A Review Model Of Pailit Decision By The Niaga Court
Keywords:
Legal Consequences, Bankruptcy Declaration Decision, Commercial CourtAbstract
Bankruptcy law in Indonesia is regulated by Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004. Bankruptcy occurs when a debtor is unable to pay their overdue debts. A bankruptcy court decision results in a public seizure of the debtor's entire estate. In Case Nomor 2/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2018/Pn.Niaga.Mdn, PT. Tri Murti Perkasa and Hotmaulin Simare-Mare, filed a bankruptcy petition against PT. Pro Mekanika Indonusa. The second petitioner also claims a debt from the company. The judge ruled for bankruptcy against PT. Pro Mekanika Indonusa, and Balai Harta Peninggalan (BHP) Medan was appointed as the Curator. Legal consequences of bankruptcy include the debtor losing control over their assets, the appointment of a supervising judge and curator, and the judge deciding on costs. The legal process must meet legal requirements and consider juridical, philosophical, and sociological considerations. To enhance the efficiency of the bankruptcy process, it is necessary to revise bankruptcy legal regulations, supervising judges and curators must maintain transparency, and the panel of judges must carefully examine evidence to avoid baseless lawsuits.
Downloads
References
Aji, R. (2018). Akibat Hukum Putusan Pernyataan Pailit Pengadilan Niaga Nomor 03/Pdt. Sus-Pailit/2015/Pn. Niaga. Smg Terhadap Harta Kekayaan Debitor Serta Perbuatan Hukum Debitor.
Anisah, S. (2008). Perlindungan kepentingan kreditor dan debitor dalam hukum kepailitan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta
Bambang Waluyo. (2014). Penelitian Hukum Dalam Praktek, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta
Dominikus Rato. (2015). Filsafat Hukum Mencari: Memahami dan Memahami Hukum, Laksbang Pressindo, Yogyakarta.
Hadi Shubhan. (2019). Hukum Kepailitan-Prinsip, Norma, dan Praktik di Peradilan, Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
I Made Pasek Diantha (2016). Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif, Prenada Media Group, Jakarta.
Lontoh, Rudhy A., dkk. (2017) Penyelesaian Utang Piutang Melalui Kepalitan atau Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, Alumni, Bandung.
Mulyadi, L. (2010). Perkara kepailitan dan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU): teori dan praktik: dilengkapi putusan-putusan Pengadilan Niaga. Praktik, Alumni, Bandung
Nating, Imran. (2015) Peranan dan Tanggung Jawab Kurator dalam Pengurusan dan Pemberesan Harta Pailit, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Salsabila, N. F. (2021). Implementasi Pembuktian Terhadap Fakta Atau Keadaan Sederhana Dalam Permohonan Pernyataan Pailit (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Islam Indonesia).
Sidabutar, L. M. J. (2019). Hukum Kepailitan dalam Eksekusi Harta Benda Korporasi sebagai Pembayaran Uang Pengganti. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 5(2), 75-86.
Soerjono Soekanto. (2014). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum, Universitas Indonesia Pers.
Sompie, E. (2014). Akibat Hukum Putusan Pengadilan Niaga Terhadap Debitor Yang Dinyatakan Pailit Berdasarkan Undang-undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004. Lex Privatum, 2(2).
Sutandyo Wignjosoebroto. (2013). Hukum Konsep dan Metode, Setara Press, Malang.
Yani, A., & Widjaja, G. (2002). Seri Hukum Bisnis Kepailitan. PT RajaGrafindo Persada, Jakarta.
Yuhelson, D. Y., (2016). Prioritas Pembagian Harta Kekayaan Debitor Pailit (Boedel Pailit) Terhadap Kreditor Preferen Dan Kreditor Separatis Berdasarkan Prinsip-Prinsip Keadilan Dan Kepastian Hukum (Doctoral dissertation, Universitas Jayabaya).
Yuhelson. (2019). Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia, Ideas Publishing, Gorontalo.
