Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai ketentuan perikatan gadai saham bila dihadapkan dengan Undang-undang Nomor 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas (UU 40/2007), khususnya mengenai ketentuan pemindahan hak atas saham dan keberlakuan hak memesan saham terlebih dahulu dalam eksekusi gadai saham.Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundang-undangan, pendekatan perbandingan, dan pendekatan kasus.Penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa perikatan gadai saham tidak dapat mengecualikan ketentuan dalam UU 40/2007 dan hak memesan saham terlebih dahulu tetap berlaku oleh karena itu hak tersebut haruslah dihormati pada eksekusi gadai saham kecuali hak tersebut telah dilepaskan oleh si pemegang hak.

---

This thesis describes the conformity of Share Pledge Agreements clauses to Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Company (Law 40/2007), specifically regarding the provisions on transfer of shares and the binding power of preemptive rights on the execution of pledged shares.

This thesis is a normative legal study and employs statutes, a comparative approach, and a case study in its analysis.

This thesis concludes that a Share Pledge Agreement cannot contradict the provisions set forth in Law 40/2007. Moreover, in the event the holders of preemptive rights have not discharged their rights, such rights are still in effect and maintain a binding power in the execution of pledged shares."

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai eksekusi gadai saham melalui penjualan secara tertutup. Pada skripsi ini akan dibahas mengenai tiga hal. Pertama, pembahasan mengenai keberlakuan KUH Perdata dalam eksekusi gadai saham melalui penjualan secara tertutup. Kedua, pembahasan mengenai kendala-kendala yang dihadapi dalam pelaksanaan eksekusi gadai berdasarkan KUH Perdata. Dan ketiga, pembahasan mengenai keberlakuan Undang-Undang No. 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas khususnya mengenai ketentuan pemindahan hak atas saham dalam eksekusi gadai saham melalui penjualan secara tertutup. Ketiga pembahasan tersebut dilakukan berdasarkan kasus eksekusi gadai saham PT Panganmas Inti Persada oleh Langdale Profits Ltd. yang terdapat dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung RI No. 2875 K/PDT/2008. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menggunakan pendekatan peraturan perundangundangan, pendekatan perbandingan, dan pendekatan kasus.Penilitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa eksekusi gadai saham melalui penjualan secara tertutup dapat dilakukan dengan penerapan KUH Perdata khususnya Pasal 1156. Eksekusi gadai saham melalui penjualan secara tertutup juga tetap harus memperhatikan ketentuan pemindahan hak atas saham dalam UU No. 40 Tahun 2007 yaitu memperhatikan Anggaran Dasar perusahaan.

---

This thesis discusses the execution of pledge of shares through private selling. This thesis focuses mainly on three issues. First, a discussion of the applicability of the Civil Code in the execution of pledge of shares through private selling. Second, the explanation about constraints faced in the implementation of the pledge execution based on the Civil Code. And third, a discussion of the validity of Law No. 40 of 2007 on Limited Liability Companies, in particular concerningthe transfer of shares in the execution of pledge of shares in private. All discussions are done based on an execution case of pledge of shares of PT Inti Persada Panganmas by Langdale Profits Ltd. contained in Supreme Court Decision No. 2875 K/PDT/2008. This research is a normative juridical approach to legislation, comparative approach, and case study.

This research concludes that the execution of pledge of shares in private can be done with the application of Article 1156 of the Indonesian Civil Code. Execution of pledge of shares through private selling also should consider the provision of transfer of shares in the Law No. 40 of 2007, which requires attention to the Articles of Association of the company."

