Indikasi Terjadinya Predatory Pricing Terkait Kerjasama Grab Dengan Ovo Dalam Perspektif Hukum Persaingan Usaha

Ndaru Nadhi Hapsoro, A.M Hasan Ali, Fitriyani Zein

Abstract


Abstract

This study aims to examine the indications of violations according to Article 20 of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. In this case there are allegations from the online motorcycle taxi company Grab and the Ovo online financing transaction company that is alleged to violate the unfair business competition provisions. There are indications of payment that does not make sense in using ovo when paying a grab rate of one rupiah. This study uses a type of empirical and qualitative juridical research. The results showed that no violations were found because there were no dead companies and Grab and Ovo were not in a dominant position and did not make them dominate the competitive market. Although basically the price of one rupiah is considered below the minimum price and can cause violations.

Keywords: Predatory Pricing, Indications, Business Competition


Keywords


Abstract This study aims to examine the indications of violations according to Article 20 of Law Number 5 of 1999 concerning Prohibition of Monopolistic Practices and Unfair Business Competition. In this case there are allegations from the online motorcyc

References


Adisasmita, Rahardjo. Dasar-Dasar Ekonomi Transportasi, Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu, 2010.

Dinilsna, Tanayastri. Apa itu Predatory Pricing, https://m.wartaekonomi.co.id/apa itu predatory pricing.html, diakses pada Senin 25 Juni 2019.

Edmon, Makarim. Pengantar Hukum Telematika, Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada, 2005.

Grab Indonesia, https://www.grab.com/id/about/,diakses pada Minggu 24 Juni 2019.

Hermansyah. Pokok-Pokok Hukum Persaingan Usaha di Indonesia, Jakarta: Kencana, 2008.

Ibrahim, Johny; & Effendi, Jonaedi. Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris, Jakarta: Penada Media Group, 2016.

Kodir, Abdul. Hukum Perusahaan Indonesia, Bandung : Citra Aditya Bakti, 1997.

Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, Pedoman Pelaksanaan Pasal 20 tentang Jual Rugi (Predatory Pricing), (Jakarta; Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, 2009).

Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, Tugas dan Wewenang.

Lubis, Andi Fahmi. Hukum Persaingan Usaha Antara Teks & Konteks, Jakarta: ROV Creative Media, 2009.and Market Division”. TheYale Law Journal, 1965.

Lubis, Andi Fahmi. Tarif Promo Ojek Online Disebut Jadi Kedok Perang Harga, https://tekno.kompas.com/read/2019/03/21/17/tarif promo ojek online disebut jadi kedok perang harga

Ma’arif, Syamsul. “Tantangan Penegakan Hukum Persaingan Usaha Komisi Pengawas Persaingan Usaha, “Pedoman Pelaksanaan Pasal 20 Tentang Jual Rugi (Predatory Pricing Seri Pedoman Pelaksanaan Undang-Undang No. 5 Tahun 1999 tentang Larangan Praktek Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat, 2009. Indonesia”. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 2002.

Maggalatung, A.S.; Aji, A.M.; Yunus, N.R. How The Law Works, Jakarta: Jurisprudence Institute, 2014.

Makarao, Mohammad Taufiq; & Suharsil. Hukum Larangan Praktik Monopoli dan Persaingan Usaha Tidak Sehat di Indonesia, Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia, 2010.

Margono, Suyud. Hukum Anti Monopoli, Jakarta : Sinar Grafika, 2013.

Mukri, S.G.; Aji, A.M.; Yunus, N.R. Relation of Religion, Economy, and Constitution In The Structure of State Life, STAATSRECHT: Indonesian Constitutional Law Journal, Volume 1, No. 1. (2017).

Ovo Indonesia, About Us, https://www.ovo.id/about, diakses pada Minggu 24 Juni 2019

Putra, Yudha Manggala. KPPU: Ada Indikasi Predatory Pricing dalam Diskon Ojol, https://www.msn.com/id-id/ekonomi/ekonomidanbisnis/kppu ada indikasi predatory pricing dalam diskon ojol, diakses pada Rabu 21 Agustus 2019.

Saliman, Abdul R. Hukum Bisnis Untuk Perusahaan Teori dan Contoh Kasus, Jakarta : Kencana Pranada Group, 2008.

Wikipedia, Grab Aplikasi, https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grab_(aplikasi), diakses pada Minggu 24 Juni 2019




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v1i3.13878 Abstract - 0

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.