Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Awang Long Law Review
Lia Amalia
Universitas Buana Perjuangan Karawang
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
THE EFFECTS OF MIXED MARRIAGE LAWS ON THE DIVISION OF PROPERTY UNDER THE MARRIAGE LAW AND INTERNATIONAL CIVIL PRINCIPLES Octaviana Sidabutar; Lia Amalia; Muhamad Abas
Awang Long Law Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (2024): Awang Long Law Review
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Awang Long

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56301/awl.v6i2.1189

Abstract

Blended marriage alludes to a marriage connection between people of various identities. This outcomes in legitimate ramifications in regards to the division of joint resources. This exploration expects to investigate comprehension of blended relationships as per Regulation Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage and according to the viewpoint of global confidential regulation, as well as the lawful results of partitioning joint resources in blended relationships. By utilizing optional legitimate sources, this exploration utilizes a Standardizing Juridical examination technique, in particular by checking out at speculations, legal guidelines and case regulation. As per Marriage Regulation Number 1 of 1974, blended relationships happen on the off chance that one accomplice is an Indonesian resident and the other isn't. This happens when two individuals whose regulations are not quite the same as Indonesian regulation wed in Indonesia. With regards to the authorization of the Marriage Regulation, there are two sorts of conjugal resources, in particular acquired resources (individual resources) and joint resources. All in all, blended relationships are managed in Regulation Number 1974 concerning Marriage and in Global Confidential Regulation applying the standard of lex loci festivities, which expresses that the law that applies to the marriage is the law where the marriage happens, and the division of joint property is directed as per law of each party.
LEGAL PROTECTION AGAINST HOLDERS OF REGISTERED BRAND "PUMA AND CAT JUMPING" FOR SIMILARITY TO FAMOUS BRANDS Sabrina Dewi Putri Wibowo; Lia Amalia; Muhamad Abas
Awang Long Law Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (2024): Awang Long Law Review
Publisher : Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Awang Long

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.56301/awl.v6i2.1197

Abstract

This research focuses on two important aspects: The research will delve deeply into laws related to well-known brands in Indonesia and the research will analyze specific cases that have been decided by the courts, such as case Number 16/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Brand/2023/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst.Well-known brands are usually highly valued because they spend money on advertising and promotion, and become more popular around the world. In addition, it obtains legal protection through trademark registration in different countries, which gives them exclusive rights to their trademarks and allows others to use them illegally. The Trademark Law in Indonesia provides special protection for well-known brands. However, trademark infringement still occurs in Indonesia. Normative juridical research, with legislation and case approaches on legal protection of well-known brands in Indonesia. Result: The Trademark Law provides a clear framework for the legal protection of well-known trademarks in Indonesia, both preventively and restrictively, in particular Article 21, Article 83 and Explanation of Article 76 paragraph (2). In decision Number 16/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Brand/2023/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst, the Commercial Court considered evidence showing that the Defendant deliberately took advantage of the reputation of the "PUMA and Jumping Cat" brand without permission or license. The Commercial Court decided to cancel the registration of the Defendant's trademark "PUMA and Jumping Cats" because the action infringed the Plaintiff's trademark rights. This decision was made to protect the Claimant from its legitimate trademark rights.
Co-Authors Muhamad Abas Octaviana Sidabutar Sabrina Dewi Putri Wibowo