Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

Kewenangan Pengadilan Negeri dalam Menetapkan Ketidakhadiran (Afwezigheid) Pemegang Saham Perusahaan Terbuka (Analisis Penetapan Nomor 110/Pdt.P/2025/Pn.Jkt.Pst.) Gigih Primandiansah; Hendrawarman Hendrawarman
Decisio: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Vol 3 No 2 (2026): DECISIO
Publisher : LPPM Iblam School of Law

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.52249/decisio.v3i2.57

Abstract

The petition for absence (afwezigheid) in corporate law practice in Indonesia has become an important instrument in resolving obstacles arising from the inactivity of public shareholders in the go-private process. This article analyzes the Central Jakarta District Court's Decision Number 110/Pdt.P/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst. regarding the petition for absence (afwezigheid) filed by PT Onix Capital Tbk. due to the absence of PT Onix Capital Tbk's public shareholders. The study uses a normative juridical method on a court ruling. The results of the study indicate that the court has the authority to provide legal legitimacy for corporations to continue the process from a public company to a private company (going private), by considering evidence of efforts to summon absent public shareholders. This ruling also strengthens the function and authority of the court in ensuring legal certainty while raising new challenges regarding legal protection for minority investors. Based on legal considerations in Decision Number 110/Pdt.P/2025/PN.Jkt.Pst, the Central Jakarta District Court deemed that the application for a determination of absence (afwezigheid) submitted by PT Onix Capital Tbk was a voluntary application within the court's authority and aimed at obtaining legal certainty. The absence of 401 public shareholders was deemed to have fulfilled the elements of afwezigheid as referred to in Article 463 of the Civil Code.
Analisis Perdamaian Kreditor dan Debitor Atas Permohonan PKPU Sebelum Terbitnya Putusan (Studi Kasus Perkara No. 87/Pdt.sus-PKPU/2025/PN.Niaga Jkt Pst) Hermanto Hermanto; Hendrawarman Hendrawarman
HUMANIORUM Vol 4 No 3 (2026): Jurnal Humaniorum
Publisher : PT Elaborium Elevasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.37010/hmr.v4i3.184

Abstract

The Application for Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) is a legal remedy that aims to provide the Debtor with the opportunity to formulate a debt settlement plan for creditors to prevent bankruptcy, but in practice it does not always continue until a court decision due to the withdrawal of the PKPU application. The withdrawal of the PKPU application is based on a peace settlement between the creditor and the debtor that occurs outside the court. Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (Law No. 37/2004) does not regulate such a peace settlement. This study aims to analyze the legal status of peace settlements between creditors and debtors outside the court and the legal basis for the withdrawal of the PKPU application before the court decision. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory, conceptual, and case approach, specifically Decision Number 87/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2025/PN. The results of the study show that the legal status of peace between creditors and debtors outside the court is not regulated in Law No. 37/2004, while the revocation of the PKPU application is carried out based on Article 271 of the Reglement op de Rechtsvordering (Rv) which is the principle of Dominus Litis.