<![CDATA[The refusal of a giro transfer instrument may generate different disputes depending on the reason for refusal, the legal relationship between the parties, and the source of loss. This study examines the legal consequences of such refusal, legal protection for recipients, and the possibility of dispute resolution through the Financial Services Sector Alternative Dispute Resolution Institution. It applies a normative juridical method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Primary legal materials include legislation, Bank Indonesia and Financial Services Authority regulations, and court decisions, while secondary materials consist of legal books and scholarly articles. The study finds that refusal cannot automatically be classified as breach of contract, tort, or a criminal offense. The dispute must first be characterized by examining the reason for refusal and the legal positions of the drawer, recipient, and bank. Protection for recipients likewise depends on the source of loss. Where the loss arises from the drawer's failure to pay, the dispute is primarily civil. Where it arises from a bank's breach of duties toward a consumer, internal complaint mechanisms and LAPS SJK may become relevant once the applicable requirements are met. The study's novelty lies in mapping these dispute characteristics to determine the appropriate liability and forum.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
