Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search
Journal : Warkat

Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Keabsahan Perjanjian Investasi Dalam Transaksi Initial Coin Offering (ICO) Berdasarkan Pasal 1320 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata: Juridical Analysis of Validity of Investment Agreement in Initial Coin Offering (ICO) according to Article 1320 of Civil Law Hashifah, Adinda Salwa; Sulistyarini, Rachmi; Ganindha, Ranitya
Warkat Vol. 3 No. 1 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Brawijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/warkat.v3n1.4

Abstract

Initial coin offering (henceforth referred to as ICO) as one of the investment developments in the digital era has left legal loopholes over the execution of the ICO in Indonesia, coupled with the emergence of cryptocurrency. This research aims to analyze the validity of an investment agreement on the ICO using cryptocurrency as a payment method along with its legal consequences. With normative-juridical methods, the research results have found out the agreement of the ICO is deemed unlawful according to Article 1320 of the Civil Code due to the clause contravening the legislation, leading to the failure of the fulfillment of the halal clause. Thus, the agreement is deemed to be void ab initio or simply inexistent. Due to the absence of the regulatory provision regulating the ICO, the investors involved could file a lawsuit over the violation harming the parties running the ICO. Thus, it is important to formulate regulatory provisions concerning the ICO in Indonesia that set forth the measures taken to provide legal protection for the aggrieved inventors due to the void ab initio agreement. These regulatory provisions are expected to avert any ICO-related problems as stated above.
Hambatan Pelaksanaan Hasil Mediasi Antara Pengembang Perumahan Di Yogyakarta Dan Konsumen: Hindrance To Implementation Of The Results Of The Mediation Between Housing Developer And Consumers Salsabila, Shindy Nabila; Sulistyarini, Rachmi; Riskawati, Shanti
Warkat Vol. 3 No. 1 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Brawijaya

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21776/warkat.v3n1.1

Abstract

This research studies the hindrance to the implementation of the result of mediation between a housing developer and consumers facilitated by the Ombudsman of the Special Region of Yogyakarta. This case has been handled by the ombudsman since early 2019, while the agreement outlined in the memorandum of understanding fails to be implemented. Article 6 paragraph (6) and Article 6 Paragraph (7) of Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Dispute Resolution Arbitration and Alternative (UU APS) has set a provision implying that mediation is implemented within 30 days, and this provision is outlined in a written agreement which is binding and final to all parties who are required to enforce this provision with good faith. This mediation is to be registered to a local District Court. However, there are two impeding factors such as procedural and substantive matters. The procedural matters are related to the absence of the basis of the law that states that the ombudsman complies with UU APS regarding the mediation. On the other hand, substantive factors are triggered by insufficient funds owned by the developer, the dominant bargaining position possessed by a consumer, and lack of understanding of the parties involved in the dispute regarding the legal principles and limited role of mediators.