<![CDATA[This study analyzes Supreme Court Decision Number 176 PK/Pdt/2025 concerning judicial review in a dispute over the unilateral cancellation of a lease agreement from the perspective of the Indonesian Civil Code and HIR. The research employs a normative juridical method using case and statutory approaches, supported by qualitative analysis of court decisions, regulations, and legal literature. The findings reveal inconsistent legal qualifications across judicial levels. The District Court and the Supreme Court at cassation classified the unilateral cancellation, acceptance of the second-year rental payment, and pre-contractual conduct as unlawful acts, whereas the High Court and the judicial review panel characterized the dispute as breach of contract. Judicial review was granted on the ground of judicial error or an obvious mistake without decisive new material facts. This situation raises questions regarding the boundary between cassation and judicial review and may weaken legal certainty and finality. The study emphasizes clearer parameters distinguishing obvious factual errors from differences in legal interpretation to preserve legal protection, good faith, legal certainty, and res judicata. Such clarification preserves the extraordinary character and function of judicial review.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
