Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.817
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Unes Law Review Academia Open QISTINA: Jurnal Multidisiplin Indonesia JURMA YUSTISI
Suryani, Cendana
Unknown Affiliation
Religion Agriculture, Biological Sciences & Forestry Arts Humanities Chemistry Computer Science & IT Earth & Planetary Sciences Economics, Econometrics & Finance Education Environmental Science Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Library & Information Science Medicine & Pharmacology Nursing Physics Public Health Social Sciences Other

Published : 4 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 4 Documents
Search

 1 
Review of Land Ownership Certificate Dispute Settlement Based on Kupang PTUN Decision Number 42/G/2023/PTUN.KPG Suryani, Cendana; Hartono, Margareta Kristiani; Rasji, Rasji
QISTINA: Jurnal Multidisiplin Indonesia Vol 3, No 1 (2024): June 2024
Publisher : CV. Rayyan Dwi Bharata

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.57235/qistina.v3i1.2417

Abstract

Agricultural issues are complex and sensitive problems that affect many aspects of life, including social, economic, political, and psychological aspects. Land disputes are a recurring and relevant topic. Obtaining land as a capital for various needs along with population growth, development trends, and access to various parties. Ways to resolve land disputes can be done through mediation, arbitration, or litigation. Mediation is the preferred method because it is a family matter and does not require a large cost. Arbitration is a method of resolving disputes outside the court with a neutral third party as an arbitrator. Litigation is a method of resolving disputes through the court, and it is the last resort. The research method used is through the use of primary data, namely mediation data and legal documents related to land disputes for a total of people. The Minister of Agriculture and Plantation Regulation No. 11 and the Director General of the National Land Agency in 2016 on Land Dispute Resolution states that land disputes can be resolved both within and outside the court.
Analysis of Expropriation and Investment Dispute Resolution in the Case of Venezuela Holdings v. Venezuela (ICSID Case No. ARB/07/27) Suryani, Cendana
JURNAL MAHASISWA YUSTISI Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025)
Publisher : Universitas Ibn Khaldun Bogor

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.32832/jurmayustisi.v3i1.1491

Abstract

Foreign investment plays a crucial role in the global economy by driving economic growth and development in host countries. To protect foreign investors, many countries have signed Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs) that regulate protection against both direct and indirect expropriation. Direct expropriation occurs when a state takes over or reduces the value of an investment directly, usually involving the transfer of ownership or rights over investor assets without adequate compensation. Under international law, expropriation must be conducted for a public purpose, be non-discriminatory, and be accompanied by fair compensation. The case of Venezuela Holdings v. Venezuela illustrates how the Venezuelan government, through nationalization in 2007, directly expropriated assets belonging to Mobil Corporation without offering compensation equal to fair market value. This case discusses the legality of expropriation, the amount of compensation owed, and the relevance of BIT provisions requiring host states to protect foreign investments. In this context, indirect expropriation — as seen in other cases — is also relevant, where government policies reduce investment value without direct asset seizure. As a result, BITs must balance host country interests with investor rights to ensure fair and transparent protection against nationalization or expropriation policies.
PEMBATALAN MEREK YANG TELAH TERDAFTAR BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG MEREK NOMOR 20 TAHUN 2016 Hartono, Margareta Kristiani; Suryani, Cendana; Syailendra, Moody Rizqy
UNES Law Review Vol. 5 No. 4 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v5i4.652

Abstract

Brand registration is protection in the form of registering the brand itself to the Directorate General of Intellectual Property Rights. Regarding trademark registration, a form of government protection for trademark registration is that a trademark can only be registered based on an application submitted by the trademark owner who is known to be in good faith or according to the principle of good faith. Trademark Cancellation according to Prof. Dr. Rahmi Jened is a procedure taken by one party to search for and eliminate the registration existence of a mark from the General Register of Marks or cancel the validity of rights based on a mark certificate. The purpose of this article is to analyze the protection of registered trademarks against use by other parties. The research method used is Normative Juridical Law method. Law with an analytical-descriptive definition investigates and investigates trademark violations in connection with the brand law number 20 of 2016 and information related to several cases that have been rife. Based on the results of the research, it is concluded that the owner of the trademark rights fulfills the requirements under the trademark and identification law. And those who feel that their brand names are similar are entitled to legal protection from the government. This legal protection can be in the form of preventive legal protection and oppressive reparation. It is necessary to provide evidence to the violators of the brand of violation which later, if proven, will definitely take responsibility for their actions. the responsibility is carried out maybe the trademark is invalid because the trademark violator has an element of bad faith towards the registered trademark and if proven this results in a lot of losses for the trademark that has been registered and furthermore the brand offender must pay compensation.
Unilateral Termination of Employment for Employees on the Grounds of Company Efficiency: Pemutusan Hubungan Kerja Secara Sepihak Terhadap Pekerja Dengan Alasan Efisiensi Perusahaan Suryani, Cendana; Lie, Gunardi
Academia Open Vol. 10 No. 2 (2025): December
Publisher : Universitas Muhammadiyah Sidoarjo

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.21070/acopen.10.2025.12914

Abstract

General Background: Employment termination due to corporate efficiency remains a critical issue within Indonesia’s labor framework, as it directly affects workers’ rights and socio-economic stability. Specific Background: Although statutory provisions such as Law No. 13/2003 and its amendments regulate termination, ambiguity persists, particularly regarding the scope of “efficiency,” allowing broad employer discretion. Knowledge Gap: Existing regulations fail to define efficiency clearly and diverge from Constitutional Court rulings requiring permanent business closure, creating inconsistencies in practice. Aims: This study examines the legal basis for efficiency-based termination and identifies corporate considerations in implementing labor efficiency measures. Results: Findings show that recent regulations, particularly PP 35/2021, expand employer flexibility by permitting efficiency-based termination without permanent shutdown, contradicting constitutional standards while increasing risks of unilateral action. Companies must assess internal-external factors, map affected employees, allocate severance budgets, and prepare comprehensive documentation. Novelty: This research highlights the regulatory dissonance between statutory reforms and constitutional jurisprudence while providing a structured framework for lawful termination practices. Implications: Ensuring compliance with legal principles and safeguarding workers’ rights is essential to prevent misuse of efficiency claims and uphold social justice within industrial relations. Highlights: Highlights the legal inconsistency between labor laws and Constitutional Court decisions on efficiency-based termination. Emphasizes the risk of unilateral layoffs due to the vague definition of “efficiency” and “company loss.” Stresses the need for structured corporate procedures to protect workers’ rights and ensure lawful, transparent PHK. Keywords: Termination of Employment, Company Efficiency, Labor Law, Workers’ Rights, Constitutional Conflict
Co-Authors Hartono, Margareta Kristiani Lie, Gunardi Moody Rizqy Syailendra Putra Rasji, Rasji