Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Interdisciplinary Journal on Law, Social Sciences and Humanities
Yeyen Wahyuni
Universitas Jember
Humanities Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 1 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 1 Documents
Search

 1 
Parate Eksekusi Objek Jaminan Fidusia Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 Yeyen Wahyuni
INTERDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL ON LAW, SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES Vol 2 No 1 (2021): May 2021
Publisher : Program Pasca Sarjana Unej

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | Full PDF (208.074 KB) | DOI: 10.19184/ijl.v2i1.22760

Abstract

Abstrak Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 menimbulkan dampak terhadap eksekusi jaminan fidusia tidak dapat melakukan eksekusi secara serta merta terhadap objek jaminan, apabila suatu saat debitur melakukan cidera janji, pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut, terdapat kekaburan pada makna frase “atas kekuasaannya sendiri” dalam Pasal 15 ayat (3) UU Jaminan Fidusia dan Konflik norma antara Pasal dimaksud dengan tafsir baru Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019. Dengan demikian terjadi disfungsi perlindungan hukum bagi kreditur yang secara legal sebagai penerima fidusia dalam hal ini akan kehilangan otoritasnya dalam melakukan parate eksekusi serta penyelesaian eksekusi sita jaminan yang dianggap menjadi tidak lagi efektif. Kata Kunci: Parate, Perjanjian, Jaminan, Fidusia Abstract After the Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019 has an impact on the execution of the fiduciary guarantee of not being able to immediately execute the collateral object, if one day the debtor commits a breach of promise, after the Constitutional Court Ruling, there is confusion in the meaning of the phrase his own power ”in Article 15 paragraph (3) of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law and Conflict of norms between the Articles referred to as a new interpretation of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18 / PUU-XVII / 2019. Thus there is a dysfunction of legal protection for creditors who are legally accepted as fiduciary, in this case they will lose their authority in parating the execution and settlement of the execution of collateral confiscation which is deemed no longer effective. Keywords: Parate, Agreement, Guarantee, Fiduciary
Co-Authors