Yetniwati
Unknown Affiliation

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

PRINSIP KEHATI-HATIAN PEMBERIAN KREDIT PERBANKAN DALAM PERSPEKTIF PERATURAN PERUNDANG-UNDANGAN DI INDONESIA Novia Sartika; Yetniwati; Muskibah
JURNAL YURIDIS UNAJA Vol. 3 No. 2 (2020): JURNAL YURIDIS UNAJA
Publisher : Universitas Adiwangsa Jambi

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35141/jyu.v3i2.812

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis pengaturan prinsip kehati-hatian dan menganalisis penerapan prinsip kehati-hatian dalam perjanjian kredit perbankan di Indonesia antara debitur dengan kreditur. Permasalahannya yaitu bagaimana pengaturan prinsip kehati-hatian terhadap proses pemberian kredit dalam perspektif peraturan perundang-undang di Indonesia, serta bagaimana penerapan prinsip kehati-hatian dalam perjanjian kredit perbankan di Indonesia antara debitur dengan kreditur. Metode yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif yaitu penelitian hukum yang dilakukan dengan cara meneliti bahan pustaka atau bahan hukum sekunder mengenai prinsip kehati-hatian sebagai bahan dasar untuk diteliti dengan cara mengadakan penelusuran terhadap peraturan peraturan dan literatur-literatur yang berkaitan dengan prinsip kehati-hatian perbankan di Indonesia. Hasil penelitian ini adalah pengaturan prinsip kehati-hatian dalam peraturan perundang-undangan di Indonesia diatur pada Pasal 2, Pasal 29 Ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 1998 tentang Perbankan dan Pasal 25 Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2004 tentang Bank Indonesia. Dalam hal kredit bermasalah para pihak dapat menyelesaikan dengan cara penyelamatan kredit yaitu penjadwalan kembali, persyaratan kembali dan penataan kembali, apabila tidak mencapai suatu kesepakatan maka dapat diselesaikan melalui jalur di luar pengadilan dengan mediasi perbankan maupun di pengadilan dan kantor pelayanan kekayaan negara dan dengan cara lelang.
PERALIHAN PIUTANG DAN IMPLIKASINYA TERHADAP HAK TANGGUNGAN: STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 202/PDT/2021/PT DKI Parawansah, Khopipah Indar; Yetniwati; Raffles
Jurnal Yuridis Vol 12 No 1 (2025): Jurnal Yuridis
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Pembangunan Nasional "Veteran" Jakarta

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.35586/jyur.v12i1.10931

Abstract

Abstract The objectives of this research are 1) To analyze the effect of transfer of receivables on mortgage rights as debt collateral, especially in the aspect of legal certainty for creditors and debtors. 2) To examine the legal consequences of the transfer of receivables on the validity and implementation of mortgage rights based on Decision Number 202/PDT/2021/PT DKI, as well as the implications for the parties involved. With these objectives, the problems discussed are 1) How is the effect of transfer of receivables in the context of mortgage rights as debt collateral. 2) What are the legal consequences of the transfer of receivables on the validity and implementation of mortgage rights in Decision Number 202/PDT/2021/PT DKI. With the formulation of these problems, this research uses normative juridical research with a statutory approach (statue approach), conceptual approach (conceptual) and case approach (case approach) using agreement theory, legal certainty theory, responsibility theory. The data is reviewed through a literature study of laws and regulations, legal doctrine, and analysis of relevant court decisions.The results show that the transfer of receivables that is not accompanied by notification to the debtor, as stipulated in Article 613 of the Civil Code, does not bind the debtor and has the potential to cause legal disputes.In Decision Number 202/PDT/2021/PT DKI, the transfer of receivables made by PT Bank UOB Indonesia to a third party without prior notification to the debtor was declared legally invalid because it did not fulfill the normative provisions, including the absence of re-binding of the mortgage.This creates legal uncertainty and harms the rights of the debtor.In addition, the process of exercising the mortgage rights by a third party cannot be legally implemented due to the loss of formal legal relationship between the new creditor and the collateral object. The conclusion of this research emphasizes the importance of debtor notification in the cessie process, as well as the need for strict legal procedures in the transfer of receivables secured by mortgage rights so as not to cause violations of the principle of good faith and legal protection for all parties.The suggestions made are that every transfer of receivables should be accompanied by written notification to the debtor and re-recording of mortgage rights in order to ensure legal certainty and justice in banking practice. Keywords : Transfer of Receivables, Mortgage Rights, Cessie, Debtor, Legal Certainty.