cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
-
Contact Email
-
Phone
-
Journal Mail Official
lawreviewuph@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Lippo Karawaci, Tangerang - 15811
Location
Kota tangerang,
Banten
INDONESIA
LAW REVIEW
Published by Universitas Pelita Harapan
ISSN : 14122561     EISSN : 26211939     DOI : -
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice
Law Review is published by the Faculty of Law of Universitas Pelita Harapan and serves as a venue for scientific information in the field of law resulting from scientific research or research-based scientific law writing. Law Review was established in July 2001 and is published triannually in July, November, and March. Law Review provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. The aim of this journal is to provide a venue for academicians, researchers, and practitioners for publishing original research articles or review articles. The scope of the articles published in this journal deals with a broad range of topics, including Business Law, Antitrust and Competition Law, Intellectual Property Rights Law, Criminal Law, International Law, Constitutional Law, Administrative Law, Agrarian Law, Medical Law, Adat Law, and Environmental Law.
Arjuna Subject : -
Articles 7 Documents
 1 
Search results for , issue " Vol 5, No 3 (2006)" : 7 Documents clear
Perlindungan Hukum Pemegang Hak Waralaba di Indonesia Ginting, Jamin; Sari, Vincensia Esti Purnama
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Franchise Agreement is regarded as legal guide to certify the rights and obligations of franchisor as well as franchisee. Since the issuance of rights in a franchise is set in a certain agreement/contract, both parties (franchisor & franchisee) demand their rights to be protected by the agreement. The objective of the protection is to secure the risk that might arise if one party breaches the agreement.   The research indicated that some clauses in the Franchisee Agreement are not protecting the franchisors need i.e: a. The clause relating the raw materials should come from the franchisor, b. The law applicable should be the law of the franchisor, c. The franchisor in entitled to all property rights and innovation made by franchisee, and other clauses which effect the franchisee, especially local franchise in Indonesian. Recently the law relating with franchise in Indonesian is only regulated in Government Regulation Number 16 Year J997 concerning franchise, and Minister of Trade and Industry Regulation Number 259/MPP/Kep/7/1997. In this case both regulation are not much of a help in protecting the Franchise Agreement in Indonesia since those regulation are not sufficient in providing direction and guidance to issue the Government Regulation.
Computer Software Programs : Is It "Goods" Under The United Nations Convention on Contracts for The International Sale of Goods (CISG)? Limenta, Michel Engel
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Dibandingkan dua Hague Conventions sebetumnya,JLlS dan ULF, CISG adalah konvensi yang menyediakan keseragaman yang lebih baik dalam bidang peraturan perdagangan internasional dan diterima oleh banyak Negara. Yang menjadi pertanyaan dalam artikel ini adalah apakah program software computer, yang merupakan benda tidak berwujud, dapat dikategorikan sebagai benda/goods dalam konsep CISG, karena dalam pasal 2 dan 3 dikatakan bahwa CISG hanya berlaku pada perjanjian perdagangan  (sales contract) benda-benda bergerak (movable things), sehingga perdagangan jasa/service dan benda-benda tidak bergerak adalah diluar aturan/konsep CISG.
The Regulation of Takeovers in Australia Riyanto, Agus
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Australia memiliki tradisi hukum yang panjang tentang pengaturan Takeovers. Hal ini terlihat dari sejarahnya, bahwa pengaturan Takeovers Australia berasal dari Second Interim Report (1969) of the Company Law Advisory Committee dibawah pimpinan Sir Richard Eggeston. Komite berkehendak untuk mengedepankan kedudukan pemegang saham minoritas sebagai elemen dasar utama yang harus diperhatikan jika terjadi proses takeovers. Dalam perjalanannya, semangat tetap mempertahankan latar belakang  pemikiran komite ini terus bertumbuh dan berkembang sampai dengan pembaharuan pengaturan takeovers melalui The Corporate Law Economic Reform Program Act ("CLERPA) pada tahun 1999 sebagai motor penggeraknya. Berangkat dari hal ini adalah menarik untuk mengenal dan mempelajari lebih dekat bagaimana sesungguhnya pengaturan takeovers di Australia memasuki periodesasi abad millennium ke-21 ini. Salah satu keuntungan dengan mempelajari perbandingan hokum adalah negaranegara  civil law dapat menjadikan alternatif cermin dalam pengaturannya yang dalam kenyataannya belum memiliki tradisi sejarah yang panjang tentang pengaturan takeovers dibandingkan dengan negara-negara common law, dalam hal ini Australia.
Europe After No and Nee-main Challenges for EU Law Wenniges, Tim
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

