Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.61
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Notaire Jurnal Hukum, Politik dan Ilmu Sosial (JHPIS) Jurnal Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora
Herpandu Hadiwibowo
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

Published : 3 Documents Claim Missing Document
Claim Missing Document
Check
Articles

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Legal Effects Of Bankruptcy On Marital Couples Without A Marital Agreement : (Analysis Of Supreme Court Decision Number: 510/PDT.G/2019/PN JKT.SEL) Herpandu Hadiwibowo
JURNAL HUKUM, POLITIK DAN ILMU SOSIAL Vol. 2 No. 4 (2023): Desember: JURNAL HUKUM, POLITIK DAN ILMU SOSIAL
Publisher : Pusat Riset dan Inovasi Nasional

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55606/jhpis.v2i4.2642

Abstract

Male and female couples marry to have offspring. If a couple does not have a marriage agreement, it could affect the property they own together, especially if one goes bankrupt. This research is descriptive-analytical research that leads to normative juridical research. Based on the research results, it is found that in bankruptcy, the debtor (husband) cannot pay and settle debts with his creditors, resulting in a joint property without a marriage agreement being included in the bankruptcy. As a result of this decision, the debtor's wife did not accept. She filed a lawsuit with the South Jakarta District Court (Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 510/Pdt.G/2019/PN Jkt.Sel). It was stated that the lawsuit could not be accepted or rejected because the South Jakarta District Court lacked the authority to examine and decide on bankruptcy cases. According to the results, the union of property is the union of assets and the burden of payment. The legal consequences of marital property without a marriage agreement, if one of the parties falls into bankruptcy, the bankruptcy of the husband and wife against their joint property through a court decision will be considered joint bankruptcy by the provisions in Article 64, Paragraph 1, of Law No. 37 of 2004.
Perlindungan Hukum Para Kreditor Atas Pembelian Aset Kripto oleh Debitor Secara Melanggar Hukum Sebelum Putusan Pernyataan Pailit Herpandu Hadiwibowo; Bambang Sugeng Ariadi Subagyono; Kukuh Leksono Suminaring Aditya
Notaire Vol. 8 No. 2 (2025): NOTAIRE
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Airlangga

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.20473/ntr.v8i2.70975

Abstract

Seiring dengan perkembangan teknologi, hadir aset kripto secara drastis di masyarakat yang saat ini dijadikan sebagai komoditi yang diperdagangkan. Kemunculan aset kripto dirasa akan menimbulkan tantangan baru bagi sistem hukum kepailitan, yakni ketika debitor yang memiliki 2 (dua) kreditor atau lebih dan masih memiliki cash tidak beritikad baik membayar utang-utangnya dan memilih melakukan jual beli aset kripto sebelum putusan pernyataan pailit untuk melarikan, menutupi, menyembunyikan, atau mengaburkan harta kekayaannya dengan maksud agar terlepas dari tanggung jawabnya terhadap para kreditor sekaligus agar harta kekayaannya tidak masuk ke dalam harta pailit. Penelitian hukum ini menggunakan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach), pendekatan konseptual (conceptual approach), dan pendekatan historis (historical approach). Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa terdapat salah satu bentuk dari pembelian aset kripto oleh debitor secara melanggar hukum sebelum putusan pernyataan pailit yaitu pembelian aset kripto berdasarkan perjanjian nominee. Perjanjian tersebut terbukti merupakan penyelundupan hukum dan terbukti memenuhi unsur-unsur perbuatan melanggar hukum. Walaupun secara a contrario Pasal 24 ayat (1) UU Kepailitan dan PKPU bermakna bahwa selama debitor belum diputus pailit secara hukum ia masih berhak untuk menguasai harta kekayaannya termasuk melakukan perbuatan jual beli aset kripto. Namun, segala perbuatan hukum debitor yang membawa kerugian terhadap para kreditor dapat dibatalkan melalui gugatan actio pauliana sebagai bentuk perlindungan hukum para kreditor. Sehingga dengan dibatalkannya perbuatan hukum jual beli aset kripto dengan actio pauliana maka timbul hak untuk pemulihan keadaan sebagaimana keadaan semula sebelum terjadinya perjanjian, yang berarti harta debitor berupa aset kripto akan kembali masuk menjadi harta pailit untuk kemudian didistribusikan kepada para kreditor.
Pencabutan Izin Pemakaian Tanah dan Pelepasan Aset Daerah Berupa Izin Pemakaian Tanah oleh Pemerintah Kota Surabaya Herpandu Hadiwibowo; Syarifah Fatimahtazzuhrah Rukhsal Assegaf; Alya Fitriani; Amilah Fadhlina
Khatulistiwa: Jurnal Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora Vol. 5 No. 1 (2025): Maret : Jurnal Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora
Publisher : Pusat Riset dan Inovasi Nasional

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.55606/khatulistiwa.v5i1.6068

Abstract

The Purpose of this study is to analyze the revocation of Land Use Permits (IPT) which have expired and the release of Surabaya City regional assets in the form of IPT. Method of research used in this article is normative legal research using a conceptual approach and a case approach. Based on this research, the following conclusions can be formulated: (1) IPT is a special product released by Surabaya Government through KTUN, so that the Government has the authority to revoke IPT if it does not comply with its intended use, either by providing compensation or without compensation and; (2) IPT as an asset of the city Government can be released by paying a certain amount of compensation with a land release agreement which is regulated in Perwali Surabaya 51/2015.
Co-Authors Alya Fitriani Amilah Fadhlina Bambang Sugeng Ariadi Subagyono Kukuh Leksono Suminaring Aditya Syarifah Fatimahtazzuhrah Rukhsal Assegaf