Garuda - Garba Rujukan Digital

Article Per Year (5 Year)

All

Journal of Private and Economic Law

JPEL
Website

Published by Universitas Jember

ISSN : - EISSN : 27978702 DOI : https://doi.org/10.19184/jpel

Core Subject : Economy, Social,

Economics, Econometrics & Finance Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice

The Journal of Private and Economic Law (ISSN 2797-8702) is a refereed journal published by the Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia. The Editorial Board ensures that all papers published in this journal were under a double-blind peer review. Articles submitted to this journal should cover contemporary issues of private and economic law, under doctrinal, comparative, and socio-legal approaches. Manuscript submissions should be between 6,000-10,000 words in length, although shorter papers relating to the policy with international and comparative perspectives will be considered. The peer-review process and decision on publication will be normally completed within 60 days of receipt of submissions. Please see our Instructions for Authors for information on manuscript submissions.

Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum

Articles 6 Documents

Search results for , issue "Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022" : 6 Documents clear

Persekongkolan Tender Pengadaan Pekerjaan Pembangunan Gedung Kolam Renang Tahap II Kecamatan Kandangan Kabupaten Hulu Sungai Selatan Salsabila Tamami; Galuh Puspaningrum
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

The definition of unfair business competition can be seen in Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition, namely competition between trade participants in the production and/or marketing of goods and/or services that is dishonest or violates the law. One example of a tender conspiracy case is the tender conspiracy for the Phase II Swimming Pool Construction Procurement, Kandangan District, Hulu Sungai Selatan Regency. Based on this case example, the author is interested in studying this case in depth and drawing out three problem formulations, including the Procurement of Phase II Swimming Pool Construction Work, Kandangan District, Hulu Sungai Selatan Regency, fulfilling the elements of conspiracy. Legal Considerations The KPPU's Decision Number 05/KPPU-I/2020 is in accordance with Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. Legal Consequences of KPPU's Decision Number 05/KPPU-I/2020 on Tender Participants. The type of research used by the researcher in this thesis is a type of normative juridical law research based on the analysis of norms and legal rules. And the research approach used by the author in this thesis is the legal approach and the conceptual approach. This journal discusses the first, namely the conspiracy that occurred in the tender for the Procurement of the Phase II Swimming Pool Building, Kandangan District, Hulu Sungai Selatan Regency. The second is regarding the legal considerations given by the Commission Council regarding the tender conspiracy for the Phase II Swimming Pool Construction, Kandangan District, Hulu Sungai Selatan Regency. And the third is regarding the legal consequences of the tender conspiracy for the Procurement of Phase II of the Swimming Pool Building, Kandangan District, Hulu Sungai Selatan Regency.

Kritik atas Perjanjian Sosekmalindo: Perspektif Kebijakan Hukum Pidana Dimasa Yang Akan Datang FX Nikolas
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

