cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
MOH. LU'AY KHOIRONI
Contact Email
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com
Phone
+6281252568899
Journal Mail Official
jurnal.adhaper@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Jl. Progo No. 17 Bandung (Biro Bantuan Hukum Universitas Padjadjaran)
Location
,
INDONESIA
ADHAPER
Published by Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata
ISSN : 24429090     EISSN : 25799509     DOI : https://doi.org/10.36913/adhaper
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata focuses on publishing scientific articles based on research, conceptual studies, and critical analyses in the field of law, particularly Civil Procedure Law and Dispute Resolution. This journal aims to support the development of legal science and contribute to solving current legal issues in society, both in local, national, and international contexts, including: 1. Civil Procedure Law 2. Civil Procedure Law Development 3. Normative and Empirical Studies of Civil Procedure Law 4. Principles of Civil Procedure Law 5. Alternative Dispute Resolution 6. Court Decision (Civil Disputes) 7. Comparative Civil Procedure Law
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 5 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue "Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni" : 5 Documents clear
PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA DENGAN MEDIASI NON-LITIGASI UNTUK KEPASTIAN HUKUM Riyanto, Faiz Fadhlurrohman
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.43

Abstract

Abstract Disputes are an inevitable consequence of the dynamics of legal relations in society, requiring effective, efficient, and fair dispute resolution mechanisms. Non-litigation mediation is an important instrument in resolving disputes outside of court, both in Indonesia and Singapore. This article aims to analyze the role of non-litigation mediation in dispute resolution and compare the legal, institutional, and implementation frameworks in Indonesia and Singapore. This study uses a normative juridical method with a regulatory, comparative, and conceptual approach. The results show that although both countries recognize mediation as an alternative to dispute resolution, Singapore has a more integrated and professional system supported by a strong culture of legal compliance, while in Indonesia, non-litigation mediation still faces normative and implementation obstacles. This study emphasizes the importance of strengthening regulations, institutionalizing mediators, and harmonizing dispute resolution systems to improve the effectiveness of non-litigation mediation in Indonesia. Keywords: dispute resolution; alternative dispute resolution; comparative study;   Abstrak Sengketa merupakan konsekuensi yang tidak terpisahkan dari dinamika hubungan hukum dalam masyarakat, sehingga diperlukan mekanisme penyelesaian yang efektif, efisien, dan berkeadilan. Mediasi non-litigasi menjadi salah satu instrumen penting dalam penyelesaian sengketa di luar pengadilan, baik di Indonesia maupun Singapura. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis peran mediasi non-litigasi dalam penyelesaian sengketa serta membandingkan kerangka hukum, kelembagaan, dan implementasinya di Indonesia dan Singapura. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, komparatif, dan konseptual. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa meskipun kedua negara sama-sama mengakui mediasi sebagai alternatif penyelesaian sengketa, Singapura memiliki sistem yang lebih terintegrasi, profesional, dan didukung oleh budaya kepatuhan hukum yang kuat, sedangkan di Indonesia mediasi non-litigasi masih menghadapi kendala normatif dan implementatif. Studi ini menegaskan pentingnya penguatan regulasi, institusionalisasi mediator, dan harmonisasi sistem penyelesaian sengketa guna meningkatkan efektivitas mediasi non-litigasi di Indonesia. Kata Kunci: penyelesaian sengketa; alternatif penyelesaian sengketa; studi komparatif;
PERAN MEDIATOR NON LITIGASI GUNA MENCEGAH MENINGKATNYA SENGKETA DI PENGADILAN (Studi Komparasi Indonesia-Italia) Nadinda, Fadhia Putri
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.47

