判决18号/PUU-XVII/2019号宪法法院判决物后执行受托人保释

Wiwin Dwi Ratna Febriyanti
{"title":"判决18号/PUU-XVII/2019号宪法法院判决物后执行受托人保释","authors":"Wiwin Dwi Ratna Febriyanti","doi":"10.36913/JHAPER.V6I2.128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Fiduciary guarantees have existed in society since the Dutch colonial era because the fl exibility of objects that can be imposed by fi duciary increases the need for legal certainty for the guarantee of this model. UUJF requires the registration of fi duciary security to be imposed. Registration is carried out at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to obtain a fi duciary certifi cate. The fi duciary certifi cate contains irah-irah which the power of execution so that the execution can be carried out immediately without going through a court and is final as explained in article 15 paragraph (2). In practice, this article often becomes a polemic in the community, causing actions against the law and even criminal acts when the fi duciary recipient wants to execute fi duciary collateral. After the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, in its decision to redefi ne article 15 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) UUJF, Based on this, this research discusses the executive power of the fi duciary security certifi cate after The Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. With statutory approach, and a conceptual approach, the conclusion is that the power of execution title in the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is not changed, it’s just a legal consequence arising from the Constitutional Court decision number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, namely the implementation mechanism for the execution of the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is carried out the same as the execution of court decisions that have permanent legal force (inkrah), when the grantor of fi duciary does not voluntarily surrender the object of fi duciary security under his control. Apart from that, it must be agreed by the parties regarding breach of contract. breach of contract should be detailed in the main agreement and the imposition of fi duciary security.","PeriodicalId":426891,"journal":{"name":"ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"EKSEKUSI OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 18/PUU-XVII/2019\",\"authors\":\"Wiwin Dwi Ratna Febriyanti\",\"doi\":\"10.36913/JHAPER.V6I2.128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Fiduciary guarantees have existed in society since the Dutch colonial era because the fl exibility of objects that can be imposed by fi duciary increases the need for legal certainty for the guarantee of this model. UUJF requires the registration of fi duciary security to be imposed. Registration is carried out at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to obtain a fi duciary certifi cate. The fi duciary certifi cate contains irah-irah which the power of execution so that the execution can be carried out immediately without going through a court and is final as explained in article 15 paragraph (2). In practice, this article often becomes a polemic in the community, causing actions against the law and even criminal acts when the fi duciary recipient wants to execute fi duciary collateral. After the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, in its decision to redefi ne article 15 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) UUJF, Based on this, this research discusses the executive power of the fi duciary security certifi cate after The Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. With statutory approach, and a conceptual approach, the conclusion is that the power of execution title in the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is not changed, it’s just a legal consequence arising from the Constitutional Court decision number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, namely the implementation mechanism for the execution of the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is carried out the same as the execution of court decisions that have permanent legal force (inkrah), when the grantor of fi duciary does not voluntarily surrender the object of fi duciary security under his control. Apart from that, it must be agreed by the parties regarding breach of contract. breach of contract should be detailed in the main agreement and the imposition of fi duciary security.\",\"PeriodicalId\":426891,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36913/JHAPER.V6I2.128\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36913/JHAPER.V6I2.128","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

信托担保自荷兰殖民时代以来就存在于社会中,因为信托可以强加的对象的灵活性增加了保障这种模式的法律确定性的需要。ujf要求对财务担保进行登记。在法律和人权部进行登记,以获得教育证书。信托证书包含irah-irah,即执行权,因此执行可以立即进行,而无需通过法院,并且如第15条第(2)款所述,是最终的。在实践中,这条经常成为社会上的争论,当信托受赠人想要执行信托抵押品时,会引发违法行为甚至犯罪行为。在宪法法院第18/PUU-XVII/2019号判决书对《宪法联合条例》第15条第(2)项和第(3)项进行重新定义后,本研究在此基础上,讨论了宪法法院第18/PUU-XVII/2019号判决书后金融担保证书的行政权。通过法定方法和概念方法,得出结论:担保保证书中的执行权并没有发生变化,它只是宪法法院第18/PUU-XVII/2019号判决所产生的一种法律后果,即担保保证书的执行机制与具有永久法律效力的法院判决的执行机制相同。设保人不自愿交出其所控制之担保物。除此之外,双方还必须就违约达成协议。违约应在主要协议和强制金融担保中详细说明。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
EKSEKUSI OBJEK JAMINAN FIDUSIA PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 18/PUU-XVII/2019
Fiduciary guarantees have existed in society since the Dutch colonial era because the fl exibility of objects that can be imposed by fi duciary increases the need for legal certainty for the guarantee of this model. UUJF requires the registration of fi duciary security to be imposed. Registration is carried out at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights to obtain a fi duciary certifi cate. The fi duciary certifi cate contains irah-irah which the power of execution so that the execution can be carried out immediately without going through a court and is final as explained in article 15 paragraph (2). In practice, this article often becomes a polemic in the community, causing actions against the law and even criminal acts when the fi duciary recipient wants to execute fi duciary collateral. After the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, in its decision to redefi ne article 15 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) UUJF, Based on this, this research discusses the executive power of the fi duciary security certifi cate after The Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. With statutory approach, and a conceptual approach, the conclusion is that the power of execution title in the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is not changed, it’s just a legal consequence arising from the Constitutional Court decision number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, namely the implementation mechanism for the execution of the fi duciary guarantee certifi cate is carried out the same as the execution of court decisions that have permanent legal force (inkrah), when the grantor of fi duciary does not voluntarily surrender the object of fi duciary security under his control. Apart from that, it must be agreed by the parties regarding breach of contract. breach of contract should be detailed in the main agreement and the imposition of fi duciary security.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
DIRUMAHKANNYA PEKERJA YANG BERUJUNG PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA (PHK) PADA MASA PANDEMI COVID-19 SECARA SEPIHAK BERDASARKAN PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KETENAGAKERJAAN SECARA NON LITIGASI PERANAN DISNAKERTRANS DALAM MELAKUKAN MEDIASI PERSELISIHAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL DI MASA PANDEM PEMBUBARAN PERSEROAN TERBATAS YANG DIAJUKAN OLEH PEMEGANG SAHAM YANG MEMILIKI PERSENTASE SAHAM BERIMBANG MELALUI PENETAPAN PENGADILAN KEDUDUKAN PARATE EKSEKUSI PADA JAMINAN FIDUSIA DENGAN PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 18/PUU-XVII/2019 KOMPETENSI ABSOLUT PENGADILAN NIAGA SEBAGAI LEMBAGA PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA UTANG PIUTANG
×
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