The European Union tried to enter a new stage in its development with the signing of the Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe. Observers have been left wondering if and when all Member States will ratify the "Constitution." After the "No" and "Nee" in the French and Dutch Referenda the Constitution does not seem to have a chance at all. Nevertheless it seems to be worth to take a closer look on this piece, because it might be an example how to organize or not to organize entities sui generis like the European  Union. The planned institutional set up and some background ideas are described in this article. However, there is not enough room to discuss the reasons for the failure and the alternatives which are discussed right now.
Upaya Administratif Erliyana, Anna
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Upaya Administratif diperlukan untuk memelihara keseimbangan antara kepentingan individu dan kepentingan umum menuju huhungan yang rukun  antara rakyat dan pemerintah. Perdamaian melalui musyawarah merupakan aspek penting untuk mencapai keputusan yang dapat diterima oleh para pihak. Oleh karena itu badan yang menyelesaikannya hams bersikap objektif dalam memberikan pertimbangan hukum dan pertimbangan kemanfaatan.
Jenis, Metode dan Pendekatan Dalam Penelitian Hukum Mezak, Meray Hendrik
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Research is an effort to search and reveal truth in science including law. That is the reason why law as part of science also possesses and follows its own method. As a custom, law has is catagorized as part of social science and follow the methodology of social science. In reality law has its own specification where the inquiry is based on normative law and substance is not merely empirical evidence. For that reason legal research can not be regarded as following the methodology of social sciences in general.
Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif : Bagaimana? Rusli, Hardijan
LAW REVIEW Vol 5, No 3 (2006)
Publisher : Pelita Harapan University

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar

Abstract

Prof Dr. C.F.G. Sunaryati Hartono, in conclusion of her research conducted in 1982, concluded that legal scientists and lawyers in Indonesia seem neglect and lack of knowledge of legal research methods. This condition does not change much until now because it can be seen from papers of undergraduate law students in Indonesia. Many of the papers stated that the methods used in the papers are Normative Legal Research. But if we check in the papers it seems that the Normative Legal Research methods is nothing but using the secondary (library) data. The students only know that normative legal research is using secondary (library) data not primary data. Is it normative legal research? So what or how is actually normative legal research? What can we expect from law students if the legal scientists and lawyers themselves do not know what or how normative legal research is? This article tries to find solution of the problem that can be useful for knowledge of legal research methods in Indonesia.

Page 1 of 1 | Total Record : 7

 1 

Filter by Year

2006 2006


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Volume 25 Issue 1 (March 2025) Volume 24 Issue 2 (November 2024) Volume 24 Issue 1 (March 2024) Volume 23 Issue 2 (November 2023) Volume 23 No. 2 (November 2023) Volume XXII, No. 3 - March 2023 Volume XXIII, No. 1 - July 2023 Volume XXI, No. 3 - March 2022 Volume XXII, No. 2 - November 2022 Volume XXII, No. 1 - July 2022 Volume XX, No. 3 - March 2021 Volume XXI, No. 2 - November 2021 Volume XXI, No. 1 - July 2021 Volume XIX, No. 3 - March 2020 Volume XX, No. 2 - November 2020 Volume XX, No. 1 - July 2020 Volume XVIII, No. 3 - March 2019 Volume XIX, No. 2 - November 2019 Volume XIX, No. 1 - July 2019 Volume XVII, No. 3 - March 2018 Volume XVIII, No. 2 - November 2018 Volume XVIII, No. 1 - July 2018 Vol 11, No 2 (2011) Vol 11, No 1 (2011) Vol 6, No 2 (2006) Vol 6, No 1 (2006) Vol 5, No 3 (2006) Vol 5, No 2 (2005) Vol 5, No 1 (2005) Vol 4, No 3 (2005) Vol 4, No 2 (2004) Vol 4, No 1 (2004) Vol 3, No 3 (2004) Vol 2, No 3 (2003) Vol 2, No 2 (2002) Vol 2, No 1 (2002) Vol 1, No 3 (2002) Vol 1, No 2 (2001) Vol 1, No 1 (2001) More Issue