Unlawful Acts by Creditors in the Execution of Fiduciary Security Objects
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.25299/uirlrev.2024.vol8(1).16070Keywords:
Unlawful Acts, Execution, Fiduciary GuaranteeAbstract
This study aims to determine the occurrence of unlawful acts by creditors in the execution of fiduciary guarantees. The research method used is sociological legal research method. This research is descriptive analytical which provides an explanation of the description of the circumstances and conditions regarding Unlawful Acts by Creditors in the Execution of Fiduciary Guarantee Objects. Data collection by means of interviews, and literature study. Data analysis used is qualitative analysis. The actions of the creditor who continues to withdraw the fiduciary security object even though the debtor objects to voluntarily surrendering the fiduciary security object are unlawful because they are contrary to the rights of the debtor and the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. The debtor suffers a loss where the debtor loses the right to control the object of fiduciary guarantee. The creditor must be held accountable for his actions by providing compensation to the debtor in accordance with Article 1365 of the Civil Code
Downloads
References
Angelica Janwarin, K. Z., Mulyati, E., & Suryamah, A. (2023). Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Tanpa Melalui Putusan Pengadilan Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 2/Puu-Xix/2021. Syntax Literate ; Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia, 8(2). https://doi.org/10.36418/syntax-literate.v8i2.11379
Bouzen, R., & Ashibly, A. (2021). Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Terhadap Debitur Yang Wanprestasi Setelah Keluarnya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Jurnal Gagasan Hukum, 3(02). https://doi.org/10.31849/jgh.v3i02.8907
Fuady, M. (2014). Konsep Hukum Perdata. PT Rajagrafindo Persada.
Hadisaputro, P. (2021). Jaminan Fidusia, Eksekusi dan Permasalahannya. Adhi Sarana Nusantara.
Halipah, G., Purnama, D. F., Pratama, B. T., Suryadi, B., & Hidayat, F. (2023). Tinjauan Yuridis Konsep Perbuatan Melawan Hukum dalam Konteks Hukum Perdata. JURNAL PENELITIAN SERAMBI HUKUM, 16(01). https://doi.org/10.59582/sh.v16i01.923
Hanifah, M. (2016). Pengantar Hukum Perdata. Alaf Riau.
HS, S. (2014). Pengantar Hukum Perdata Tertulis (BW). Sinar Grafika.
Kamelo, T. (2006). Hukum Jaminan Fidusia Suatu Kebutuhan yang Didambakan. PT. Alumni Bandung.
Karelina, N., Abubakar, L., & Handayani, T. (2022). Implikasi Hukum Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU/XVII/2019 DAN Penegasannya Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 2/PUU-XIX/2021 Terhadap Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Dan Perumusan Klausula Perjanjian. ACTA DIURNAL Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kenotariatan, 5(2), 187–201. https://doi.org/10.23920/acta.v5i2.738
Mantili, R. (2022). Ganti Kerugian Immateriil Terhadap Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Dalam Praktik: Perbandingan Indonesia Dan Belanda. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum DE’JURE: Kajian Ilmiah Hukum, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.35706/dejure.v4i2.6460
Meliala, D. S. (2012). Hukum Perdata dalam Perspektif BW. Nuansa Aulia .
Rusli, T., Ainita, O., & Martawan, I. N. (2022). Analisis Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Dalam Perjanjian Pembiayaan Dan Pengakuan Hutang Oleh Pt. Finansia Multi Finance (Studi Putusan Nomor: 110/Pdt.G/2020/PN Tjk). Jurnal Pro Justitia (JPJ), 3(1). https://doi.org/10.57084/jpj.v3i1.556
Simanjuntak, P. N. H. (2017). Hukum Perdata Indonesia. Kencana.
Supianto, S., & Rumawi, R. (2022). Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 terhadap Pelaksaan Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia. DIVERSI : Jurnal Hukum, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.32503/diversi.v8i1.1181
Usman, R. (2009). Hukum Jaminan Keperdataan. Sinar Grafika.
Waluyo, B. (2002). Penelitian Hukum Dalam Praktek. Sinar Grafika.
Waluyo, B. (2022). Kajian Terhadap Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Berdasarkan Pada Pasal 1365 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Cakrawala Hukum: Majalah Ilmiah Fakultas Hukum Universitas Wijayakusuma, 24(1). https://doi.org/10.51921/chk.v24i1.186
Yani, A. (2001). Jaminan Fidusia. PT. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
