<![CDATA[This research aims to analyze the legal considerations provided by the panel of judges in the reconventional claim case related to the transfer of the Certificate of Ownership (SHM) in a land sale transaction. Specifically, this study examines how the judges assess the evidence presented in the reconventional claim and how the legal procedures related to the transfer of SHM are applied in the case of Court Case Number: 8/Pdt.G/2023/PN.GTO. The method used is normative research with a statutory, case, and conceptual approach, utilizing primary legal sources such as laws, court decisions, and secondary legal materials like books and journals. The results of the study show that the judges rejected the plaintiff's lawsuit because it did not meet the formal and substantive requirements outlined in civil law, such as the absence of a valid sale agreement and the failure to include all parties involved in the sale transaction. Additionally, the plaintiff failed to prove whether the defendant had committed unlawful acts or breached the contract, which should have been the basis for the lawsuit. As a result, the judges granted the reconventional claim filed by the defendant, who argued that the plaintiff's lawsuit was legally flawed. This research highlights the importance of fulfilling both formal and substantive requirements in civil lawsuits, as well as providing valid evidence in disputes regarding the transfer of land rights. The legal considerations of the judges demonstrate the application of the principles of legal certainty and justice to ensure that the decision made aligns with the applicable legal provisions and is accountable.]]>
