<![CDATA[The case of Budi Said against PT Aneka Tambang Tbk and related parties is a civil case that demonstrates differences in legal considerations and rulings across three levels of the judiciary: Surabaya District Court Decision Number 158/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Sby, Surabaya High Court Decision Number 371/PDT/2021/PT SBY, and Supreme Court Decision Number 1666 K/Pdt/2022. This study aims to analyze the facts of the case, legal issues, judges’ considerations, and changes in the rulings from the first instance to the cassation level. This study employs a normative juridical method using a statutory approach and a case approach. At the first instance level, the panel of judges linked the actions of several parties involved in the gold transactions to unlawful acts and held PT Antam liable under Article 1367 of the Civil Code. The High Court overturned the first instance decision and dismissed the lawsuit in its entirety. At the cassation level, the Supreme Court overturned the High Court’s decision and adjudicated the case on its merits by reaffirming the basis of liability considered by the District Court; however, it modified the ruling concerning joint liability and eliminated immaterial damages, penalty payments, and immediate enforcement. These differences indicate that the case concerns not only the delivery of gold, but also the construction of unlawful acts, the evidentiary relationship between employees’ actions and the corporate entity, and the application of Articles 1365 and 1367 of the Civil Code.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
