Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 12 Documents
Search

Tanggung Jawab Pemegang Saham Pasca Perseroan Perorangan Berubah Menjadi Perseroan Persekutuan Modal Ni Putu Sukma Meerani Santi; Ketut Kasta Arya Wijaya; I Nyoman Alit Puspadma
Syntax Literate Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia
Publisher : Syntax Corporation

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36418/syntax-literate.v11i5.64342

Abstract

Perseroan Perorangan merupakan bentuk badan hukum yang diperkenalkan melalui Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja untuk memberikan kemudahan bagi pelaku usaha mikro dan kecil dalam mendirikan badan usaha berbadan hukum. Namun, dalam praktiknya Perseroan Perorangan wajib mengubah statusnya menjadi Perseroan Persekutuan Modal apabila jumlah pemegang saham bertambah atau tidak lagi memenuhi kriteria usaha mikro dan kecil. Perubahan status tersebut menimbulkan persoalan hukum terkait kedudukan serta tanggung jawab pemegang saham, khususnya terhadap perikatan yang telah ada sebelum perubahan status dilakukan. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kedudukan hukum dan tanggung jawab pemegang saham pasca perubahan Perseroan Perorangan menjadi Perseroan Persekutuan Modal. Penelitian menggunakan metode hukum normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan perbandingan. Data diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan serta wawancara dengan notaris dan pihak Kementerian Hukum dan HAM sebagai pendukung analisis normatif. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa perubahan status perseroan tidak membentuk badan hukum baru, melainkan hanya mengubah struktur kepemilikan saham dari tunggal menjadi kolektif sehingga seluruh mekanisme pengelolaan perseroan tunduk pada Undang-Undang Perseroan Terbatas. Prinsip tanggung jawab terbatas tetap berlaku, namun keberlanjutan perikatan sebelum perubahan status berpotensi menimbulkan kerugian bagi pemegang saham baru karena kewajiban perseroan tetap melekat pada badan hukum yang sama. Kondisi tersebut menunjukkan adanya kekosongan norma terkait pembebanan tanggung jawab secara proporsional dan perlindungan hukum bagi pemegang saham baru. Oleh karena itu, diperlukan pengaturan yang lebih jelas untuk menciptakan kepastian hukum, keadilan, dan perlindungan hukum bagi seluruh pemegang saham.
Cancellation of Overlapping Land Rights Certificates Without Judicial Mechanism I Gede Hermanta; I Made Suwitra; I Nyoman Alit Puspadma
Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains Vol. 7 No. 3 (2026): Jurnal Indonesia Sosial Sains
Publisher : CV. Publikasi Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59141/jiss.v7i3.2253

Abstract

Land title certificates are administrative state products that serve as strong evidentiary instruments to ensure legal certainty in land law. However, the issuance of overlapping certificates persists in practice, creating disputes and legal uncertainty. This research aims to analyze the authority of the National Land Agency in canceling overlapping land title certificates and to assess the extent to which such cancellations provide legal certainty. It also examines BPN’s responsibility arising from such cancellation, particularly in relation to good-faith certificate holders. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory and conceptual approaches, analyzed through interpretative legal reasoning. The findings indicate that the authority to cancel overlapping land title certificates, exercised by the Head of the Regional Land Office and, in certain circumstances, by the Minister of Agrarian Affairs and Spatial Planning/National Land Agency, constitutes a lawful delegation and substitution of authority as an administrative corrective mechanism. Nevertheless, the existence of substantively identical authority across different hierarchical levels without clear limitations, combined with the absence of temporal restrictions on administrative cancellation, results in a form of legal certainty that remains relative and nonfinal, as such decisions may still be subject to judicial review. Furthermore, BPN’s authority in the administrative cancellation of overlapping certificates is limited to the administrative domain and lacks adequate compensation mechanisms for good-faith holders, thereby failing to achieve substantive justice. This study recommends clearer delineation of cancellation authority and explicit mechanisms for legal protection and remedies to strengthen legal certainty and justice in land administration.