Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

PRAKTER RENTENIR BERKEDOK KOPERASI SIMPAN PINJAM PADA MASA PANDEMIK COVID-19 DITINJAU DARI HUKUM PERJANJIAN Yosia Hetharie
Bacarita Law Journal Vol 1 No 2 (2021): April (2021) Bacarita Law Journal
Publisher : Programs Study Outside the Main Campus in Law Pattimura University ARU Islands Regency

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji dan menganalisis praktek rentenir berkedok koperasi simpan pinjam di masa pandemik covid-19 ditinjau dari aspek hukum perjanjian. Dampak dari pandemik covid-19 inilah yang mengakibatkan sangat sulitnya pendapatan atau penghasilan dari masyarakat, sehingga muncul perbuatan-perbuatan yang menghalalkan segala cara untuk mendapatkan pengahasilan tersebut. Salah satunya dengan berhutang pada sistem koperasi simpan pinjam yang tidak sesuai dengan ketentuan perundang-undangan yaitu pada rentenir. Penelitian ini bersifat normatif, dengan menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan â€œstatute approachâ€ dan menggunakan pendekatan konseptual â€œconceptual approachâ€untuk mengkaji dan menganalisis permasalahan yang ada. Perjanjian yang dibuat dalam praktek rentenir berkedok koperasi di masa pandemik covid-19 merupakan perbuatan yang dilakukan atas dasar itikad tidak baik untuk mendapatkan keuntungan dari apa yang dilakukannya. Praktek rentenir berkedok koperasi simpan pinjam tersebut merupakan perbuatan ilegal yang belum diatur secara tegas dalam peraturan perundang-undangan, perjanjian yang muncul dari prakltek rentenir yang berkedok koperasi melanggar esensi syarat sah perjanjian yang ke empat yang ada dalam Pasal 1320 point 4 yaitu harus didasarkan pada suatu sebab yang tidak dilarang.

Hak Paten Sebagai Objek Jaminan Fidusia Putra Leonardo Sopamena; Merry Tjoanda; Yosia Hetharie
PATTIMURA Law Study Review Vol 1 No 1 (2023): Agustus 2023 PATTIMURA Law Study Review
Publisher : Faculty of Law Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/palasrev.v1i1.10834

ABSTRACT: After the issuance of Law no. 24 of 2022 concerning the Creative Economy paving the way for the imposition of intellectual property rights as fiduciary guarantees, however, the mechanism and filing of patent rights are not explicitly explained in Law no. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees. The purpose of this study is to discover and study the determination of indicators for valuation of patents as objects of fiduciary guarantees and to review the mechanism for filing patents as objects of fiduciary guarantees. The method used in this study is normative juridical with statutory approach (statute approach) and the concept approach (conceptual approach). The legal materials used are primary legal materials, secondary which was analyzed qualitatively. The results of the study show that there are several indicators that can used to determine the value (valuation) of patent rights in the case of filing as fiduciary guarantees, namely the cost-based approach, the market approach (market based approach), and income approach (income based approach). The mechanism for submitting patent rights as objects of fiduciary guarantees is not voluntary specifically regulated in statutory provisions, but referring to Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees in conjunction with Government Regulation Number 46 of 2020 regarding the Requirements and Procedures for Registration of Patent Transfers, then it can be done by filing an application for registration of patent transfer, as well as attaching supporting documents in the form of patent documents, copies of the agreement deed, power of attorney especially for applications submitted by proxy, proof of payment of the application fee, proof of payment of the annual fee for a patent, proof of recording of a patent license agreement has been given to other parties, a copy of the fiduciary guarantee certificate, and approval in writing from the fiduciary recipient if the right to a patent is used as the object of fiduciary guarantees, and a copy of the Presidential Regulation regarding the implementation of patents by the government.

