The Debtor's Juridical Analysis of Bankruptcy Decisions as A Consequence of Homologation Violations in Suspention of Payment
The case study decision numbers 20/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2019/PN.Smg, jo. Numbers 23/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2018/PN. Smg
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11653366Keywords:
Bankruptcy, Homologation, Peace Agreements, Commercial CourtsAbstract
Despite a peace agreement being legally enforceable and officially recognized and accepted by both parties, the debtor may choose not to proceed with it. If the debtor fails to meet their obligations, the creditor has the right to demand that the peace agreement be terminated and declare the debtor insolvent. When petitioning for the termination of this peace agreement, the judge will naturally consider the provided information as well as the relevant bankruptcy and PKPU laws, notably Law Number 37 of 2004. This research utilizes a normative juridical approach, which includes analytical and descriptive aspects. The research aims to scrutinize and analyze the legal factors considered by the Commercial Court judges at the Semarang District Court during the invalidation of the peace agreement 23/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2018/Pn. Smg, as well as the ratification of peace agreement number 24/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2018/Pn. Smg, as indicated in Decision Number 20/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2019/Pn. Smg and Jo. Number 23/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2018/Pn. Smg. The research findings indicate that the Case Examining Panel of Judges invalidated the approved peace agreement due to evidence of the debtor's violation of contract or negligence. This led to the declaration of the debtor's insolvency and the termination of the corresponding peace agreement.
Downloads
References
Aditya, T.A.C., “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Pembatalan Perjanjian Perdamaian Yang Telah Dihomologasi Karena Bertentangan Dengan Ketentuan Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU)”, Jurnal Dharmasisya: Program Magister Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Indonesia, Volume 1 Nomor 3, September 2021.
Fajar, M. & Yulianto Ahmad, 2010, Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif &Empiris, Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Fuady, M. 2014, Hukum Pailit dalam Teori dan Praktek, Bandung, Citra Aditya.
Hoff, J. 2000, UU Kepailitan di Indonesia, Jakarta, (Indonesia Bankruptcy Law) Terjemahan Kartini Muljadi, Tata Nusa.
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata
Lontoh, R.A., 2001, Penyelesaian Utang-Piutang Melalui Pailit atau Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, Bandung, Alumni.
Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Pada Pengadilan Negeri Semarang Tentang Putusan Penetapan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang Nomor: 23/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2018/Pn. Smg
Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Pada Pengadilan Negeri Semarang Tentang Pengesahan Perjanjian Perdamaian Nomor 24/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2018/Pn. Smg.
Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Pada Pengadilan Negeri Semarang Tentang Kepailitan Nomor 20/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2019/ Pn.Smg, Jo. Nomor 23/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2018/Pn. Smg
Saliman, A.R., 2004, Esensi Hukum Bisnis Indonesia, Jakarta: Kencana.
Santiago, F. 2012, Pengantar Hukum Bisnis, Jakarta, Mitra Wacana Media.
Simbolon, E. 2018, Tesis Pembatalan Perdamaian Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (Studi Putusan Niaga Jakarta Pusat Nomor 2/Pdt.Sus-Pembatalan Perdamaian/2016/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst Jo Nomor 8/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2015/Pn.Niaga.Jkt.Pst), Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum, Fakultas Hukum, Universitas Sriwijaya, Palembang
Soekanto, S. dan Sri Mamuji, 1995, Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Suatu Tujuan Singkat, Jakarta: Raja Grafindo.
Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Nanda Dwi Ardhia, Leli Joko Suryono, La Ode Muhammad Rafi’ud Darajat
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