Perjanjian bilateral (BTA) antara indonesia dan malaysia tentang perekonomian di daerah perbatasan adalah sosekmalindo, perjanjian dibuat tahun 1970 dan diberlakukan di daerah perbatasan Kalimantan. Perjanjian sosekmalindo hakekatnya bertujuan untuk pemenuhan kebutuhan pokok masyarakat perbatasan, dasar pertimbangan kondisi cultur dan kondisi geografis sehingga masyarakat diperbolehkan berbelanja produk-produk malaysia, dengan syarat tidak boleh melebihi RM 600 perbulan, seiring dengan perkembangan globalisasi dan rasio berpikir manusia yang semangkin modern tentang ilmu pengetahuan bisnis, peluang keuntungan, keuntungan pada prinsipnya adalah kebahagian, tentunya tidak melanggar norma-norma hukum yang berlaku, memasukan produk-produk malaysia dan diperjual belikan kembali di daerah perbatasan merupakan suatu perbuatan yang bertentangan dengan makna perjanjian sosekmalindo, tujuan dari penulisan ini memberikan deskripsi terjadinya modus operandi peredaran produk-produk malaysia yang diperdagangkan dengan konsep teori korporasi dan memberikan kritik terhadap perjanjian BTA sosekmalindo tahun 1970 yang hampir 25 tahun masing berlaku, sehingga dipandang perlu dilakukan reformasi dan reo-rientasi. Metode penelitian dalam penulisan ini dilakukan dengan pendekatan yuridis normatif yaitu dengan melakukan analisis terhadap permasalahan melalui pendekatan asas-asas hukum serta mengacu pada norma-norma hukum yang terdapat dalam peraturan perundang-undangan. Hasil penelitian terdapat produk-produk malaysia yang diperdagangkan di daerah perbatasan, keberadaan produk-produk malaysia diperbatasan disebabkan korporasi pengusaha dengan masyarakat perbatasan, mengginat perjanjian sosekmalindo hanya memberikan izin kepada masyarakat perbatasan berbelanja RM 600 perbulan, dan tidak diperdagangkan. Jika diperdagangkan maka harus mengacu kepada peraturan menteri keuangan republik indonesia nomor 80/Pmk.04/2019 tentang impor dan ekspor, berlaku kepada masyarakat perbatasan, dan undang-undang kepabeaan nomor 17 tahun 2006 perubahan terhadap undang-undang nomor 10 tahun 1995 tentang kepabeaan, peraturan menteri membebaskan biaya masuk barang yang dibawa pelintas di daerah perbatasan, sementara pasal 1 undang-undang kepabeaan diberikan kewenangan untuk memungut biaya masuk terkait dengan keluar masuknya barang di daerah kepabeaan, perjanjian sosekmalindo sebagai lex specialis derogat legi generali dari permen dan undang-undang tersebut, menjadikan ruang terjadinya modus kejahatan ekonomi yang mencari keuntungan, sebesar-besarnya oleh pengusaha dengan cara memberikan sejumlah uang kepada masyarakat perbatasan berbelanja produk-produk malaysia kemudian diperdagangkan, memaknai perjanjiaan BTA antara malaysia-indonesia tidak ada regulasi itu, maka sebagai bentuk saran kepada pemerintah indonesia dan untuk mengkaji kembali BTA perjanjian sosekmalindo dan penal policy sebagai bentuk pengaturan kedepan perdagangan di daerah perbatasan. Kata Kunci: Kritik, BTA Perjanjian Sosekmalindo, dan Penal Policy

Rekonstruksi Hukum Pidana di Indonesia untuk Menangani Perkembangan Kejahatan Ekonomi Global Zainal Aris Masruchi
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

Legal reform can be interpreted as an effort to replace the current legal order in accordance with social, political developments and aspirations regarding the legal order that the community aspires to. One of the things that must follow developments in the international community is criminal law. Moreover, the provisions in our criminal law are no longer in accordance with democratic values, respect for human rights, and cannot respond to developments that occur in society so that justice is not achieved as aspired by society. In addition, our criminal law can no longer ensnare the types of unlawful acts that occur in society, especially in the economic field. Therefore, it is time for us to enter what Barda Nawawi Arief calls the new era of Indonesian criminal law. Economic criminal law reform, must be directed to the extent to which the applicable provisions of criminal law (economic) need to be changed or updated, including including how to prevent the occurrence of criminal acts (economy), and methods of investigation, prosecution, trial. and criminal prosecution must be carried out.

Persekongkolan Tender Paket Pekerjaan Pembangunan Rumah Sakit Daerah Provinsi Aceh (Studi Putusan KPPU Nomor 04/KPPU-L/2020) Bimantara Fauzan Kusuma; Nanang Suparto
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

In the current era, of course, hospital facilities and infrastructure need to be updated and repaired to be able to keep up with the evolving times. The hospital is a place that has a vital role in every country and even every region. Hospital obligations have also been regulated in Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation Article 29 which requires hospitals to provide proper public facilities and infrastructure. This can be realized by renovating hospitals for the better, one of which is by carrying out the procurement of goods/services. The government has issued a legal provision, namely Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. It aims to provide signs and activities that are prohibited by business actors from conducting business activities. One example is the case of tender conspiracy. There are still some business actors who in carrying out their business activities carry out unfair business competition. This happened in the tender for the hospital construction work package in the Aceh Province. There is a conspiracy in the registration of the work package tender by the bidders which has been followed up by KPPU with the issuance of KPPU's Decision Number 04/KPPU-L/2020. The business actor referred to as the reported party in the decision has violated Article 22 of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning the Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition regarding conspiracy among bidders. The parties who are reported are PT. Mina Fajar Abadi, PT Sumber Alam Sejahtera, PT Arafah Alam Sejahtera, PT Betesda Mandiri, PT Eka Jaya Lestari, PT Adhi Putra Jaya, Construction Working Group-LXXXIX Aceh Government Goods and Services Procurement Bureau for Fiscal Year 2018. This case was analyzed with three discussions, namely: The legal standing of the parties in litigation at KPPU, the suitability of the legal considerations of KPPU's Decision Number 04/KPPU-L/2020 with Law Number 5 of 1999, Legal Consequences of KPPU's Decision Number 04/KPPU-L/2020.

