<![CDATA[Insurance claim disputes involving collateral often raise formal problems in civil procedural law, particularly regarding the principle of complete parties. This study aims to analyze the application of the plurium litis consortium principle in insurance disputes containing a Banker's Clause, as well as to examine the legal consequences of a breach of contract lawsuit if the collateral-holding bank is not included as a party to the case. Through a normative juridical research method with case and statutory approaches, the results of the study indicate that the collateral clause grants absolute rights to the bank over the object of the dispute, thus transforming its position into a directly interested party. The plaintiff's negligence in including the bank is proven to violate the audi et alteram partem principle and results in the lawsuit's construction becoming formally defective as an error in persona classified as plurium litis consortium. The legal consequence arising from this procedural defect is the issuance of a Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard (N.O) decision by the panel of judges, which immediately halts the examination process without touching upon the evidentiary aspects of the main case. The rendering of this N.O decision represents the dominance of legal certainty over substantive justice, where the decision lacks material binding force (res judicata) and the ne bis in idem principle does not apply. ]]>
Copyrights © 2026
