Ananda, Fauzan Rahmat
Unknown Affiliation

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

Comparison of The Imposition of The Doctrine of Piercing The Corporate Veil in a Limited Liability Company Between The Board of Directors and Shareholders in Terms of Law Number 40 Of 2007 Concerning Limited Liability Company Ananda, Fauzan Rahmat; Widyawati, Sri
Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum Vol. 23 No. 1 (2024): Pena Justisia
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pekalongan

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31941/pj.v23i1.3698

Abstract

The purpose of writing this journal is to determine the comparison of the imposition of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in a Limited Liability Company between the Board of Directors and shareholders, with a review of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies (UUPT). The Doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil is a doctrine that has long been present in the business world, especially attached to the legal entity of Limited Liability Companies in Indonesia. UUPT as the law governing Limited Liability Companies in Indonesia has set out the rules regarding the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil. The doctrine has historically been widely used in court decisions, the presence of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil can penetrate the distinctive nature of a Limited Liability Company, namely limited liability. Departing from this inevitability, the author then formulates the problem in writing this journal, namely why there is a doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in a Limited Liability Company and how the comparison of the imposition of the doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil in a Limited Liability Company between the Board of Directors and shareholders is reviewed from the Company Law. The research method used is normative legal research, based on sources obtained through literature studies, in the form of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials related to the writing of this journal. This research shows that the presence of the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil in a Limited Liability Company is needed as a form of legal protection for the Limited Liability Company entity and its related parties, and there are differences in the imposition of the doctrine on the Board of Directors of the company and the company's shareholders. The difference in the imposition between the Board of Directors and the shareholders of the company is that, if the Board of Directors is required another article in relation to its good faith in running the company (fiduciary duty), while the shareholders of the company are expressly regulated in Article 3 of the Company Law.
SECURITY OF CHINA’S WARSHIP AND COAST GUARD ON ILLEGAL FISHING ACTIVITIES OF CHINA FISHERMAN IN SOUTH CHINA SEA REVIEWED FROM UNCLOS 1982 AND PRINCIPLE NON INTERVENTION Ananda, Fauzan Rahmat
BELLI AC PACIS (Jurnal Hukum Internasional) Vol 7, No 2 (2021): December 2021
Publisher : Faculty of Law Universitas Sebelas Maret

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20961/belli.v7i2.68804

Abstract

This research aims to determine the security of China’s warship and coast guard on illegal fishing activities of China fisherman in South China Sea reviewed from UNCLOS 1982 and principle nonintervention, with the background of various illegal fishing incidents in the South China Sea which are often protected by Chinese warships and coast guard. This research was normative legal with case approach and statute approach. The data used secondary data. The characteristic used prescriptive legal research. The techniques in the gathering of legal materials in this research was library research. This research uses deduction methods of analysis techniques, namely stemming from the rule of law and legal facts and then drawn into conclusions. From this research showed that the security of China’s warship and coast guard on illegal fishing activities of their fisherman is an act that is contrary to international law, as reviewed from UNCLOS 1982 and principle non-intervention.