Abstract

Abstract The increasing number of cases filed in court shows the need to optimize dispute resolution mechanisms outside of litigation. Non-litigation mediators play a strategic role in preventing disputes from escalating to court proceedings through a dialogical, participatory, and interest-based approach. This article aims to examine the role and effectiveness of non-litigation mediators in reducing the court caseload through a comparative study between Indonesia and Italy. This study uses a normative juridical method with a regulatory, comparative, and institutional approach. The results show that Italy has strongly institutionalized the role of mediators through mandatory mediation mechanisms and a strict mediator certification system, thereby reducing the number of litigation cases. Meanwhile, in Indonesia, the role of non-litigation mediators is still complementary and faces challenges in terms of regulation, professionalism, and the legal culture of society. This study emphasizes the importance of strengthening the legal and institutional framework for non-litigation mediators as a preventive instrument to reduce the increase in disputes in court. Keywords: Mediation; Case Load; Italy   Abstrak Meningkatnya jumlah perkara yang masuk ke pengadilan menunjukkan perlunya optimalisasi mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa di luar jalur litigasi. Mediator non-litigasi memiliki peran strategis dalam mencegah eskalasi sengketa menuju proses peradilan melalui pendekatan dialogis, partisipatif, dan berbasis kepentingan para pihak. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji peran dan efektivitas mediator non-litigasi dalam mereduksi beban perkara pengadilan melalui studi komparasi antara Indonesia dan Italia. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, komparatif, dan kelembagaan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Italia telah menginstitusionalisasikan peran mediator secara kuat melalui mekanisme mediasi wajib dan sistem sertifikasi mediator yang ketat, sehingga mampu menekan jumlah perkara litigasi. Sementara itu, di Indonesia, peran mediator non-litigasi masih bersifat komplementer dan menghadapi tantangan dalam aspek regulasi, profesionalisme, serta budaya hukum masyarakat. Penelitian ini menegaskan pentingnya penguatan kerangka hukum dan kelembagaan mediator non-litigasi sebagai instrumen preventif untuk menekan peningkatan sengketa di pengadilan. Kata Kunci: Mediasi; Beban Perkara; Italia
PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KERUGIAN PIHAK KETIGA AKIBAT PERBUATAN HUKUM DEBITOR PAILIT Ariyanto, Candra Fahmi
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.50

Abstract

Abstract Bankruptcy aims to provide legal certainty for creditors through the fair and balanced administration of bankruptcy assets. However, in bankruptcy practice, there are often legal actions by bankrupt debtors that cause losses to third parties, both before and during the process. The problem arises when Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU does not explicitly regulate the mechanism for resolving disputes over losses incurred by third parties as a result of the legal actions of bankrupt debtors, thus creating legal uncertainty. Using a normative legal research method with a legislative approach, conceptual approach, and case approach, specifically through an analysis of commercial court decisions related to the actions of bankrupt debtors that harm third parties. The settlement of disputes over losses to third parties resulting from the legal actions of bankrupt debtors can be pursued through two mechanisms. First, settlement based on the provisions of the UUK-PKPU if the act is directly related to the bankrupt estate. Second, through a lawsuit for unlawful acts based on Article 1365 of the Civil Code if it is not explicitly regulated in the UUK-PKPU, in order to provide legal protection for third parties. Keywords: Bankruptcy, Dispute, Unlawful Acts   Abstrak Kepailitan bertujuan untuk memberikan kepastian hukum bagi kreditor melalui pengurusan harta pailit secara adil dan seimbang. Namun, dalam praktik kepailitan kerap terjadi perbuatan hukum debitor pailit yang menimbulkan kerugian bagi pihak ketiga, baik sebelum maupun selama proses berlangsung. Permasalahan muncul ketika Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU belum mengatur secara tegas mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa atas kerugian pihak ketiga akibat perbuatan hukum debitor pailit, sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Menggunkan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan Metode pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus, khususnya melalui analisis putusan pengadilan niaga terkait perbuatan debitor pailit yang merugikan pihak ketiga. Penyelesaian sengketa kerugian pihak ketiga akibat perbuatan hukum debitor pailit dapat ditempuh melalui dua mekanisme. Pertama, penyelesaian berdasarkan ketentuan UUK-PKPU apabila perbuatan tersebut berkaitan langsung dengan harta pailit. Kedua, melalui gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum berdasarkan Pasal 1365 BW apabila tidak diatur secara eksplisit dalam UUK-PKPU, guna memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi pihak ketiga. Kata Kunci: Kepailitan, Sengketa, Perbuatan Melawan Hukum
PEMBUKTIAN KERUGIAN PENUMPANG TANPA TEMPAT DUDUK KERETA API RAPIH DHOHO DITINJAU DARI STANDAR PELAYANAN MINIMUM PERMENHUB NOMOR 63 TAHUN 2019 Pratiwi, Santi Indah
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.51

