Analisis Yuridis “Wanprestasi” Pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 931 K/Pdt/2019 Ditinjau Dari Asas Pacta Sunt Servanda - Hutagalung, Salomo Jordan Marcelino (Brawijaya Law Student Journal, 2023)
Salomo Jordan Marcelino Hutagalung, Moch. Zairul Alam, Setiawan Wicaksono Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Jl. MT. Haryono No. 169 Malang e-mail: marcelhage@student.ub.ac.id Abstrak Penelitian ini membahas perjanjian sewa beli yang tidak diatur secara khusus dalam K.U.H. Perdata, tetapi masih berlaku dalam masyarakat dengan mematuhi asas kebebasan berkontrak,undang-undang, kesusilaan, dan ketertiban umum. Fokus penelitian adalah pada unsur sahnya perjanjian berdasarkan Pasal 1320 K.U.H. Perdata, melibatkan persetujuan, kecakapan pihak, hal tertentu, dan sebab yang halal. Kasus studi adalah putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 931 K/Pdt/2019, yang melibatkan wanprestasi dalam perjanjian sewa beli tanah dan bangunan antara Penggugat dan Tergugat (PT.PLN). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Tergugat bersalah karena tidak menandatangani akta jual beli yang diajukan oleh Penggugat. Hakim menolak dalil Tergugat yang menyatakan perjanjian tidak batal karena Tergugat diam-diam menyetujui permohonan Penggugat tanpa mengumumkan pemutusan perjanjian. Analisis hakim terhadap wanprestasi dan denda tidak konsisten dengan asas Pacta Sunt Servanda, menimbulkan ketidaksesuaian antara putusan hakim dan prinsip keadilan dalam perjanjian. Rumusan masalah utama melibatkan ratio decidendi hakim pada Sengketa Sewa Beli dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 931 K/Pdt/2019, dan Apakah putusan “Wanprestasi” pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 931 K/Pdt/2019 telah sesuai dengan Asas Pacta Sunt Servanda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan dan studi kasus. Sumber hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier dianalisis melalui studi kepustakaan dengan penafsiran sistematik, ekstensif, dan komparatif. Kesimpulan dari penelitian menyatakan bahwa Tergugat seharusnya tidak bersalah karena melanggar kewajiban dari perjanjian melainkan perilaku dari Penggugat yang mengakibatkan berakhirnya perjanjian sesuai dengan prinsip bahwa perjanjian harus dijalankan sesuai dengan isi dan maksudnya. Kata Kunci: Wanprestasi, Asas, Pacta Sunt Servanda Abstract This research studies a rent-and-purchase agreement not specifically regulated in the Civil Law but implemented based on compliance with the freedom of contract, statute, decency, and public order. This research focuses on validity aspects in an agreement according to Article 1320 of the Civil Code and takes into account agreements, the competence of parties, particular matters, and halal cause, by studying the Supreme Court Decision Number 931 K/Pdt/2019 in the case of breach of contract in a rent-and-purchase agreement of land and building object between the claimant and respondent (PT. PLN). The research results reveal that the respondent was proven guilty simply because he did not sign the agreement made by the claimant. The judges rejected the proposition given by the respondent, saying that the agreement was not cancelled since the respondent secretly approved the request of the claimant without announcing the termination of the agreement. The analysis made by the judges regarding the breach of contract and fines is inconsistent with the principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda, leading to irrelevance between the judiciary decision and the principle of justice in the agreement. The first research problem deals with the ratio decidendi of the judges in the dispute as in the Supreme Court Decision concerned and whether the verdict declaring the breach of contract on the Supreme Court Decision concerned complies with the principle of Pacta Sunt Servanda. This research employed a normative-juridical method and statutory and case approaches. Primary, secondary, and tertiary data were analysed based on library research and systematic, extensive, and comparative interpretations. The research results reveal that the respondent should not have been declared guilty just because of breaching the responsibility as set forth in the agreement. However, in this case, the claimant himself caused the agreement to end, while an agreement should take place according to its substance and intent. Keywords: Default, Principle, Pacta Sunt Servanda