Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

PPAT'S Responsibilities in Preparing a Deed of Mortgage Rights that is Cancelled by a Court Decision (Study Decision No. 136/Pdt.G/2019 PN Ckr) Noviana Putri, Della; Wahyudi, Trubus
Jurnal Konstatering Vol 4, No 4 (2025): October 2025
Publisher : Master of Notarial Law, Faculty of Law, Sultan Agung Islamic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Land Deed Officials, as public officials, are authorized to issue authentic deeds related to legal acts on land, including APHTs, which are crucial for granting mortgages to secure loans. However, courts often revoke APHTs, as in decision 136/Pdt.G/2019/PN Ckr, due to negligence on the part of Land Deed Officials (PPATs) in examining land documents or status, leading to legal uncertainty and losses for creditors. Therefore, a review of the authority and responsibilities of PPATs in issuing APHTs that have been revoked by the court is necessary to strengthen legal certainty and protection for the parties. This research uses a normative (doctrinal) legal method that focuses on the study of written or secondary legal materials. The approaches employed include a statutory approach to analyze applicable legal provisions, a conceptual approach to understand legal doctrine and principles, and a case approach to examine court decisions regarding the annulment of APHTs to examine the judge's considerations and their legal implications. The research results show that the Land Deed Making Officer (PPAT) is a public official authorized to make authentic deeds, including the Deed of Granting Mortgage Rights (APHT), to ensure legal certainty for creditors and debtors. In making APHT, PPAT is obliged to check the validity of the certificate, ensure the identity of the parties, the value of the mortgage, and the object of the mortgage right according to legal requirements, maintain independence and professionalism, make a valid authentic deed, and register the deed on time with the land office. By working carefully and meticulously, PPAT prevents legal defects, disputes, and the risk of administrative, civil, and criminal liability, so that APHT can be valid and provide legal protection for all parties.
Legal Implications of Determining Heirs Without a Certificate of Heirs (Study of Bogor District Court Decision No: 147/Pdt.G/2017/Pn.Bgr) Timbul, Jonatan; Wahyudi, Trubus
TABELLIUS: Journal of Law Vol 4, No 1 (2026): March 2026
Publisher : Master of Notarial Law, Faculty of Law, Sultan Agung Islamic University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

This study discusses the legal implications of determining heirs without a Certificate of Inheritance (SKW) by studying the Bogor District Court Decision No. 147/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Bgr. The main focus of the study is legal protection for heirs who do not have a SKW in applications for inheritance determination through the court and its impact on the legal certainty of inheritance. The study uses a normative juridical method with a case analysis approach, based on studies of court decisions, laws and regulations. legislation (Civil Code, judicial regulations, and land regulations), Compilation of Islamic Law, as well as the doctrines of inheritance law experts, legal certainty, and legal protection. The results of the study indicate that legal protection for heirs without a SKW can still be realized through the mechanism of determining heirs by the court, as long as the inheritance relationship is materially proven through written evidence, witnesses, and confessions of the parties which are then formalized in a decision or deed of reconciliation. The court's decision in Decision No. 147/Pdt.G/2017/PN.Bgr functions functionally to replace the SKW because it explicitly determines the identity of the heir, the list of heirs, and their position regarding the inheritance so that it can be used as an administrative basis before third parties such as banks and the National Land Agency. From the perspective of legal certainty, this judicial path is able to provide certainty comparable to the existence of the SKW, but at the same time raises normative challenges in the form of potential disparities in assessments and standards of proof between courts if not followed by uniform guidelines.