Abstract

Abstract This research is an empirical legal research which examines the applicable legal provissions regarding the legal protection of passengers without a seat on the Rapih Dhoho train, using an empirical juridical approach then analyzed with descriptively qualitatively to make it easier to draw conclusions and answer the problems posed. The results of this study indicate that the service facilities at KA Rapih Dhoho are not in accordance with the minimum service standards specified in Regulation of the Minister of Transportation (Permenhub) No. 63 Tahun 2019 and not paying attention to the SPM during the trip mainly to standing passengers for KA Rapih Dhoho which enforces ticket sales without seats. And regarding legal protection for passengers KA Rapih Dhoho is not accomplished according to Article 132 verse (2) Railway Law (UU Perkeretaapian) by not providing compensation to passengers who suffer losses for which PT KAI is obliged to pay compensation as stated in Article 157 verse 3 Railway Law. so that the tickets held by passengers can be used as evidence in accordance with Article 164 HIR. Keywords: Legal Protection; Passengers; Facilities;   Abstrak Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian hukum empiris yang mengkaji ketentuan hukum yang berlaku mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi penumpang tanpa tempat duduk di kereta Rapih Dhoho, menggunakan pendekatan hukum empiris kemudian dianalisis secara deskriptif kualitatif untuk memudahkan penarikan kesimpulan dan menjawab permasalahan yang diajukan. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa fasilitas layanan di KA Rapih Dhoho tidak sesuai dengan standar layanan minimum yang ditetapkan dalam Peraturan Menteri Perhubungan (Permenhub) Nomor 63 Tahun 2019 dan tidak memperhatikan SPM selama perjalanan, terutama bagi penumpang yang berdiri di KA Rapih Dhoho yang menerapkan penjualan tiket tanpa kursi. Dan mengenai perlindungan hukum bagi penumpang KA Rapih Dhoho, hal ini tidak dipenuhi sesuai dengan Pasal 132 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Perkeretaapian (UU Perkeretaapian) dengan tidak memberikan kompensasi kepada penumpang yang mengalami kerugian, padahal PT KAI wajib membayar kompensasi sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 157 ayat 3 Undang-Undang Perkeretaapian sehingga tiket yang dimiliki penumpang dapat digunakan sebagai alat bukti sesuai dengan Pasal 164 HIR. Kata Kunci: Perlindungan Hukum; Penumpang; fasilitas;
IMPLIKASI EIGENDOM VERPONDING TERHADAP TIMBULNYA SENGKETA HAK ATAS TANAH DI INDONESIA Hapsari, Devi Nuzulin; Nazidah, Febrianti Putri Ainun
ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni
Publisher : Asosiasi Dosen Hukum Acara Perdata (ADHAPER)

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.36913/adhaper.v9i01.52

Abstract

Abstract Eigendom Verponding rights should have expired and been converted to Freehold Rights by September 1980 at the latest, based on Minister of Agrarian Affairs Regulation No. 2 of 1960 in conjunction with Minister of Agrarian Affairs Regulation No. 13 of 1961. However, many holders of western land rights did not convert their rights, resulting in the former western land rights becoming abandoned and triggering disputes. This is reflected in Cassation Decision No. 934 K/Pdt/2019, which states that the Eigendom Verponding in the name of George Henrik Muller has expired, but Review Decision No. 109 PK/Pdt/2022 granted the lawsuit and established ownership rights over the disputed object. The difference in these decisions has created legal uncertainty and undermined the sense of justice. This study uses a normative juridical method with a regulatory, conceptual, and case approach. The results show that the failure to implement the conversion resulted in the termination of the Eigendom Verponding rights, and that the inconsistency of court decisions has the potential to weaken legal certainty in the national land system. Keywords: Keywords: Conversion; Eigendom Verponding; Court Decision   Abstrak Hak Eigendom Verponding seharusnya berakhir dan dikonversi menjadi Hak Milik paling lambat September 1980 berdasarkan Permen Agraria No. 2 Tahun 1960 juncto Permen Agraria No. 13 Tahun 1961. Namun, banyak pemegang hak tanah barat tidak melakukan konversi, sehingga tanah bekas hak barat menjadi terlantar dan memicu sengketa. Hal ini tercermin dalam Putusan Kasasi No. 934 K/Pdt/2019 yang menyatakan Eigendom Verponding atas nama George Henrik Muller telah berakhir, tetapi Putusan Peninjauan Kembali No. 109 PK/Pdt/2022 justru mengabulkan gugatan dan menetapkan hak kepemilikan atas objek sengketa. Perbedaan putusan tersebut menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum dan goncangan rasa keadilan. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, konseptual, dan pendekatan kasus. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa tidak dilaksanakannya konversi mengakibatkan hapusnya hak Eigendom Verponding, serta inkonsistensi putusan pengadilan berpotensi melemahkan kepastian hukum dalam sistem pertanahan nasional. Kata Kunci: Konversi; Eigendom Verponding; Putusan Hakim

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 5

 1 

Filter by Year

2023 2023


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 11 No. 02 (2025): Desember Vol. 11 No. 01 (2025): Juni Vol. 10 No. 02 (2024): Desember Vol. 10 No. 01 (2024): Juni Vol. 9 No. 02 (2023): Desember Vol. 9 No. 01 (2023): Juni