Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Pelaku usaha perhotelan rentan menghadapi risiko yang berpotensi merugikan tamu hotel dimana pada pelaksanaannya, penerapan ganti kerugian di bisnis perhotelan belum dijalankan secara konsisten. Perbedaan pengaturan mengenai kewajiban asuransi tanggung gugat pihak ketiga bagi penerima waralaba dari Amerika Serikat dengan pelaku usaha hotel penerima waralaba dari negara lain berdampak pada perbedaan penerapan ganti kerugian serta mitigasi risiko oleh pelaku usaha. Penelitian ini dilakukan menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal dengan jenis penelitian kepustakaan dengan membandingkan ketentuan waralaba jaringan hotel Amerika Serikat dan India dan ditarik kesimpulan bahwa pelaku usaha hotel penerima waralaba dari Amerika Serikat memiliki kemampuan keuangan yang lebih baik dalam hal terjadi tuntutan kerugian dari pihak ketiga dalam melaksanakan kegiatan operasionalnya dibandingkan dengan penerima waralaba dari India. Kewajiban untuk memiliki polis asuransi memungkinkan penerima waralaba dari Amerika Serikat untuk mengalihkan risiko tersebut kepada perusahaan asuransi tanpa harus mengorbankan arus kas perusahaan untuk mengganti kerugian tamu hotel. Tanpa kewajiban memiliki polis asuransi, maka penerima waralaba dari India akan mengorbankan kondisi keuangannya tidak hanya untuk mengganti kerugian namun juga untuk menanggung biaya hukum pembelaan atas tuntutan pihak ketiga. Untuk memastikan konsistensi penerapan penggantian kerugian bagi tamu hotel, Negara sebagai regulator dapat mewajibkan seluruh pelaku usaha untuk memiliki asuransi tanggung gugat pihak ketiga untuk memastikan pelindungan konsumen dalam hal ganti kerugian, memberikan perlindungan bagi pelaku usaha perhotelan dari sisi risiko keuangan dan reputasi serta meningkatkan penetrasi asuransi di Indonesia.

---

Hotel business actors are vulnerable to risks that have the potential to harm hotel guests where in practice, the application of compensation in the hotel business has not been carried out consistently. Differences in regulations regarding third party liability insurance obligations for franchisees from the United States and hotel franchisees from other countries have an impact on differences in the application of compensation and risk mitigation by business actors. This research was conducted using a doctrinal research method with a type of literature research by comparing the franchise provisions for hotel chains in the United States and India and the conclusion was drawn that franchisee hotel business actors from the United States have better financial capabilities in the event of claims for losses from third parties in carrying out activities. operations compared with franchisees from India. The obligation to have an insurance policy allows United States franchisees to transfer the risk to an insurance company without having to sacrifice company cash flow to indemnify hotel guests. Without the obligation to have an insurance policy, franchisees from India will sacrifice their financial condition not only to compensate for losses but also to cover the legal costs of defending third party claims. To ensure consistency in the application of compensation for hotel guests, the State as a regulator can require all business actors to have third party liability insurance to ensure consumer protection in terms of compensation, provide protection for hotel business actors in terms of financial and reputation risks and increase insurance penetration in Indonesia."

"Sejak dikenalkan pada tahun 1964, pertanggungan wajib kecelakaan lalu lintas jalan (PWKLLJ) diselenggarakan secara monopolistik oleh negara melalui PT Jasa Raharja. Kini, mekanisme tersebut telah diubah melalui UU Perasuransian—disahkan pada tahun 2014—yang mengharuskan PWKLLJ diselenggarakan secara kompetitif. Penelitian ini menjawab persoalan perubahan norma hukum yang timbul pada penyelenggaraan program asuransi wajib, khususnya PWKLLJ, di Indonesia. Dengan menggunakan metode doktrinal dan analisis komparatif, tulisan ini mengungkap bagaimana politik hukum asuransi mengalami pergeseran dan bagaimana pengaturan hukum asuransi tersebut seharusnya dieksekusi. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa UU Perasuransian telah mempertegas pemisahan asuransi wajib komersial dari kelompok asuransi sosial. Meskipun begitu, PWKLLJ masih diselenggarakan secara monopolistik oleh PT Jasa Raharja karena adanya kekosongan hukum. Kekosongan hukum yang dimaksud terjadi karena para pembentuk undang-undang masih belum konsisten dalam mengubah politik hukum PWKLLJ yang sebelumnya berlandaskan pada prinsip perlindungan sosial ‘asuransi sosial’ ke aspek kompetitif ‘asuransi wajib komersial’. Sebagai respons atas kekosongan hukum tersebut, Penulis menghadirkan preskripsi mengenai perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 34 Tahun 1964 yang bisa diterapkan dengan melihat penyelenggaraan asuransi serupa di negara Belanda dan Tiongkok. Transformasi hukum asuransi kendaraan bermotor di Indonesia menjadi hal yang sangat mendesak untuk dilakukan demi menegakkan kepastian hukum sehingga kesejahteraan rakyat menjadi keniscayaan.