"Pemberitahuan kepada Komisi telah terjadinya pengambilalihan saham harus dilakukan apabila sudah melebihi jumlah tertentu dan harus dilakukan selambat-lambatnya 30 (tiga puluh) hari sejak tanggal pengambilalihan tersebut. PT Pembangunan Perumahan (Persero), Tbk. Terlambat menyampaikan pemberitahuan pengambilalihan saham PT Centurion Perkasa Iman kepada KPPU selama 2 (dua) hari kerja. Atas pelanggaran tersebut, PT PP (Persero), Tbk dijatuhkan denda sebesar Rp1.000.000.000,00 (Satu Miliar Rupiah). Denda tersebut mengalami pengurangan dari pengaturan undang-undang karena pertimbangan hal-hal yang meringankan oleh Majelis Komisi. Pengurangan denda karena hal-hal yang meringankan mengakibatkan pendapat Majelis Komisi menjadi peran sangat penting. Selain itu, dalam kasus ini juga terdapat perbedaan pendapat mengenai definisi dan kategori perusahaan terafiliasi. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan tujuan menganalisis kasus pengambilalihan saham PT CPI oleh PT PP (Persero), Tbk berdasarkan undang-undang. Hasil dari penelitian ini adalah terdapat salah pengertian oleh PT PP (Persero), Tbk mengenai perusahaan terafiliasi dan penghitungan nilai aset dan/atau nilai penjualan gabungan. Pertimbangan Majelis Komisi dengan alasan hal-hal yang meringankan tidak diatur dalam undang-undang.

---

The Commission must be notified of the acquisition of shares after a particular period of time has elapsed and no later than thirty (30) days after the date of acquisition. PT Pembangunan Perumahan (Persero), Tbk is known to have been 2 (two) business days late in notifying KPPU of the takeover of PT Centurion Perkasa Iman shares. For this infraction, PT PP (Persero), Tbk was liable to a fine of IDR 1,000,000,000.00 (One Billion Rupiah). However, the amount of the fine was reduced from that which had been stipulated by law because of the relief granted by the Commission Council. In this case, the Commission Council has a very important role in reducing the fines that have been set at PT PP (Persero) Tbk. Furthermore, in this scenario, there are varying opinions on what constitutes an affiliated company and how to classify them. To analyse the situation of PT PP (Persero), Tbk's takeover of PT CPI shares in a way that is compliant with the law, this study employs a method known as normative juridical research. Based on the findings of this research, PT PP (Persero), Tbk has some confusion about how to value its affiliated companies' assets and/or total sales. The consideration of mitigating circumstances by the Commission Council is not governed by law."

"[ABSTRAKPenjualan lelang eksekusi gadai saham melalui pelelangan umum harus dilakukan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas I di Kantor Pelayanan Kekayaan Negara dan Lelang (KPKNL). Namun pada prakteknya lelang terdapat lelang eksekusi gadai saham yang dilaksanakan oleh Pejabat Lelang Kelas II dan dilakukan di Balai Lelang Swasta sebagaimana dituangkan dalam risalah lelang nomor RL-0XX/2011. Penelitian ini dilakukan untuk mengetahui bagaimanakah sebenarnya kewenangan pejabat lelang, khususnya Pejabat Lelang Kelas II, dalam melaksanakan lelang gadai atas saham serta bagaimanakah dampak pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang terhadap lelang yang telah dilaksanakan tersebut. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode yuridis normatif, yaitu dengan memperhatikan risalah lelang yang telah diterbitkan oleh Pejabat Lelang dan diperbandingkan terhadap ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku berkenaan dengan lelang. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dalam hal terjadi pelanggaran kewenangan pejabat lelang dalam melaksanakan lelang, maka terhadap pejabat lelang tersebut akan dinyatakan melanggar ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang lelang dan izinnya sebagai Pejabat Lelang dapat dikenakan sanksi berupa pembebastugasan untuk jangka waktu tertentu. Pejabat Lelang tersebut juga berkewajiban untuk mengganti kerugian yang ditimbulkan. Selain itu, terhadap lelang yang dilaksanakan tanpa kewenangan pejabat lelang, maka lelang tersebut dianggap batal demi hukum. Namun prosedur pembatalan lelang yang batal demi hukum belum diatur lebih lanjut dalam ketentuan peraturan perundang-undangan lelang yang ada saat ini.

