Impact of Failure to Postpone Debt Payment Obligations Suspension on Separate Creditors
Abstract
Separate creditors have special rights, and rejection of a peace plan can limit these rights in terms of receiving payment from the debtor, as separated creditors will only accept payment with the lowest value between the collateral value and the actual value of the loan. This study examines the legal protection for separated creditors in the context of rejecting a peace plan in the Debt Payment Obligation Suspension (PKPU) process. The main focus of the study is to analyse the legal implications of the rejection of peace by separated creditors and how it affects their rights in the PKPU process. The methodology used is normative juridical with a statutory regulatory approach, while the legal sources used in analysing this study were obtained through library materials or secondary data. This research is also called library legal research. It can be concluded that separatist creditors are still given compensation of the lowest value among the collateral or actual value of the loan. It is directly guaranteed by collateral rights on the property owned by the creditor. The results show that the Debt Payment Obligation Suspension (PKPU) Law has yet to fully provide adequate legal protection for separatist creditors who reject the peace plan.
Keywords
Full Text:
PDFReferences
Alhadiansyah, A., Djun’astuti, E., Susila, S., Marnita, M., & Aprilsesa, T. D. (2023). The sharia funding risk issues in fintech securities crowdfunding: Realization of legal certainty in the shari’ah perspective. Sasi, 29(4), 777. https://doi.org/10.47268/sasi.v29i4.1733
Dori, E. (2023). Pelaksanaan proses penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang oleh perusahaan. ResearchGate.
Eiflal, R., Mukidi, & Affan, I. (2022). Analisis yuridis penyelesaian utang debitor yang telah jatuh tempo terhadap kreditor melalui kepailitan (Studi putusan Mahkamah Agung nomor 654 K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2020). Jurnal Ilmiah Metadata, 4(1), 272–300. https://doi.org/10.21608/pshj.2022.250026
Fibriani, R. (2022). Tinjauan hukum kepailitan koperasi saat gagal bayar pada masa pandemi Covid-19. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(1), 87. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i1.3575
Florencia, A., Krisnawangsa, H. C., & Charitos, H. (2021). Tinjauan hukum tentang debitur sebagai termohon PKPU yang telah terikat perjanjian arbitrase dengan pemohon PKPU. Jurnal Legislatif Fakultas Hukum Unhas, 4(2), 223–235. http://journal.unhas.ac.id/index.php/jhl/article/view/14603
Handayani, A. N. (2021). Perlindungan hukum bagi kreditor dan penyelesaian utang debitor terhadap kreditor ditinjau dari Undang-Undang Kepailitan dan PKPU. Varia Hukum, 3(2), 46–74. https://doi.org/10.15575/vh.v3i2.12589
Hariyadi, H. (2020). Restrukturisasi utang sebagai upaya pencegahan kepailitan pada perseroan terbatas. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 1(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v1i2.61
Kartoningrat, R. B., Marzuki, P. M., & Shubhan, M. H. (2021). Prinsip independensi dan pertanggung jawaban kurator dalam pengurusan kepailitan. Rechtidee, 16(1), 37–64. https://doi.org/10.21107/ri.v16i1.10165
Kautsar, I. A., & Muhammad, D. W. (2021). Investigation the interest of creditor and debtor in suspension of debt payment obligations. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis Bonum Commune, 4(2), 159–170.
Kenting, Y. A., & Parulian, H. D. (2022). Kedudukan kreditor separatis terhadap rencana perdamaian dalam proses penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang. Jurnal Ilmu Hukum: ALETHEA, 5(2), 91–110. https://doi.org/10.24246/alethea.vol5.no2.p91-110
Kusumadewi, Y., Wijayanto, P., & Widjajati, E. (2020). Upaya hukum bagi kreditor apabila debitor pailit tidak mengakui atau menolak tagihan utangnya (Studi putusan nomor 05/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2016/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst). Krisna Law, 2(2), 182.
