Proof Power of Authentic Deed Transfer of Land Rights in Legal Perspective of Civil Procedures

Yuda Anrova, Eman Suparman, Hazar Kusmayanti
{"title":"Proof Power of Authentic Deed Transfer of Land Rights in Legal Perspective of Civil Procedures","authors":"Yuda Anrova, Eman Suparman, Hazar Kusmayanti","doi":"10.26555/NOVELTY.V12I2.A18604","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction to The Problem: Evidence is a process carried out by the parties in resolving disputes to prove the arguments presented before the judge who decides the legal dispute so that the judge can decide as fairly as possible. Evidence under the civil procedure law is regulated in Article 164 HIR. Supreme Court decision number 3591K/Pdt/2018 discusses documentary evidence in the form of an agreement to transfer and transfer land rights and states that the deed has no legal force. Purpose/Objective Study: The purpose of the study was to determine the legal considerations for the strength of authentic deed evidence in the Supreme Court Decision number 3591K/Pdt/2018, connected with civil procedural law. The research method used is a normative juridical approach to the research specification in descriptive-analytical analysis and qualitative normative. Design/Methodology/Approach: The method used in this research is normative juridical research which focuses on the applicable legal provisions. Findings: The research results that the authentic deed submitted by the Defendants in the Reconvention as evidence has external and formal evidentiary power. However, authentic deeds that are perfect and binding do not have a coercive or decisive character. Authentic deed evidence can be invalidated if there is evidence of the opponent which can prove otherwise. Based on the decision of the Supreme Court number 3591K/Pdt/2018, the Notarial Deed of the Transfer of Land Rights Agreement has no legal force because land rights have been transferred and building use rights are attached. Paper Type: Research Article","PeriodicalId":32116,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Hukum Novelty","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Hukum Novelty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26555/NOVELTY.V12I2.A18604","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction to The Problem: Evidence is a process carried out by the parties in resolving disputes to prove the arguments presented before the judge who decides the legal dispute so that the judge can decide as fairly as possible. Evidence under the civil procedure law is regulated in Article 164 HIR. Supreme Court decision number 3591K/Pdt/2018 discusses documentary evidence in the form of an agreement to transfer and transfer land rights and states that the deed has no legal force. Purpose/Objective Study: The purpose of the study was to determine the legal considerations for the strength of authentic deed evidence in the Supreme Court Decision number 3591K/Pdt/2018, connected with civil procedural law. The research method used is a normative juridical approach to the research specification in descriptive-analytical analysis and qualitative normative. Design/Methodology/Approach: The method used in this research is normative juridical research which focuses on the applicable legal provisions. Findings: The research results that the authentic deed submitted by the Defendants in the Reconvention as evidence has external and formal evidentiary power. However, authentic deeds that are perfect and binding do not have a coercive or decisive character. Authentic deed evidence can be invalidated if there is evidence of the opponent which can prove otherwise. Based on the decision of the Supreme Court number 3591K/Pdt/2018, the Notarial Deed of the Transfer of Land Rights Agreement has no legal force because land rights have been transferred and building use rights are attached. Paper Type: Research Article
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
民事诉讼法律视野下的土地确权证书转让证明权
问题简介:证据是当事人在解决纠纷时为证明在法官面前提出的论点而进行的一个过程,法官决定法律纠纷,从而使法官能够尽可能公正地作出裁决。民事诉讼法第一百六十四条规定了民事诉讼法的证据。最高法院第3591K/Pdt/2018号决定讨论了转让和转让土地权利协议形式的书面证据,并指出该契约不具有法律效力。目的/目的研究:本研究的目的是确定最高法院第3591K/Pdt/2018号判决中与民事诉讼法相关的真实契约证据强度的法律考虑。本文采用的研究方法是对描述性分析分析和定性规范的研究规范的规范性司法方法。设计/方法/途径:本研究使用的方法是规范性法律研究,侧重于适用的法律条款。研究发现:本案中被告提交的真实契约作为证据具有外在的正式证据力。然而,完备的、具有约束力的真实契约并不具有强制性或决定性。如果对方有证据证明事实并非如此,真实的契约证据可以无效。根据大法院第3591K/Pdt/2018号判决书,《土地权利转让协议公证书》已经转让了土地权利,附加了建筑物使用权,因此不具有法律效力。论文类型:研究论文
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊最新文献
Implications of Utilizing Protected Forest Areas for Geothermal Business: A Legal Analysis Local Examination in Child Custody Disputes: Judges’ Efforts to Find the Best Interests of the Child Understanding the Place of Islamic Arbitration within the Nigerian Law Legal Protection of HARA Platform Users on the Service of Electronic Data Interchange Legal Protection Policy for Obstetricians-Gynecologists in Cases of Maternal, Perinatal, and Neonatal Mortality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1