---

ABSTRACTShares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.;Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer?s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia., Shares pawned with creditors (pledge) should be sold by public auction conducted by the Class I Auctioneers of the State Asset and Auction Services Office (KPKNL). In practice, however, there was an auction of the aforementioned pledge conducted by a Class II Auctioneer at a Private Auction House as set forth in the Auction Deed No. RL-0XX/2011. This research examines auctioneer’s authority, particularly the Class II Auctioneer, in conducting auctions of pawned shares and how a violation of the provisions on authority affecting the auction. The research used the normative juridical method, by taking into account the Auction Deed and the prevailing regulations in relation to auctions. The research concluded that if an auctioneer violates the provision on authority in conducting the auction, he shall be guilty of an offense against the Auction Regulations and his license as an auctioneer may be suspended for a certain time period. He may also be obliged to pay the losses incurred. Furthermore, the auction of pawned shares conducted by the Auctioneer without proper authority shall be deemed as null and void. However the revocation procedure for a null and void auction has not been set forth in auction regulations in Indonesia.]"

"Tesis ini dilatarbelakangi oleh maraknya pembuatan penjaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup untuk jaminan suatu hutang berdasarkan lembaga jaminan gadai selama ini, sementara berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 tentang Jaminan Fidusia, pembuatan jaminan atas saham dapat juga dilakukan dengan menggunakan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Oleh karenanya hal itu menimbulkan pertanyaan bagi penulis, mengapa para pihak pada umumnya, atau penerima jaminan atas saham pada khususnya, lebih memilih lembaga jaminan gadai daripada menggunakan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Apakah keunggulan penggunaan lembaga jaminan gadai dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Apakah memang lembaga jaminan gadai memberikan perlindungan hukum yang lebih baik dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah yuridis normatif. Oleh karena itu, lebih lanjut tesis ini akan membahas mengenai tinjauan yuridis mengenai konsep saham, lembaga jaminan gadai dan lembaga jaminan fidusia, prosedur gadai saham dan fidusia atas saham serta perbandingan perlindungan hukum yang diberikan oleh ketentuan perundang-undangan bagi pemegang jaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup berdasarkan konsep lembaga jaminan gadai dan lembaga jaminan fidusia. Hasil penelitian dalam tesis ini adalah bahwa lembaga jaminan gadai lebih baik digunakan untuk penjaminan atas saham dalam perseroan terbatas tertutup dibandingkan lembaga jaminan fidusia.

---

The background of this research is that nowadays there is so many granting of shares as debt collateral in the form of pledge of shares in the closed limited liability company, whereas based on Law No. 42 Year 1999 concerning Fiduciary Security, the granting of shares as debt collateral might be given in the form of fiduciary security. This fact, therefore, raise questions for the writer, why the concerned parties in general, or the grantee or the holder of the shares collateral in this matter, prefer to use security institution of pledge other than the security institution of fiduciary security. What the advantages of using the security institution of pledge other than the security institution of fiduciary security are. Whether security institution of pledge shall give legal protection better than the security institution of fiduciary security.

The research method for this thesis is judicial normative. Therefore, further, this thesis shall discuss the legal review regarding the legal concept of shares, security institution of pledge and security institution of fiduciary security, the procedure of security institution of pledge of shares and security institution of fiduciary security upon shares, and also the comparative legal protection given by the laws and regulations to the holder of collateral upon shares in the closed limited liability company based on the security concepts of pledge and fiduciary security. The research result is that the security institution of pledge of shares shall be better than the security institution of fiduciary security upon shares."

