Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.23
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Jurnal Pemberdayaan Hukum Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies
Paulus Tiku Taru Padang
Universitas Atma Jaya Makassar
Aerospace Engineering Arts Humanities Computer Science & IT Health Professions Neuroscience Social Sciences

Published : 2 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Nilai Keterangan Saksi Yang Diajukan Oleh Penggugat dan Tergugat Paulus Tiku Taru Padang
Jurnal Pemberdayaan Hukum Vol 1, No 2 (2011): Jurnal Pemberdayaan Hukum
Publisher : Universitas Atma jaya Makassar

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

Abstract

This Papper Adresses the  issue of how the value of the testimony of the witnesses presented by the plaintiffs and defendants. The research is  conducted with a case study that has been done in the state court of Makale. The purpose of this research is to know the value of the testimony of the witnesses presented by the plaintiffs and defendants. .........................
The Influence of Ne Bis In Idem on Inheritance Paulus Tiku Taru Padang
Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies Vol. 5 No. 8 (2025): Eduvest - Journal of Universal Studies
Publisher : Green Publisher Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.59188/eduvest.v5i8.51958

Abstract

This study aims to analyze and explain the influence ne bis in idem on inheritance. The method used in this study is a normative legal research method with primary legal materials. The results of the study show that in the second case/dispute the Makale District Court Decision Number: 103/Pdt.G/2015/PN. Mkl., contrary to the principle ne bis in idem, because the judge only considered that the subject of the case was the same and the object of the case was the same, so this case entered ne bis in idem without assessing the legal relationship between Defendant I and Defendant II. Defendant II redeems the pawn object from Defendant I but between Defendant II and Defendant I has never entered into a pawn agreement so that Defendant II does not have the right to redeem the pawn object/object of dispute. To avoid the confusion mentioned above, in this third case, if G. Yohana Lembang wants to fight for his right to obtain the distribution of inheritance from his deceased parents, then G. Yohana Lembang must change his position as Defendant II and the Plaintiff is his 2 brothers who have not been involved in the first and second cases and the object of the dispute is changed to undivided inherited land. So the influence ne bis in idem on inheritance does not exist. so that G. Yohana Lembang can obtain his rights through the distribution of inheritance that has not been divided.
Co-Authors