Lubis, M. R. (2024). Akibat hukum pengesahan perdamaian dalam penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU). Jurnal Ilmiah Metadata, 6(1), 119–130. https://doi.org/10.47652/metadata.v6i1.470
Nasution, M. L., Sunarmi, S., & Robert, R. (2023). Analisis yuridis putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam upaya hukum kasasi terhadap putusan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (Studi putusan No. 23/PUU-XIX/2021). Recht Studiosum Law Review, 2(2), 20–37. https://doi.org/10.32734/rslr.v2i2.12105
Manikoe, A. I., Muhammad, A., & Pahlevi, R. (2023). Pengajuan penundaan pembayaran utang oleh PT. Petro Oil Tools terhadap PT. Asia Petrocom Service. Jurnal Krisna Law, 5(1), 97–108. https://ejournal.hukumunkris.id/index.php/krisnalaw/article/view/244
Puspita, N. K., & Yoesuf, J. P. (2022). Juridical analysis of the absolute competence of religious courts and commercial courts in adjudicating bankruptcy and PKPU based on sharia contracts. Proceedings on Law, Economy, Social and Sharia, 1(7), 358–369. https://proceeding.icless.net/index.php/icless22/article/view/30
Rifa’i, I. J., Purwoto, A., Muksalmina, Ramadhani, M., Mardiyanto, I., Rusydi, M. T., & Harahap, N. K., et al. (2023). Metodologi penelitian hukum (A. Iftitah, Ed.). Banten: Sada Kurnia Pustaka.
Sari, E. P., & Kongres, E. (2023). Kepastian hukum terhadap proses PKPU pasca putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi nomor 23/PUU-XIX/2021. Jurnal Hukum Magnum Opus, 6(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.30996/jhmo.v6i1.7391
Sari, N. (2017). Tinjauan yuridis pembatasan jangka waktu penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang terhadap debitor. Kertha Patrika, 39(2), 89. https://doi.org/10.24843/kp.2017.v39.i02.p02
Sihabudin, S., & Adhitama, E. (2023). Hak kreditor dengan tagihan piutang tertolak dalam proses penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang. Arena Hukum, 16(1), 83–104. https://doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2023.01601.5
Simanjuntak, J. (2023). Penggunaan informasi debitor dari sistem layanan informasi keuangan Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (SLIK OJK) sebagai alat bukti permohonan PKPU. Jurnal Hukum To-Ra: Hukum Untuk Mengatur Dan Melindungi Masyarakat, 9(1), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.55809/tora.v9i1.209
Sinaga, N. A., & Sulisrudatin, N. (2016). Hukum kepailitan dan permasalahannya di Indonesia. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara, 7(1).
Syahfitri, T. (2021). Perlindungan hukum perlindungan hukum debitor terdampak Covid-19 terhadap PKPU. Jurnal Hukum Das Sollen, 6(2), 146–157. https://doi.org/10.32520/das-sollen.v6i2.1837
Syamsudin, S., Hafidz, M., & Baharuddin, H. (2021). Perlindungan hukum pihak ketiga terhadap jaminan kebendaan dalam harta pailit. Journal of Lex Generalis (JLS), 2(3), 1368–1379. https://pasca-umi.ac.id/index.php/jlg/article/view/441
Tejaningsih, T. (2016). Perlindungan hukum terhadap kreditur separatis dalam pengurusan dan pemberesan harta pailit. Universitas Islam Indonesia. https://doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/44/8/085201
Utama, R. A. W., & Santoso, B. (2022). Analisis yuridis tanggung jawab direksi terhadap kepailitan perseroan terbatas menurut Undang-Undang nomor 40 tahun 2007. Notarius, 15(2), 1002–1011. https://doi.org/10.14710/nts.v15i2.37014
Weku, R. L., Maramis, R. A., & Konoras, A. (2018). Perlindungan hukum bagi kreditur terhadap kepailitan debitor (Studi kasus terhadap putusan Pengadilan Niaga nomor: 36/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2015/PN Niaga Jkt Pst). LEX ET SOCIETATIS, 6(3), 106–118
Zubaedah, R., Affandi, I., & Panjaitan, M. M. M. (2022). Pengalihan harta kekayaan debitor pailit tanpa sepengetahuan kurator dan akibat hukumnya. Jurnal Meta-Yuridis, 5(2), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.26877/m-y.v5i2.12519
DOI: https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v12i2.42296 Abstract - 0 PDF - 0
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