"ABSTRAKTerkait dengan parate eksekusi didalam ketentuan eksekusi gadai saham, pelaksanaan gadai saham pada praktiknya menimbulkan permasalahan hukum, khususnya dalam pengeksekusiannya. Hal tersebut ditandai dengan adanya penafsiran yang berbeda mengenai eksekusi gadai saham oleh praktisi hukum maupun yang dihasilkan oleh pengadilan, khususnya Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, terkait dengan pengaturan jangka waktu dalam perjanjian gadai itu sendiri. Hal ini menggambarkan belum ada kesamaan penafsiran terhadap eksekusi gadai saham di Indonesia. Tentunya, perbedaan-perbedaan penafsiran inilah yang nantinya dalam praktik menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum, khususnya yang terjadi dalam sengketa perjanjian gadai saham antara PT. BFI Finance, Tbk (PT. BFI) selaku pemegang gadai dengan PT. Ongko Multicorpora (PT. OM) dan PT. Aryaputra Teguharta (PT. APT) selaku pemberi gadai. PT.APT dan PT. OM mendalilkan jangka waktu Perjanjian Gadai Saham adalah 12 (dua belas) bulan terhitung sejak tanggal perjanjian, karena itu tanggal jatuh tempo Akta Gadai Saham adalah 1 Juni 2000 dan akibat hukum berakhirnya jangka waktu gadai adalah objek gadai, yaitu saham-saham yang digadaikan Pemberi Gadai sudah tidak lagi terikat sebagai jaminan hutang kepada PT.BFI. oleh karena itu pelaksanaan eksekusi gadai saham oleh PT. BFI dengan menjual saham-saham milik Pemberi Gadai pada tanggal 9 Februari 2001 dianggap sebagai perbuatan melawan hukum. Berdasarkan dalil Pemberi Gadai tersebut, Majelis Hakim Agung dalam putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 240 PK/pdt/2006 mengabulkan gugatan Pemberi Gadai (PT. APT) dan menyatakan tidak sah pelaksanaan eksekusi atas gadai saham yang dilakukan PT. BFI. Namun terhadap Putusan Permohonan Peninjauan Kembali No. 240 PK/Pdt/2006 tanggal 20 Februari 2007 ternyata terdapat perbedaan baik didalam pertimbangan dan hasil putusan yang kemudian diajukan oleh PT. OM dalam Putusan Peninjauan Kembali Mahkamah Agung RI No. 115 PK/Pdt.2007 dimana pelaksanaan eksekusi gadai saham oleh PT.BFI adalah sah menurut hukum. Untuk menjawab permasalahan perbedaan penafsiran tersebut, dilakukan penelitian secara normative terhadap putusan Mahkamah Agung dan peraturan perundang-undangan yang mendasarinya. Pengolahan data secara kualitatif, sedangkan pengambilan kesimpulan dilakukan dengan menggunakan logika deduktif. Dengan metode ini diharapkan kesimpulan yang disampaikan dalam tesis ini dapat menjawab permasalahan kepastian hukum mengenai pelaksanaan eksekusi atas gadai saham, dalam hal jangka waktu perjanjian gadai telah berakhir tetapi hutang debitor belum dilunasi seluruhnya.

---

ABSTRACTThe implementation of pledge on shares raises legal issues, particularly in the enforcement of the execution in the provision of pledge on shares. It is characterized by the existence of different interpretations regarding to legal opinion of the execution on pledge of shares, related to period time in pledge of shares agreement, by legal practitioners nor the Court, especially the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia. This illustrates that the execution of pledge of shares in Indonesia has not yet had similar interpretation in legal framework of pledge. The differences of this interpretation is what will create legal uncertainty, especially those that occur in pledge of shares agreement disputes between PT. BFI Finance Tbk (PT BFI) as "pledgee" with PT. Ongko Multicorpora (PT OM) and PT. Aryaputra Teguharta (PT APT) as "pledgor". PT.APT and PT. OM postulated that Pledge of Shares Agreement term is during 12 (twelve) months from the date of the agreement, hence the agreement is ended in June 1, 2000. The expiry of period time in pledge of shares agreement is that pledge property, the shares which is guaranteed by pledgor is no longer bound as collateral to PT.BFI as pledgee. Therefore the execution of pledge of shares by PT. BFI which selling the pledgor shares on February 9, 2001 is considered as a tort. Based on the pledgor arguments, the Supreme Council of Judges in judicial review of the Supreme Court decision No. 240 PK/pdt/2006 fulfill pledgor (PT APT) petition and outlawed the execution of the pledged shares selling by PT. BFI. However, the Petition for Judicial Review Decision of supreme court No. 240 PK/Pdt/2006 dated February 20, 2007 turned out there is a controversial. It is because of difference both in judgment and the verdict which was then filed by PT. OM in judicial review of the Supreme Court decision No. 115 PK/Pdt.2007. Its judge that the enforcement of execution of pledged shares by PT. BFI was lawful. This Thesis is using a normative research towards the supreme court verdict and legislation underlying to answer the legal issues which has proposed above. In addition, it uses Qualitative data processing, while the conclusions made with deductive logic. With these method are expected conclusions presented in its can answer the problem of legal certainty regarding the execution of the pledge on shares, especially in which case the contract period has ended but debtor has not fulfill the debt."

