ABSTRAK Pelanggaran terhadap prinsip utmost good faith seringkali menjadi permasalahan
seperti dalam kasus yang terjadi antara Muhammad Idris, seorang ahli waris dari
nasabah Bank BRI dan peserta asuransi Bringin Life, Ibrahim Idris, dengan Bank
BRI. Bringin Life menolak klaim asuransi terkait dengan alasan pelanggaran
terhadap prinsip utmost good faith karena Ibrahim Idris telah menyembunyikan
riwayat kesehatannya dalam pengisian surat pernyataan kesehatan, yang diduga
diisi oleh pihak Bank BRI. Bringin Life pada akhirnya memberikan pembayaran
klaim secara ex gratia sebesar lima ratus juta rupiah melalui Bank BRI dan telah
diterima oleh Muhammad Idris. Muhammad Idris kemudian menggugat Bank BRI
untuk membayar ganti kerugian karena Bank BRI telah melakukan kelalaian yang
menyebabkan kerugian. Penelitian ini dimaksudkan untuk mengetahui dasar
pertimbangan hukum dari hakim dalam putusan Nomor 21/PDT.G/2011/PN.KAG
terkait dengan prinsip utmost good faith, dasar dalam memberikan ex gratia
payment, serta status hak untuk mengajukan klaim setelah pembayaran secara ex
gratia dilakukan. Penelitian dilakukan dengan metode penelitian yuridis-normatif
dengan menggunakan data sekunder berupa studi pustaka dan wawancara dengan
narasumber. Berdasarkan hasil analisis dalam penelitian ini diperoleh kesimpulan
bahwa dalam penerapan prinsip itikad paling baik (utmost good faith),
pertimbangan hukum dari hakim dirasa kurang tepat mengingat Ibrahim Idris lah
yang menandatangani surat pernyataan kesehatan. Dasar pemberian ex gratia
payment sendiri bisa bermacam-macam, salah satunya adalah pertimbangan
bisnis. Selain itu, setelah mendapatkan ex gratia payment¸ idealnya tidak boleh
lagi ada tuntutan terkait klaim tersebut di kemudian hari
ABSTRACT Violation of utmost good faith principle often brings up some problems, just like
in a case which occurred between Muhammad Idris, the heir of Bank BRI
customer and the insured of Bringin Life, Ibrahim Idris, with Bank BRI. Bringin
Life rejected the related claim because of the violation of the utmost good faith
principle as Ibrahim Idris had hid his health history in filling the health statement,
which is allegedly filled by Bank BRI. At the end, Bringin Life gave an ex gratia
payment of five hundred million through Bank BRI and it was received by
Muhammad Idris. Muhanmad Idris then prosecuted Bank BRI to pay a sum of
money due to Bank BRI’s negligence which led to loss. This study aimed to
determine the law consideration by the judges in court decision
no. 21/PDT.G/2011/PN.KAG related to utmost good faith principle, the basic
reasons for giving ex gratia payment, and the status of rights to claim after the ex
gratia payment has been paid. Research is conducted by the juridical-normative
research methods using secondary data from the study of documents and
interviews with sources. Based on the analysis in this study, it can be concluded
that in applying the utmost good faith principle, the law consideration by the
judge is less appropriate considering that Ibrahim Idris was the one who signed
the health statement. The basic reasons for giving ex gratia payment can vary
which one of them is business consideration. Moreover, after receiving an ex
gratia payment, ideally there should be no more claims related to it in the future.