinary general meeting of shareholders procedure. The remain proceeding extraordinary general meeting of shareholders does not meet the quorum, hence it does not adopting resolutions. Moreover, before the previous general meeting of shareholders adjourn, the company submit a proposal to west Jakarta District Court regarding the general meeting of shareholders quorum court?s order. The applicant subjected a number of proposals along with the court complete granted. This research is normative juridiche based on library research methodology, conducted by way of reviewing literatures which have no limitation in time and place, including book research results, laws and regulations either printed or online which related to the research. The research set two main predicament based on The west Jakarta District Court?s order case. There are, the legitimacy of applicant proposal regarding to the extraordinary general meeting of shareholder quorum court?s order, and the role of notary to be present at the extraordinary general meeting of shareholders in order to form a minutes based on west Jakarta district court?s order (Penetapan Pengadilan). In summary, court is not allowed to granted a proposal in which not constitute on the law, hence notary has the authority to provide a legal advice and has the responsible no more than the formality form of the deeds.