"Gadai merupakan jaminan dengan menguasai bendanya. Gadai saham dilakukan dengan cara menyerahkan sertifikat saham yang menjadi objek gadai kepada pihak yang meminjamkan modalnya atau disebut juga perjanjian utang piutang dengan jaminan gadai. Perbankan dalam melaksanakan Pemberian pinjaman kepada Debitur dapat menahan Saham yang dimiliki oleh suatu Debitur, sehingga bila Debitur tidak dapat memenuhi prestasinya, maka Pihak Bank dapat menggadaikan saham tersebut. Namun terdapat permasalahan dalam proses Eksekusi Gadai Saham milik Beckett, Pte, Ltd, yang dilakukan oleh Deutsche Bank. Untuk itulah ada beberapa pokok permasalahan yang akan dibahas dalam penulisan ini, yaitu 1). Bagaimanakah eksekusi Gadai Saham menurut Hukum Indonesia, 2). Apakah eksekusi gadai saham Beckett, Pte, Ltd telah sesuai dengan ketentuan hukum yang berlaku. Metode Penelitian menggunakan bentuk penelitian yuridis normatif, yaitu cara penelitian dengan menggunakan data sekunder atau kepustakaan. Tipe penelitian adalah penelitian deskriptif analistis. Kesimpulan dari penulisan ini adalah 1). Eksekusi gadai saham dapat dilakukan melalui parate eksekusi berdasarkan pasal 1155 KUH Perdata dan perantaraan pengadilan menurut pasal 1156 KUH Perdata, 2). Dalam kasus gadai saham Beckett, Pte, Ltd, penjualan barang gadai yang dilakukan setelah debitur wanprestasi telah dilakukan dengan parate eksekusi secara tepat, karena penjualan tidak dilakukan di muka umum, melainkan secara private, dan kreditur telah meminta penetapan dari Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan untuk mengijinkannya melakukan hal tersebut.

---

Lien is a security by virtue of control over the object. Shares Lien is conducted through assignment of shares that are the object of lien to a lending party or it is also referred to as loan agreement with Shares Lien. In applying the provision of loan, banks can retain shares owned by a Debtor. In the event that the Debtor failed to comply with his obligation, the bank could put the shares concerned under lien. However, problems are found on the execution of the lien of shares owned by Beckett, Pte, Ltd; an execution conducted by Deutsche Bank.

The problems would be elaborated by this writing through the following questions: (1) how is the execution of Shares Lien in Indonesia? (2) whether the execution of lien of shares of Beckett, Pte, Ltd complies with the prevailing laws? The method of this research applies a juridical norm research, which is a research relying on secondary data. The type of research is analytical-descriptive.

The conclusion of this writing is that: 1) direct execution of shares lien can be conducted by virtue of execution in accordance with Article 1155 of the Indonesian Civil Code and through Court as governed under Article 1156 of the Indonesian Civil Code. In the case of Lien Shares of Beckett, Pte, Ltd, the sales of the encumbered objects were conducted following the breach of contract. The execution was conducted properly. The sales were not conducted before the public; the sales were conducted privately and the creditor had requested a decree from the District Court of South Jakarta to allow the sales."