Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal JURNAL MAGISTER HUKUM UDAYANA Jurnal Yudisial Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan
A Dwi Rachmanto
Fakultas Hukum Universitas Katolik Parahyangan
Environmental Science Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Perlindungan Konsumen, Pasca Undang-Undang No. 21 Tahun 2011 Tentang Otoritas Jasa Keuangan A Dwi Rachmanto
Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal) Vol 9 No 2 (2020)
Publisher : University of Udayana

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.24843/JMHU.2020.v09.i02.p12

Abstract

The majority of civil case decisions specifically consumer protection are closely correlated with the financial services sector. Looking at and studying the verdicts of consumer protection cases contained in the Supreme Court (MA) website, it can be concluded that the consumer protection cases have increased significantly in the last 3 (three) years, between 2013 and 2017, especially after the enactment of Act Number 21 the Year 2011 concerning Financial Fervices Authority. This paper will analyze non-financial service case decisions, at least from the point of view of whether non-financial service case decisions are appropriately handled and understood by Supreme Court judges, BPSK Members, and by disputing parties based on Act Number 9 of 1999 Concerning Consumer Protection. The purpose of writing is to know what has been exactly done by BPSK and the judge and to analyze what is not appropriate normatively. The decision analysis is based on the classification of consumers, business actors, and the authority of the Consumer Dispute Settlement Agency (BPSK). This paper will analyze 14 non-financial services Supreme Court (MA) decisions in the span of time between 2013 and 2017, and use the normative juridical research method. From the results of the verdict research, it appears that the understanding of MA judges, BPSK members, and the parties to the dispute has not fully understood the understanding of consumers, business actors, and the authority of BPSK in handling cases. Mayoritas putusan perkara perdata khusus perlindungan konsumen berkorelasi erat dengan bidang jasa keuangan. Melihat dan mempelajari putusan perkara perlindungan konsumen yang terdapat dalam laman Mahkamah Agung (MA) dapat disimpulkan bahwa perkara perlindungan konsumen mengalami peningkatan signifikan dalam kurun 3 (tiga) tahun terakhir, antara tahun 2013 sampai dengan tahun 2017, khususnya setelah berlakunya UU Nomor 21 Tahun 2011 tentang Otoritas Jasa Keuangan. Tulisan ini akan menganalisis putusan perkara non jasa keuangan, setidaknya dari sudut pandang apakah putusan perkara non jasa keuangan telah tepat ditangani dan dipahami oleh hakim MA, Anggota BPSK dan oleh para pihak yang bersengketa berdasarkan UU Nomor 9 Tahun 1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen. Tujuan penulisan mengetahui apa yang telah tepat dilakukan oleh BPSK dan hakim serta menganalisis apa saja yang tidak tepat secara normatif. Analisis putusan dilakukan berdasarkan klasifikasi konsumen, pelaku usaha, dan kewenangan Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen (BPSK). Tulisan ini akan menganalisis 14 putusan MA (MA) non jasa keuangan dalam rentang waktu antara tahun 2013 sampai dengan tahun 2017, dan menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif. Dari hasil penelitian putusan nampak bahwa pemahaman hakim MA, Anggota BPSK dan para pihak yang bersengketa belum sepenuhnya memahami pengertian konsumen, pelaku usaha, dan kewenangan BPSK dalam menangani perkara.
KAITAN DASAR GUGATAN DAN TATA KELOLA PERUSAHAAN A Dwi Rachmanto
Jurnal Yudisial Vol 9, No 2 (2016): DINAMIKA "CORPUS JURIS"
Publisher : Komisi Yudisial RI

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.29123/jy.v9i2.25

Abstract

ABSTRAKPutusan Nomor 266/PDT.G/2007/PN.BKS merupakan contoh kasus sengketa antara warga negara Indonesia dengan warga negara asing yang bertindak sebagai investor di Indonesia. Banyak hal yang menjadi dasar pertimbangan bagi hakim dalam memutuskan perkara tersebut. Tiga hal yang didalilkan oleh pihak penggugat didasarkan pada gugatan wanprestasi dan gugatan perbuatan melawanhukum. Pada pertimbangan awal dapat disimpulkan bahwa hakim dapat menerima sebuah gugatan yang diajukan tidak hanya gugatan wanprestasi tetapi sekaligusgugatan perbuatan melawan hukum. Terkait hal benturan kepentingan karena rangkap jabatan, meskipun dijadikan dalil gugatan oleh pihak penggugat, namun dalam putusan ini tidak dijadikan dasar dan pertimbangan hakim. Justru halyang tidak berkorelasi secara normatif, yaitu ketiadaan tata kelola perusahaan yang baik, dijadikan dasar pertimbangan hakim dalam memutus Putusan Nomor 266/PDT.G/2007/PN.BKS ini. Dalam tulisan ini akan dianalisa secara normatif tentang perbedaan antara gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum dengan gugatan wanprestasi, persoalan jabatan rangkap oleh orang yang sama dalam beberapaperusahaan, serta korelasi antara gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum atau wanprestasi dengan tidak adanya tata kelola perusahaan yang baik.Kata kunci: wanprestasi, perbuatan melawan hukum, tata kelola perusahaan.ABSTRACTThe Decision Number 266/PDT.G/2007/PN.BKS is an example of a civil case concerning a dispute between Indonesian citizen with foreign citizen who is undertaking business of infestations in Indonesia. The judges have consideration in many respects in effort to resolve the case. Three points raised in the lawsuit by the plaintiff are based on a breach of contract and a tort. On a preliminary consideration, it can be deduced that the judge may accept simultaneous lawsuits, not just a lawsuit in a breach of contract, but at once a tort. The argument in the lawsuit filed by the plaintiff is related to a conflict of interest inregard of concurrent positions, however the judges did not take it into consideration in making the decision. The very thing that lacks of normatively consistent correlation,i.e., the absence of good corporate governance, even becomes the basis of consideration of the judge in the Decision Number 266/PDT.G/2007/PN.BKS. This focus is discussed in a normative analysis concerning the matter of differences between two lawsuits, a tort and a breach of contract, the issue of concurrent position occupied by the same person in several companies, and the correlations between a breach of contract or tort with the lacking ofgood corporate governance.Keywords: breach of contract, tort, corporate governance.
PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSUMEN AKIBAT PERJANJIAN BAKU DAN KLAUSULA BAKU PASCA KEBERLAKUAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 21 TAHUN 2011 TENTANG OTORITAS JASA KEUANGAN Rachmanto, A. Dwi
Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan
Publisher : UI Scholars Hub

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

Abstract

After the enactment of Act Number 11 of 2011 concerning the Financial Services Authority (UUOJK), there are 2 (two) of law that regulate the settlement of disputes between business actors and consumers. First, Act Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection (UUPK), and the second Act Number 11 of 2011 concerning the Financial Services Authority (UUOJK). This paper will discuss and analyze the resolution of disputes between business actors and consumers after the enactment of Act Number 11 of 2011 concerning the Financial Services Authority by using jurudical normative/dogmatic approach. In the end of the article a number of conclusions were submitted regarding the resolution of consumer disputes based on UUOJK or based on UUPK.
Co-Authors