Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Journal of Law and Legal Reform
Jeffry Yuliyanto Waisapi
Faculty of Law, Universitas 17 Agustus 1945 Surabaya
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Is Legal Reform the Answer to Dispute Resolution in the Construction Services Sector? A Critical Look at Law No. 2 of 2017 Jeffry Yuliyanto Waisapi; Slamet Suhartono; Yovita Arie Mangesti; Rosalinda Elsina Latumahina; Felina C Young
Journal of Law and Legal Reform Vol. 5 No. 4 (2024): Contemporary Issues on Law Reform in Indonesia and Global Context
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/jllr.v5i4.4310

Abstract

Disputes in the construction services sector are inevitable due to the complexity of contracts, project delays, cost overruns, and quality issues. Law No. 2 of 2017 on Construction Services seeks to reform dispute resolution mechanisms by emphasizing alternative dispute resolution (ADR), mediation, and arbitration while ensuring legal certainty and fairness. This study analyzes these reforms using a quantitative survey approach to assess their effectiveness and identify existing gaps. The Construction Services Acts of 1999 and 2017 marked significant philosophical and procedural shifts, with the latter focusing on non-litigious settlements through a win-win approach. However, challenges remain, particularly regarding the interpretation of the term "court" and the enforcement of decisions. Findings indicate that while Law No. 2 of 2017 promotes ADR mechanisms, enforcement issues, contractual inconsistencies, and power imbalances between large developers and smaller contractors hinder its effectiveness. The Act also establishes a team formed by mutual agreement to oversee construction services and mediate disputes, yet concerns persist over defects, nonconformities, weaknesses, and perceived biases in its implementation. Despite these challenges, Indonesia is progressing toward more effective construction dispute resolution. To enhance future regulatory frameworks, this study recommends stricter sanctions for violations of construction agreements and improved procedural clarity. Comparative insights from international legal frameworks suggest that Indonesia could benefit from integrating global best practices, such as adjudication boards and expedited arbitration. These findings are crucial for legal practitioners and policymakers in refining dispute resolution mechanisms and raising public awareness of regulatory gaps that hinder sustainable development.
Is Indonesia’s Company Law Ready to Turn the Page on Outdated Liquidation Procedures? Jeffry Yuliyanto Waisapi
Journal of Law and Legal Reform Vol. 5 No. 3 (2024): Various Issues on Law Reform in Indonesia and Beyond
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.15294/jllr.v5i3.4335

Abstract

Business practices in Indonesia increasingly rely on Limited Liability Companies (LLCs), which are central to various sectors, including trade, industry, finance, and insurance. Liquidation, the process of dissolving an LLC and settling its assets, plays a critical role when a company ceases operations. This study examines the legal framework governing LLC liquidation under Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies (UUPT), using a normative juridical approach. It highlights the liquidator's role in the dissolution process, grounded in Article 1233 of the Indonesian Civil Code, which outlines that legal relationships arise from consent or law. Upon liquidation, the liquidator assumes responsibility for managing the company’s assets and liabilities, as mandated by Article 149, paragraph (1) of the UUPT. The liquidator’s duties include collecting assets, notifying creditors, publishing liquidation notices in newspapers and the State Gazette, and distributing remaining funds to shareholders. The liquidator must also provide a final report to the General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS) or the court for approval. Once the report is accepted, the LLC is formally dissolved and ceases to exist as a legal entity. This study reveals the need for reform in the liquidation procedures, emphasizing the complexity of managing the dissolution process in today’s interconnected business environment. With evolving commercial dynamics, the current legal framework may require updates to streamline liquidation and ensure more effective resolution for all stakeholders involved.
Co-Authors Felina C Young Rosalinda Elsina Latumahina Slamet Suhartono Yovita Arie Mangesti