Klausul arbitrase sudah semakin lazim dimasukkan di dalam kontrak dagang. Penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase dapat dilakukan dalam hal di antaranya adalah tentang sengketa utang piutang. Khusus mengenai kewenangan absolut pengadilan memeriksa permohonan pernyataan pailit, Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Hutang memuat ketentuan khusus berkenaan klausula arbitrase. Dengan berpijak pada Pasal 303 Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Hutang, maka sengketa kepailitan dengan dasar putusan arbitrase dapat dilakukan oleh Pengadilan Niaga. Namun dalam praktiknya, ketentuan tersebut dapat dikesampingkan dengan berbagai sebab. Hal tersebut terjadi pada kasus perkara kepailitan antara Ecom Agroindustrial Corp., Ltd., dengan PT. Golden Tatex Indonesia. majelis hakim memutuskan menolak permohonan pailit yang dimana syarat kepailitan telah terpenuhi dari Para Pemohon dengan pertimbangan bahwa terjadinya tumpang tindih apabila Pemohon mengajukan eksekusi putusan Arbitrase dan juga dipailitkan. Hasil penelitian ini menyatakan berdasarkan undang-undang yang berlaku dan azas-azas yang digunakan, seharusnya permohonan pailit dapat dikabulkan.

---

The arbitration clause is increasingly prevalent included in commercial contracts. Dispute resolution trough arbitration can be used in settling debts issue. Especially with regard to the absolute authority of the court examine the request declaration of bankruptcy, Act No. 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment of Debts contain special provisions in respect of the arbitration clause. Relying on Article 303 of Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment of debt, hence bankruptcy dispute on the basis of the arbitral award may be made by the Commercial Court. However, in practice, these provisions can be ruled out for various reasons. This happens in the case of bankruptcy cases between Ecom Agroindustrial Corp., Ltd., and PT. Golden Tatex Indonesia. However, the decision of the case, the judges decided to reject the bankruptcy petition of the Applicant which the requirement of bankruptcy has been fulfilled with the consideration that there is overlapped when the applicant submits the execution of arbitral award, but also requesting the Respondent to be declared a bankruptcy. The result of this thesis is the lawsuit of declaring a bankruptcy can be granted, based on the regulating law and principles that applied to this case.