ABSTRAK
PT Dharmatama Megah Finance (“DMF”), suatu perusahaan pembiayaandinyatakan dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang/PKPU (sementara)berdasarkan putusan Pengadilan Niaga Pada Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta PusatNomor: 18/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2014/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst tanggal 16 April 2014, yangberakhir dengan homologasitanggal 22 September 2014. Meskipun demikian,Perjanjian kerjasama pembiayaan yang dilakukan PT DMF dengan bank danperjanjian leasing, menimbulkan beberapa persoalan hukum dalam menentukankedudukan bank sebagai kreditor berdasarkan perjanjian kerjasama pembiayaan,Lesseesebagai Pemberi Fidusia berdasarkan Perjanjian Leasing dan status jaminanfidusia. Penelitian dilakukan dengan metode penelitian hukum normatifmenggunakan data sekunder. Dengan kesimpulan; Kedudukanbank adalahkreditor konkuren dengan hak tagih senilai pembayaran yang belum diserahkanoleh PT DMF kepada bank; Kedudukan Lessee sebagai Pemberi Fidusiaditentukanoleh status hutangnya berdasarkan Perjanjian Leasing,dan jaminanfidusia merupakan asset PT DMF dalam bentuk jaminan atas Perjanjian Leasingyang akan menjadi harta pailit jika PT DMF sampai dinyatakan pailit. Disarankankepadapara Kreditor dan Debitor untuk berupaya melaksanakan skemapenyelesaian utang. Dan kepada pihak bank maupun pembuat regulasi, perlumengkaji ulang ketentuan mengenai pihak Penerima Fidusia terkait perjanjiankerjasama pembiayaan dengan perusahaan leasing agar terhindar dari kerugianjika perusahaan leasing dinyatakan pailit.

---

ABSTRACT
PT Dharmatama Megah Finance (“DMF”), a company multi finance company,was declared in the status of Suspension of Payment /PKPU (temporarily) by theDecision of the Commercial Court of the District Court of Central JakartaNumber: 18/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2014/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst dated April 16th 2014, whichwas ended with the homologation dated September 22nd, 2014. However, somecooperation agreements (joint finance) entered into by DMF with banks andLeasing Agreements, have raised some legal issues particularly to determine thestatus of banks as creditors in accordance with the cooperation agreement, Lesseeas the Giver of Fiduciary and the status of fiduciary.The research was conductedwith normative legal research method by using secondary data. With theconclusions; The bank is unsecured creditors whose claim is based on the value ofpayment that has not been transferred by PT DMF to the bank. The Status ofLessee will be subject to the Leasing Agreement, and the Fiduciary should bedeemed as assets of PT DMF which would be a bankruptcy estate if PT DMFbankrupt. The recommendation are: the Debtors and Creditors should obey theSettlement Agreement. The banks and related regulator institution should reviewthe clause of the Fiduciary Receiver in cooperation agreements with leasingcompany to avoid the loss when the leasing company is declared in bankruptcy.