Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2020 - 2025
0.408
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Referendum Aliansi: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora
Ligina Tesalonika
Unknown Affiliation
Humanities Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences

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

Found 2 Documents
Search

 1 
Perbandingan Hukum Indonesia dan Malaysia dalam Kepemilikan Properti oleh Warga Negara Asing Ligina Tesalonika; Handar Subhandi Bakhtiar; Atik Winanti
Aliansi: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora Vol. 2 No. 3 (2025): Aliansi: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan dan Sosial Humaniora
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/aliansi.v2i3.999

Abstract

Globalization has increased the interest of Foreign Nationals (WNA) in owning property in various countries, whether for residential purposes, holidays, or investment. Indonesia and Malaysia, as two Southeast Asian nations, have different regulatory approaches regarding property ownership by WNA. This research aims to analyze the legal provisions, identify similarities and differences in regulations, and evaluate their impact on the investment climate and legal protection for WNA in both countries. The research method used is comparative law, focusing on the legal basis, forms of ownership, limitations, and legal protection. The findings indicate that Indonesia tends to be protective of land ownership by foreign parties, strictly regulated through the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA) No. 5 of 1960, which limits WNA to Right of Use (Hak Pakai) and Right to Build (Hak Guna Bangunan/HGB) with limited durations. In contrast, Malaysia adopts a more liberal and pro-investment approach, allowing WNA to own property as freehold or leasehold based on the National Land Code 1965 and the Malaysia My Second Home (MM2H) program. The implications of these differences are that Indonesia's restrictive policies may reduce the attractiveness of foreign investment due to legal ambiguity and limitations in secondary transactions. Meanwhile, Malaysia offers greater legal certainty and economic appeal through freehold ownership, despite social risks such as rising property prices. This study concludes that Malaysia has a more foreigner-friendly system for property ownership, while Indonesia maintains a cautious principle. It is suggested that Indonesia consider agrarian reforms that are more transparent and provide legal certainty that balances national interests with foreign investment attractiveness.
Tinjauan Yuridis terhadap Penyelesaian Sengketa Merek Internasional antara Industri Berbeda Tasya Darosyifa; Ligina Tesalonika; Ariel Lois; Angel Evelyn; Aditama Candra Kusuma; Irwan Triadi; Iwan Erar Joesoef
Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana Vol. 2 No. 2 (2025): Juni : Referendum : Jurnal Hukum Perdata dan Pidana
Publisher : Asosiasi Peneliti dan Pengajar Ilmu Hukum Indonesia

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.62383/referendum.v2i2.727

Abstract

International trademark infringement poses a complex challenge for brand owners due to jurisdictional variations and differing legal systems across countries. This study examines available legal remedies, ranging from non-litigation dispute resolution mechanisms such as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) - encompassing negotiation, mediation, and arbitration - to formal litigation in national courts. ADR offers advantages in time efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and confidentiality, while litigation provides legal certainty through binding court decisions such as injunctions and damages awards. Preventive strategies including international trademark registration through the Madrid System and cooperation with customs authorities serve as crucial proactive protection measures. Furthermore, this research analyzes judicial considerations in cross-industry trademark disputes, including assessment of trademark similarity (visual, phonetic, conceptual), reputation of well-known marks, bad faith of infringers, and potential consumer confusion. Case studies such as Louis Vuitton vs. Louis Vuitton Dak and Zara Food vs. Zara Fashion demonstrate judicial application of the likelihood of confusion principle and anti-dilution doctrine even across different industries. The research employs normative legal methodology with statutory and secondary document analysis approaches. Findings confirm that legal strategy selection must consider infringement scale, jurisdiction, and business objectives, while international trademark protection requires integration of proactive registration, legal enforcement, and comprehensive understanding of global market dynamics.
Co-Authors Aditama Candra Kusuma Angel Evelyn Ariel Lois Atik Winanti Handar Subhandi Bakhtiar Irwan Triadi Iwan Erar Joesoef Tasya Darosyifa