Tanggung Gugat Developer dan Penyedia KPR Terhadap Pembeli Perumahan atas Penggunaan Sertifikat Tanah Sebagai Agunan Bank (Studi Kasus Perumahan Violet Garden) Nengah Erlina Wahyu Damayanti; Iswi Hariyani
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

Banks cannot provide mortgage facilities without collateral from developers because banks in providing credit facilities must apply collateral supply obligations. Explained in Article 8 of Law No. In the case of Violet Garden housing, it is known that the bank in providing mortgage facilities to residential buyers does not hold a certificate belonging to the buyer who is doing a mortgage where the debtor should submit the certificate to be used as collateral in the distribution of mortgages because the developer has guaranteed the certificate at another bank. So that for buyers who have paid off payments both in cash and mortgages can not make demands to process AJB in accordance with PPJB For the act, the form of developer liability on housing buyers for home certificates used to other banks to get the loan of funds is classified in the form of liability wanprestasi. Thus the developer must immediately redeem the home certificate or pay off the loan and compensate the losses incurred by the buyer, then in an effort to get the certificate of the aggrieved housing buyer can demand compensation with costs and interest by applying as a concurrent creditor to the curator by using ppjb evidence in accordance with Article 115 point 1 of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and PKPU.

Penyelesaian Sengketa Pembatalan Merek Pada Kelas Berbeda Melalui Pengadilan Negeri (Studi Putusan Nomor: 3011 K/Pdt/2018) Kefara Gustinia Digmadani; Ayu Citra Santyaningtyas
Journal of Private and Economic Law Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022
Publisher : Private Law Department, Faculty of Law, University of Jember, Indonesia

ABSTRACT: This case began when Andri Anis and Yasmar registered the Soerabi Enhaii brand in class 43, namely restaurants. This makes Cecep Sumarno as the owner of the same trademark in class 30 feel disadvantaged due to registration in bad faith by Andri Anis and Yasmar. Therefore Cecep Sumarno sued to the District Court with a lawsuit against the law. Then, Cecep Sumarno submitted an application to the Supreme Court with the principal request being to cancel Andri Anis and Yasmar's trademarks. Andri Anis and Yasmar's actions violate Article 21 verse 3 of Mark and Geographical Indication Law, that “trademark will be rejected if the mark is submitted by an applicant who registers the mark in bad faith”. The researcher aims to examine the reasons for the cancellation of the mark, the legal consequences of registering the same mark, as well as the legal considerations of the judge who rejected Cecep Sumarno's appeal. The research method used is a normative juridical research method using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The reason for the cancellation of the mark proposed by Cecep Sumarno is that the cancellation of the registration mark has bad intentions. The legal consequence of trademark equality is that Cecep Sumarno as the owner of the mark in class 30 can file a lawsuit for the cancellation of Andri Anis and Yasmar's trademark in class 43 through the Commercial Court. The judge's legal considerations in the Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number: 3011 K/Pdt/2018 that based on the judex facti of the DKI Jakarta High Court does not conflict with the law. The trademark dispute filed by Cecep Sumarno basically asks for the cancellation of the mark which is not the authority of the District Court. KEYWORDS: Mark Revocation, Mark Similarity, Dispute Settlement

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 6

Filter by Year

2022 2022

Filter By Issues

All Issue Vol 3 No 2 (2023): November 2023 Vol 3 No 1 (2023): May 2023 Vol 2 No 2 (2022): November 2022 Vol 2 No 1 (2022): May 2022 Vol 1 No 2 (2021): November 2021 Vol 1 No 1 (2021): May 2021

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name
pratiwi puspitho andini

Contact Email
jpel@unej.ac.id

Phone
+6281332727076

Journal Mail Official
jpel@unej.ac.id

Editorial Address
jalan gajah mada XI no 19

Location
Kab. jember,

Jawa timur

INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Home Page

OAI Link

Editorial Team

Contact

Reviewer

Google Scholar

Contact Name pratiwi puspitho andini

Contact Email jpel@unej.ac.id

Phone +6281332727076

Journal Mail Official jpel@unej.ac.id

Editorial Address jalan gajah mada XI no 19

Location Kab. jember, Jawa timur INDONESIA

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Abstract

Contact Name
pratiwi puspitho andini

Contact Email
jpel@unej.ac.id

Phone
+6281332727076

Journal Mail Official
jpel@unej.ac.id

Editorial Address
jalan gajah mada XI no 19

Location
Kab. jember,

Jawa timur

INDONESIA