---

Since its inception in 1964, compulsory motor third-party liability insurance (MTPL) in Indonesia has been monopolized by the state through PT Jasa Raharja. This arrangement has undergone a transformation with the enactment of the Insurance Law in 2014, which mandates a competitive framework for MTPL. This research addresses the legal implications arising from this shift, particularly in the context of compulsory insurance programs in Indonesia. Employing a doctrinal and comparative analysis, this paper explores the evolution of insurance law policy and how these legal provisions should be implemented. The findings reveal that the Insurance Law has clearly delineated commercial compulsory insurance from social insurance. However, MTPL remains a monopoly of PT Jasa Raharja due to a legal vacuum. This vacuum arises from the inconsistency in the legislative efforts to transition MTPL from a social security-based system to a competitive commercial insurance model. In response to this legal gap, this paper proposes amendments to Law No. 34 of 1964, drawing on examples from the Netherlands and China. A legal transformation of motor vehicle insurance in Indonesia is imperative to ensure legal certainty and promote public welfare."

"ABSTRAKKebakaran hutan dan lahan terutama di lahan gambut yang sering terjadi di Indonesia memberikan dampak negatif yang sangat besar, baik bagi lingkungan hidup maupun bagi masyakat. Penegakan hukum perdata untuk mendapatkan kompensasi ganti rugi terhadap kerugian lingkungan maupun bagi masyarakat harus bisa didapatkan. Penggunaan dasar pertanggungjawaban perdata melalui tanggungjawab mutlak bisa dilakukan bagi kegiatan dan/atau usaha yang berada didalam sebuah ekosistem gambut ataupun memiliki dampak terhadap ekosistem gambut. Namun dalam praktiknya belum tentu badan usaha pencemar/ perusak lingkungan tersebut dapat memenuhi kompensasi tersebut secara penuh karena terdapat permasalahan insolvensi. Asuransi lingkungan hidup mampu untuk mengatasi permasalahan tersebut dengan mekanisme pengalihan risiko yang dilakukan. Keluarnya PP No. 46 Tahun 2017 tentang Instrumen Ekonomi memberikan jalan bagi penerapan asuransi lingkungan hidup di Indonesia. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan cara metode yuridis normatif dengan melihat bahan-bahan hukum yang memiliki kekuatan hukum mengikat seperti ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan.

---

ABSTRACTForest and land fires, especially on peatlands that often occur in Indonesia, have a huge negative impact both for the environment and for the community. The enforcement of civil law to obtain compensation for damages to the environment and for the community must be obtained. The basic use of civil liability through absolute responsibility can be made for activities and or businesses within a peat ecosystem or have an impact on the peat ecosystem. The basic use of civil liability through strict liability can be made for activities and or businesses within a peat ecosystem or have an impact on the peat ecosystem. In practice, however, it is not necessarily that the polluter can fulfill their compensation fully because there are insolvency problems. Environmental insurance is able to overcome these problems with the risk transfer mechanism. The issuance of PP no. 46 of 2017 on Economic Instruments provides a way for the implementation of environmental insurance in Indonesia. This research is conducted by means of normative juridical method by looking at legal materials that have binding legal force such as legislation."

