Legal Consequences of Third Party Resistance to Assets Encumbered with Mortgage Rights (Study of Decision Number 46/Pdt.Bth/2016/PN. Smr)

Dhiya Fitriyah Rahmadiyanti

Abstract


Legal certainty is very important for every Indonesian citizen as a subject holding land rights, therefore the State must guarantee every rights holder to obtain legal protection as a certificate of proof of the rights they have and as strong and perfect evidence if a dispute occurs in the future. The purpose of this thesis research is to study the law on the resistance of third parties as holders of mortgage rights when viewed from the aspects of justice, legal consequences and legal certainty in Decision Number 46 / Pdt.Bth / 2016 / PN.Smr and How are the legal consequences of third party resistance to assets that are subject to mortgage rights when viewed from Decision Number 46 / Pdt.Bth / 2016 / PN.Smr. This study uses the Normative Juridical method. The data sources obtained are in the form of primary data sources and secondary data sources, namely Court Decisions and related Laws. This research was conducted by examining the Samarinda District Court Decision. The results of this study, when viewed based on the theory of justice, legal consequences and legal certainty, are fair enough for the winning party, but unfair for the third party as the holder of the Mortgage Right. The legal consequences for the third party are clearly disadvantaged because the third party is not allowed to file a third party objection. Viewed from the legal certainty side, the Panel of Judges has also not carried out legal considerations as its rights in a concrete manner because there are two references, so this creates a side of legal uncertainty.

References


Bambang Sutiyoso, (2004), “Implementasi Gugatan Legal Standing Dan Class Action Dalam Praktik Peradilan Di Indonesia”, Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Justum, No. 11, Vol. 26, FH UII, Yogyakarta.

Busyro Mugaddas, (2002), “Mengkritik Asas-Asas Hukum Acara Perdata”, Jumal Hukum Ius Quia Tustum, No. 9, Vol. 20, FH UII, Yogyakarta.

Hartini, (2009), “Pengecualian Terhadap Penerapan Asas Ultra Petitum Partum Dalam Beracara di Pengadilan Agama”, Jurnal Mimbar Hukum, Vol. 21, FH UGM, Yogyakarta.

Herowati Poesoko, (2013), Dinamika Hokum Parate Executie Objek Hak Tanggungan, Yogyakarta : CV. Aswaja Pressindo.

Kamus Hukum Edisi Lengkap, (1977), Bahasa Belanda-Indonesia-Inggris, Semarang : Aneka.

Luki Indrawati, (2007), “Rekontruksi Legal Reasoning Hakim (Sudut Pandang Epistimologis Terhadap Logika Hukum)”, Jurnal Media Hukum, No. 3, Vol. 14, FH Universitas Muhammadiyah, Yogyakarta.

M. Syamsudin, (2011), “Rekonstruksi Pola Pikir Hakim Dalam Memutuskan Perkara Korupsi Berbasis Hukum Progresif”, Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, No. 1, Vol. 11, FH Universitas Jenderal Soedirman, Purwokerto.

M. Yahya Harahap, (2005), Hukum Acara Perdata, Jakarta : Sinar Grafika.

Peter Mahmud Marzuki, (2015), Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta : Prenadamedia Group.

Rachmadi Usman, (2001), Aspek-Aspek Hukum Perbankan Di Indonesia, Jakarta : PT. Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Ratih Prihatina, Mengenal Kolektibilitas (Kol) Kredit Perbankan Kaitannya Dengan dengan Undang-Undang No 4 Tahun 1996 (UUHT), https://www.djkn.kemenkeu.go.id/kpknl-pekalongan/baca-artikel/14713/Mengenal-Kolektibilitas-Kol-Kredit-Perbankan-Kaitannya-Dengan-dengan-Undang-Undang-No-4-Tahun-1996-UUHT.html diakses tanggal 24 Mei 2024.

Ronny Hanitijo Soemitro, (1982), Metodologi Penelitian Hukum, Jakarta : Ghalia Indonesia.

Soerjono Soekanto dan Sri Mamudji, (2004), Penelitian Hukum Normatif : Suatu Tinjauan Singkat, Jakarta : Sinar Grafika.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.