Perlindungan Konsumen Terhadap Penjualan Obat Antibiotik Tanpa Resep Dokter Hubertus Veron Mailuhuw; Theresia Louize Pesulima; Yosia Hetharie
PATTIMURA Law Study Review Vol 1 No 1 (2023): Agustus 2023 PATTIMURA Law Study Review
Publisher : Faculty of Law Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/palasrev.v1i1.10855

ABSTRACT: Drugs are a very important component for public health, meaning that drugs are needed to cure diseases suffered by humans. One of them is an antibiotic drug which is a drug to kill bacteria in the body and to increase endurance. In the provisions of the Regulation of the Minister of Health Number 73 of 2016 which regulates Pharmaceutical Service Standards, as well as Decree of the Minister of Health of the Republic of Indonesia No. 02396/A/SK/VIII of 1986 concerning Special Marks for List G Strong Drugs stipulates that antibiotic drugs as a category of hard drugs on list G can only be given with a doctor's prescription with sufficient criteria. However, in practice it is still traded freely without a doctor's prescription by pharmacies. This certainly violates consumer rights in Article 4 letter a regarding the right to comfort, security and safety in consuming goods and/or services. The pharmacist's actions also contradict Article 7 letter b of the UUPK's obligation as a business actor to provide correct, clear and honest information regarding the conditions and guarantees of goods and/or services as well as provide an explanation for the use of antibiotic drugs. The method used in this study is normative juridical, with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials collected through literature study, and analyzed qualitatively to answer the problems studied. Based on the results of the study, those responsible for the sale of antibiotic drugs without a doctor's prescription are the pharmacy companies because legally the pharmacies know exactly and clearly about the provisions prohibiting the sale of antibiotic drugs without a doctor's prescription. This means that if consumers want to buy antibiotics, it is the responsibility of the pharmacy to explain correctly and clearly regarding the provisions for using antibiotics that must be prescribed by a doctor, not vice versa to seek profit and then ignore consumer safety. The legal liability that can be imposed on the pharmacy is liability based on fault, so the pharmacy must provide compensation to consumers (buyers) if it is proven that due to their mistakes they caused harm to the buyer through the misuse of antibiotic drugs which can lead to overdose, resistance even death.

Perjanjian Nominee sebagai Sarana Penguasaan Hak Milik atas Tanah oleh Warga Negara Asing (WNA) Menurut Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata Yosia Hetharie
SASI Vol 25, No 1 (2019): Volume 25 Nomor 1, Januari - Juni 2019
Publisher : Faculty of Law, Universitas Pattimura

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.47268/sasi.v25i1.147

The main issues of concern in this study is still the practice of control of land ownership by foreigners through a nominee agreement by using the guise of citizen so as if it did not violate the Act. This action was legalized by a notary / PPAT that in fact understand clearly applicable law. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the validity, binding strength, and as a result of the implementation of treaty law nominee in the control rights to land by foreigners based on the law of treaties Indonesia as well as the role and responsibilities of a notary / PPAT in issuing deeds nominee agreement. Based on the results of research conducted by the author, so in this study showed that the nominee agreement in terms of acquisition of land by foreigners to borrow the citizen name is not valid since the beginning of the holding no bad faith agreement of the parties, contrary to the principle of freedom of contract by not qualify objective the validity of an agreement as provided for in Article 1320 of the Civil Code, and contrary to Article 9, Article 21 paragraph (1), and reaffirmed by Article 26 paragraph (1) BAL. Therefore, not the validity of the nominee agreement, legally do not have binding force means the juridical consequences of their actual nominee agreement violates the law and therefore null and void and the land fell to the state as required in Article 26 paragraph (2) BAL. The role of the Notary/PPAT in issuing deeds relating to a nominee agreement must still be based on the applicable rules. If the deeds issued by the Notary/PPAT detrimental to the party, then the Notary/PPAT can be requested, with overall responsibility for the losses.

Title

Found 4 Documents
Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title Search

Found 4 Documents Search

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Title

Found 4 Documents
Search