"ABSTRAKPeraturan Menteri Lingkungan Hidup Republik Indonesia nomor 7 tahun 2014 tentang Kerugian Lingkungan Hidup Akibat Pencemaran dan/atau Kerusakan Lingkungan Hidup merupakan satu-satunya wadah hukum yang mengatur mengenai mekanisme perhitungan ganti rugi kerusakan dan/atau pencemaran lingkungan secara komprehensif dan menyeluruh di Indonesia. Sayangnya, peraturan menteri ini masih memiliki banyak kelemahan yang dapat menghambat proses pemulihan lingkungan hidup dan pelaksanaan sistem kompensasi bagi korban-korban. Beberapa kesalahan konsep yang terdapat dalam peraturan menteri ini adalah penuntutan secara bersamaan antara biaya pemulihan lingkungan hidup dan biaya kerusakan lingkungan hidup, metode perhitungan biaya pemulihan lingkungan hidup yang tidak berdasarkan biaya riil, dan kemungkinan terjadinya perhitungan ganda double counting . Skripsi ini akan menganalisis kesalahan-kesalahan tersebut dan memberikan solusi yang tepat melalui studi kepustakaan, perbandingan dengan The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, wawancara, dan analisis Kasus Montara. The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage adalah konvensi internasional yang menyediakan sistem kompensasi bagi korban-korban pencemaran minyak di laut. Secara garis besar, dalam The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, biaya pemulihan lingkungan hidup dituntut berdasarkan biaya riil dengan menyertakan rencana restorasi. Rencana restorasi akan mencegah terjadinya perhitungan ganda. Sistem perhitungan ganti rugi yang diatur dalam The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage diharapkan dapat menjadi pedoman bagi Indonesia untuk memperbaiki kelemahan-kelemahan sistem perhitungannya.

---

ABSTRACTRegulation of the Minister of Environment Number 7 Year 2014 Regarding Environmental Damage as A Consequence of Pollution and or Damage to the Environment is the only comprehensive law in Indonesia that regulates the mechanism of valuation environmental damage. Unfortunately, this ministerial regulation has several weaknesses which can hamper the environmental recovery and execution of compensation system for the victims. For instances, environmental recovery and environmental damage are compensated jointly, environmental recovery valuation is not based on actual cost, and a possibility of double counting. This thesis discusses about those weaknesses and provides an appropriate solutions through literature studies, comparative approach with the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, interviews, and an analysis of Montara Incident. The International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage is an international convention that provides compensation for victims of oil spill in the ocean. Basically in the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage, environmental recovery cost valuation is based on actual cost through a restoration plan. This restoration plan helps to prevent double counting. Hopefully Indonesia may improve and rectify all those weaknesses with the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage as its guidance. "

"As frustration mounts in some quarters at the perceived inadequacy or speed of international action on climate change, and as the likelihood of significant impacts grows, the focus is increasingly turning to liability for climate change damage. Actual or potential climate change liability implicates a growing range of actors, including governments, industry, businesses, non-governmental organisations, individuals and legal practitioners. Climate Change Liability provides an objective, rigorous and accessible overview of the existing law and the direction it might take in seventeen developed and developing countries and the European Union. In some jurisdictions, the applicable law is less developed and less the subject of current debate. In others, actions for various kinds of climate change liability have already been brought, including high profile cases such as Massachusetts v. EPA in the United States. Each chapter explores the potential for and barriers to climate change liability in private and public law"-- Provided by publisher.Contents Machine generated contents note: Part I. Legal, Scientific and Policy Aspects: 1. Introduction Jutta Brunne;e, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani; 2. The scientific basis for climate change liability Myles Allen; 3. Overview of legal issues relevant to climate change Jutta Brunne;e, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani; 4. Policy considerations Jutta Brunne;e, Silke Goldberg, Richard Lord and Lavanya Rajamani; Part II. National Laws: Asia and Pacific: 5. Australia Ross Abbs, Peter Cashman and Tim Stephens; 6. China Deng Haifeng; 7. India Lavanya Rajamani and Shibani Ghosh; 8. Indonesia Mas Achmad Santosa, Rifqi Assegaf and Josi Khatarina; 9. Japan Yukari Takamura; Africa/Middle East: 10. Egypt Dalia Farouk and Lamiaa Youssef; 11. Israel Issachar Rosen-Zvi; 12. Kenya Patricia Kameri-Mbote and Collins Odote; 13. South Africa Debbie Collier and Jan Glazewski; Europe and Eurasia: 14. European Union Ludwig Kra;mer; 15. Germany Hans-Joachim Koch, Michael Lührs and Roda Verheyen; 16. Poland Bartosz Kuras, Maciej Szewczyk, Dominik Walkowski, Tomasz Wardynski and Izabella Zielinska-Barlozek; 17. English law Silke Goldberg and Richard Lord; 18. Russia Fiona Mucklow Cheremeteff, Max Gutbrod, Daria Ratsiborinskaya and Sergei Sitnikov; North America: 19. Canada Meinhard Doelle, Dennis Mahony and Alex Smith; 20. United States of America Michael B. Gerrard and Gregory E. Wannier; Central and South America: 21. Brazil Yanko Marcius de Alencar Xavier and Pedro Lucas de Moura Soares; 22. Mexico Jose; Juan Gonzalez Marquez."