Article Per Year (5 Year)
p-Index From 2021 - 2026
0.562
P-Index
This Author published in this journals
All Journal Unes Law Review
Prasanthi Sigit, Antarin
Unknown Affiliation
Education Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Physics Public Health Social Sciences

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

Found 3 Documents
Search

 1 
Eksistensi Perjanjian Buy Back Guarantee dalam Pembelian Rumah Melalui Kredit Pemilikan Rumah (KPR) Syafiqah, Nadiyah; Prasanthi Sigit, Antarin
UNES Law Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i2.1188

Abstract

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kedudukan buy back guarantee dalam sistem hukum di Indonesia dan keabsahan buy back guarantee dalam penyelesaian persoalan tunggakan KPR. Penelitian doktrinal ini menggunakan studi kepustakaan dalam pengumpulkan data sekunder berupa bahan-bahan hukum yang dianalisis secara kualitatif. Dari hasil analisis dapat dijelaskan bahwa buy back guarantee dapat disamakan dengan perjanjian jaminan perorangan (borgtocht) karena perjanjian buy back guarantee merupakan perjanjian tambahan (accesoir) yang dibuat berdasarkan perjanjian pokok (yaitu perjanjian kredit). Dalam KPR, buy back guarantee diperlukan oleh bank sebagai jaminan dari developer untuk pelunasan pembayaran tanah atau rumah yang dibeli konsumen namun dalam kondisi sertipikat belum ada atau belum dipecah (sehingga belum bisa dilakukan pembuatan Akta Jual Beli (AJB) dan Akta Pemberian Hak Tanggungan (APHT) beserta Sertipikat Hak Tanggungan (SHT)).
Urgensi Pembuatan Perjanjian Penerbitan Surat Utang Berjangka (Medium Term Notes) oleh Notaris Vianny, Maena; Prasanthi Sigit, Antarin
UNES Law Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i2.1299

Abstract

The Financial Services Authority (OJK) issued Financial Services Authority Regulation (POJK) No.30/POJK.04/2019 concerning the Issuance of Debt Securities and/or Sukuk Conducted Without a Public Offering (from now on referred to as POJK EBUS) as a legal umbrella for issuance agreements Term Debt Securities or Medium Term Notes (from now on referred to as MTN). However, in reality, defaults on payments to MTN still occur frequently at this time. Moreover, in POJK EBUS there are no provisions explaining the making of an MTN Issuance Agreement by a capital market notary whereas in Circular Letter No. SE-0005/DIR-EKS/KSEI/1121 concerning the Mechanism for Registration of Debt Securities and/or Sukuk at PT Kustodian Sentral Efek Indonesia (KSEI) (hereinafter referred to as SE KSEI concerning EBUS Registration) explains the obligation to make the agreement by a capital market notary which has been registered with the OJK. The purpose of this research is to analyze the provisions in force in Indonesia regarding MTN Issuance Agreements, and the authority of notaries in making MTN Issuance Agreements. This doctrinal research collects secondary data through literature study, which is then analyzed qualitatively. From the results of the analysis, it can be explained that there are several factors that led to MTN's default, namely the Covid-19 pandemic, the bankruptcy of the securities issuing company and manipulation of the financial reports of the securities issuing company. The MTN Issuance Agreement itself should be made in the form of an authentic deed before a notary to guarantee legal certainty and protection for the parties because the authentic deed is a perfect means of proof if a dispute arises in the future.
Implikasi Yuridis Perjanjian Perkawinan yang Didaftarkan Pada Saat Proses Perceraian Astrid Zahara, Delia; Prasanthi Sigit, Antarin
UNES Law Review Vol. 6 No. 2 (2023)
Publisher : Universitas Ekasakti

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i2.1311

Abstract

A marriage agreement made by a husband and wife before or during the marriage is binding on both parties who have promised since the marriage took place unless otherwise stated in the marriage agreement. In order for a marriage agreement to be binding on third parties involved in the marriage agreement, the marriage agreement must be recorded by a marriage registrar. The marriage agreement should be immediately registered with the marriage registrar to fulfill the principle of publicity. However, in reality, many married couples do not immediately register their marriage agreement with the marriage registrar, and there are even marriage agreements which are only registered with the marriage registrar when the divorce process is underway by only one of the parties. The aim of this research is to analyze whether there is good faith on the part of the party registering the marriage agreement with the marriage registrar employee when the divorce process is in progress as well as the legal consequences of the marriage agreement registered with the marriage registrar employee during the divorce process on joint property. The form of research used in this research is normative juridical, namely research that uses secondary data in the form of primary legal materials and secondary legal materials to analyze the problems raised in this research. The results of this research indicate that recording a marriage agreement with a marriage registrar during the divorce process by one party without the knowledge of the other party is evidence of a lack of good faith on the part of that party. Apart from that, the results were also obtained that the marriage agreement that had just been registered with the marriage registrar during the divorce process had no effect on the marital assets obtained by involving a third party and were obtained during the marriage, before the marriage agreement was recorded by the marriage registrar.
Co-Authors Astrid Zahara, Delia Syafiqah, Nadiyah Vianny, Maena