Deed of Settlement as A Dispute Object based on HIR and Supreme Court Regulation No. 1/2016

Hazar Kusmayanti, Lucky Dharmawan

Abstract


Introduction to The Problem: It is uncommon for a case that has been decided by a judge and has the legal force to be retained and then brought back to Court by one party for a lawsuit. This kind of case contradicts the principles and applicable law, such as the case that the researcher found in Case No. 22/Pdt.G/2016/PN. Sal.

Purpose/Objective Study: This paper intends to discuss the legal problem of the re-submission of the deed of settlement as the object of a breach.

Design/Methodology/Approach: This research is doctrinal legal research. The data are secondary data which analyzed qualitatively. Following the approach method used, the study is conducted on norms and principles contained in secondary data, from the primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials

Findings: The results of the study show that, first, deed of settlement cannot be an object of default because it has been inkracht. Secondly, Salatiga court judges did not consider the principle of ne bis in idem under Article 10 (1) The Judicial Power Act. The president of judges shall be able to carry out the role or power under Article 119 of the HIR, which is to provide advice to those who wish to file a lawsuit.

Paper Type: Research Article.


Keywords


ne bis in idem, deed of settlement, inkracht

Full Text:

PDF

References


Agung, A. A. I. (2016). Akta perdamaian notariil dalam pembuktian di pegadilan. Jurnal Notariil, 1(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.22225/jn.1.1.107.51-68

Aulia, M. Z. (2018). Hukum pembangunan dari mochtar kusumaatmadja: mengarahkan pembangunan atau mengabdi pada pembangunan? Undang: Jurnal Hukum, 1(2), 363–392. https://doi.org/10.22437/ujh.1.2.363-392

Bernard, D. (2011). Ne bis in idem protector of defendants’ rights or jurisdictional pointsman? Journal of International Criminal Justice, 9. https://doi.org/doi:10.1093/jicj/mqr018

Butarbutar, E. N. (2018). Asas ne bis in idem dalam gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum: kajian putusan nomor 65/PDT.G/2013/PN-RAP. Jurnal Yudisial, 11(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v11i1.167

Damis, H. (2018). Konflik kewenangan absolut pengadilan akibat penentuan pokok sengketa yang berbeda. Jurnal Yudisial, 11(1), 75–89. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.29123/jy.v11i1.20

Firmansyah, Y. R. (2017). Kekuatan hukum akta perdamaian yang dibuat dihadapan notaris dan putusan akta perdamaian pengadilan. Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum, 8(2), 220–229. https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v8i2.2114

Harahap, M. Y. (2017). Hukum acara perdata. Sinar Grafika.

Ivan, R. S. (2016). Tinjauan yuridis tentang peranan identitas domisili dalam menentukan kompetensi relatif pengadilan. Lex Privatum, IV(1), 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

Jacob, J. (2010). The reform of civil procedural law. The Law Teacher Journal, 44. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03069400.1980.9992524

Khaira, U. (2018). Pelaksanaan upaya perdamaian dalam perkara perceraian (suatu kajian terhadap putusan verstek pada Mahkamah Syar’iyah Bireuen). Jurnal Penelitian Hukum De Jure, 18(3), 319–334.

Latipulhayat, A. (2014). Khazanah Mochtar Kusumaatmadja. In Padjadjaran Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Vol. 1, Issue 3, pp. 626–642).

Melani. (2014). Disparitas putusan terkait penafsiran pasal 2 dan 3 uu pemberantasan tindak pidana korupsi. Jurnal Yudisial, 7(2), 103–116.

Mertokusomo, S. (2009). Hukum acara perdata di Indonesia. Liberty.

Mulyana, D. (2019). Kekuatan hukum hasil mediasi di dalam pengadilan dan di luar pengadilan menurut hukum positif. Jurnal Wawasan Yuridika, 3(2), 177. https://doi.org/10.25072/jwy.v3i2.224

Murniati, R. (2016). Relevansi dan kekuatan hukum akta perdamaian dalam penyelesaian sengketa di bidang ekonomi. Fiat Justisia, 9(1), 89–102. https://doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v9no1.590

Noor, T., Gulo, M., & Putri, M. I. (2019). Analisis Hukum terhadap penyelesaian sengketa hutang piutang melalui akta perdamaian (studi putusan nomor: 1/Pdt.G.S/2017/PN. Blg). Jurnal Hukum Kaidah: Media Komunikasi Dan Informasi Hukum Dan Masyarakat, 18(3).

Paputungan, R. P. (2017). Kedudukan hukum akta perdamaian yang ditetapkan oleh hakim menurut hukum acara perdata. Lex Crimen, VI(8), 1689–1699.

Soemitro, R. H. (1980). Metodologi penelitian hukum dan jurimetri. Ghalia Indonesia.

Sri Mamudji. (2004). Mediasi Sebagai alternatif penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan. hukum dan pembangunan, 34(3), 194–209.

Sutantio, R. W., & Oeripkartawinata, I. (2009). Hukum acara perdata dalam teori dan praktek. Mandar Maju.

Wicaksana, Y. P. (2018). Implementasi asas ius curia novit dalam penafsiran hukum putusan hakim tentang keabsahan penetapan tersangka. Jurnal Lex Renaissance, 3(1), 86–108. https://doi.org/10.20885/jlr.vol3.iss1.art3




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26555/novelty.v11i2.a16092

Article Metrics

Abstract view : 0 times
PDF - 0 times

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2020 Jurnal Hukum Novelty

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Hukum Novelty

ISSN 1412-6834 (Print)

ISSN 2550-0090 (Online)

Creative Commons License
This journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Jurnal Hukum Novelty Stats

 

Jurnal Hukum Novelty is indexed by:

 

   

 

Jurnal Hukum Novelty is member of:

 

Translator/Proofreader Partnership: