Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"[Perbuatan Melawan Hukum diartikan sebagai suatu perbuatan yang melanggar hukum tertulis maupun hukum tidak tertulis. Dalam hal ini Notaris telah membuat akta Perubahan anggaran dasar CV yang melawan hukum dikarenakan adanya kelalaian Notaris dalam membuat minuta akta, yang mana notaris tidak memintakan bukti fisik dari surat kuasa pihak yang berkepentingan dalam akta sehingga terdapat keterangan palsu dalam akta tersebut. Dalam hal ini bagaimana prosedur pembuatan akta menurut Undang-Undang dan apa akibat hukum terhadap akta tersebut yang dibuat tidak sesuai undang-undang serta apa sanksi yang dikenakan terhadap notaris yang melakukan pelanggaran tersebut, Dalam penelitian ini menggunakan metode kepustakaan yaitu metode yang memiliki kegiatan mengumpulkan data sekunder yang dapat berupa bahan hukum primer maupun bahan hukum sekunder. Analisa kasus dilakukan terhadap putusan Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru Nomor 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr, dan adapun prosedur pembuatan akta notaris yang dibuat oleh (akta relaas) atau dihadapan (akta partij) Notaris dan akibat dari tidak dibuatnya akta menurut Undang-Undang adalah akta tersebut batal demi hukum. Sanksi yang dikenakan pada notaris tersebut bisa berupa sanksi perdata, sanksi pidana, dan sanksi administratif. Dalam hal ini Notaris hendaknya memiliki sifat kehati-hatian, ketelitian dan memiliki itikad baik dalam pembuatan akta otentik serta mematuhi ketentuan hukum yang berlaku dan berlandaskan pada moral dan etika.

---

Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In thisresearch literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical. Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical.;Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In

this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that

unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false

information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to

law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this

research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to

the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as

for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement

notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is

null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil

sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should

have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to

comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical., Unlawful acts defined as an act in violation of written law and unwritten law. In

this case notary had been made of amendment the articles of partnership CV that

unlawful because of negligence in making notarial deed, notary did not ask physical

evidence the power of attorney of interested parties in the act so there is false

information in the act. In this case how the deed manufacturing procedures according to

law and what sanctions are imposed on the notary who committed the offense, In this

research literature using the methods that have a secondary data gathering activities that

can be either primary law materials or secondary legal materials. In this case analysis to

the decisions of the District Court of Pekanbaru Number 116/Pdt/G/2012/Pn.Pbr. and as

for making procedure that is created by (deed party) or presence (announcement

notarial) deed, and the consequences of the deed not made under the act is the deed is

null and void, and sanctions imposed on the notary which are able to form civil

sanctions, criminal sanctions, and administrative sanctions. In this case notary should

have a prudent nature, thoroughness, and good faith in making authentic deed and to

comply with applicable law and based on moral and ethical.]"

"Akta Notaris dalam pembuatannya harus memerhatikan asas-asas hukum yang salah satunya adalah asas kehati-hatian. Tujuan penggunaan asas kehati-hatian oleh Notaris dalam pembuatan akta adalah untuk mencegah turunnya keotentisitasan akta akibat kurangnya syarat-syarat yang harus dipenuhi dalam pembuatan akta. Terdegradasinya akta Notaris yang dalam pembuatannya kurang menerapkan asas kehati-hatian bisa menjadi akta di bawah tangan maupun batal demi hukum. Akibatnya, akta tersebut dapat mengakibatkan Notaris terlibat ke dalam Perbuatan Melawan Hukum karena telah menimbulkan kerugian bagi para pihak yang bersangkutan. Adapun permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai status akta perjanjian kesepakatan tentang pengalihan saham dan aset perseroan yang dibuat dengan tidak terpenuhinya unsur dalam perjanjian pada Pasal 1320 KUH Perdata serta tanpa adanya dasar dari RUPS sesuai dengan ketentuan UUPT dan Anggaran Dasar Perseroan. Dalam rangka menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian deskriptif-analisis. Hasil penelitian dari analisis ini adalah mengenai hal-hal apa saja yang harus diperhatikan oleh Notaris dalam membuat akta supaya status akta yang dibuat tetap terjaga keotentisitasannya sehingga tidak merugikan pihak manapun maupun Notaris bersangkutan. Kemudian akibat hukum yang diterima apabila Notaris terbukti bersalah, dalam hal ini berupa sanksi perdata dan sanksi administratif. Keterlibatan Notaris dalam suatu kasus tentunya akan mengurangi rasa kepercayaan masyarakat kepada Notaris pada umumnya, untuk itu prinsip kehati-hatian harus selalu diterapkan

---

Notaries in making a deed must pay attention to legal principles, one of which is the principle of prudence. The purpose of using the precautionary principle by a Notary in making a deed is to prevent a reduction in the authenticity of the deed due to the non- fulfillment of the requirements in making the deed. The degradation of a notary deed that does not apply the principle of prudence can become a private deed or be null and void by law. As a result, the deed can result in the Notary being involved in an unlawful act because it has caused harm to the parties concerned. The issues raised in this study are regarding the status of the deed of agreement regarding the transfer of shares and assets of the company made by not fulfilling the elements in the agreement in Article 1320 of the Civil Code and without the basis of the GMS in accordance with the provisions of the Company Law and the Company's Articles of Association. To answer these problems, the method used is normative juridical research with descriptive-analytical research. The results of this analysis are about what things must be considered by the Notary in making the deed so that the status of the deed made is maintained its authenticity so that it does not harm any party or the Notary concerned. Then the legal consequences received if the Notary is proven guilty, in this case in the form of civil sanctions and administrative sanctions. The involvement of a Notary in a case will certainly reduce the public's sense of trust in a Notary in general, for that the precautionary principle must always be applied."

"Akta Wasiat merupakan kehendak terakhir dari Pewasiat untuk memberikan harta peninggalannya kepada seseorang yang ditunjuk dalam akta tersebut yang dilakukan setelah Pewasiat meninggal dunia. Pembuatan Akta Wasiat dilakukan di hadapan Notaris dan dihadiri saksi-saksi serta harus memenuhi syarat-syarat yang telah ditentukan oleh Undang-Undang. Permasalahannya adalah bagaimanakah pertanggungjawaban Notaris terhadap Kesalahan Redaksional dalam Pembuatan Akta Wasiat yang Obyeknya merupakan Harta Bersama apabila dikaitkan dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Jabatan Notaris dan bagaimanakah kaitan antara penerapan Prinsip Kehati-hatian seorang Notaris dengan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum apabila dikaitkan dengan kasus dalam Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Medan Nomor 43/Pdt.G/2020/PN Mdn. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum Yuridis-Normatif dengan menggunakan alat pengumpulan data studi kepustakaan. Tanggung jawab Notaris terhadap Kesalahan Redaksional Akta Wasiat berdasarkan ketentuan UUJN, Notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi untuk penggantian biaya, rugi dan bunga terdapat pada kententuan berikut yang diantaranya yaitu dalam ketentuan Pasal 44. Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Medan Nomor 43/Pdt.G/2020/PN Mdn., terdapat Kesalahan Redaksional dalam pembuatan Akta Wasiat yang dilakukan oleh Notaris. Atas kelalaian yang dilakukan oleh Notaris, Notaris digugat dengan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum. Pada kasus tersebut Notaris bertanggung jawab terhadap Kesalahan Redaksional pembuatan Akta Wasiat serta Notaris yang bersangkutan bertanggung jawab berdasarkan Pasal 1366 KUHPerdata dikarenakan dalam menjalankan jabatannya tidak menerapkan Prinsip Kehati-hatian. Amar Putusan Majelis Hakim menyatakan bahwa Akta Wasiat yang dibuat oleh Notaris batal. Penelitian ini berkesimpulan bahwa Notaris tersebut tidak menjalankan Prinsip Kehati-hatian dan kurang memperhatikan syarat-syarat dalam pembuatan Akta Wasiat. Saran terhadap penelitian ini bahwa Notaris dalam Putusan berkaitan harus teliti dalam membuat Erfstelling. Apabila pembuatan Erfstelling tanpa menyebutkan harta-harta milik daripada Pewasiat, maka Redaksional pembuatan Erfstelling yang dibuat oleh Notaris tidak terdapat masalah.

---

Testament Acte is the last will of the Testator to give his estate to a person designated in the deed which is done after Testator dies. The making of Legaat is carried out before a Notary and is attended by witnesses and must meet the conditions specified by the Act. In practice the making of a Legaat is often made by not fulfilling the existing provisions. The problem is how is the Notary's responsibility for Formulation Errors in making a Testament Acte whose Object is Financial Settlement if it is related to Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Position of Notary and how is the relations between the application of the Precautionary Principle of a Notary and Tort if it is related to the case in the Medan District Court Decision Number 43/Pdt.G/2020/PN Mdn. To answer these problems, the author uses Juridical-Normative legal research methods using data collection tools in the form of literature studies. The responsibility of the Notary for the error of the Formulation of Legaat based on the provisions of the UUJN, the Notary may be subject to sanctions for reimbursement of costs, compensation and interest is contained in the following provisions, including in the provisions of Article 44. In the case of the Medan District Court Decision Number 43/Pdt.G/2020/PN Mdn., there was a formulation error in the making of Legaat made by the Notary. For negligence committed by a Notary, the Notary is sued with Unlawful Acts. In that case, the Notary is responsible for the formulation of the Legaat and the Notary concerned is responsible under Article 1366 of the Civil Code because in carrying out his position he does not apply the Precautionary Principle. In the Judgment Decision, the Panel of Judges held that the Legaat made by the Notary was void. The author concludes that the Notary does not carry out the Precautionary Principle and pays little attention to the conditions in making the Legaat. The author suggests the Notary in the relevant Judgment should be meticulous in making Erfstelling. If the manufacture of Erfstelling is without mentioning the property of the Pewasiat, then the Formulation of the manufacture of Erfstelling made by a Notary is no problem.

 

"

"Notaris dalam menjalankan kewenangannya sebagai pejabat umum harus berdasarkan pada undang-undang jabatan notaris, kode etik notaris, dan peraturan lainnya yang berlaku. Hal ini dilakukan agar tidak terjadi permasalahan hukum dikemudian hari terhadap akta autentik yang dibuatnya. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini mengenai notaris yang memperbolehkan penandatanganan akta kuasa menjual tanpa dihadiri salah satu penghadap. Hal ini telah melanggar ketentuan Pasal 16 ayat (1) huruf M Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris. Bentuk penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa tindakan notaris yang memperbolehkan akta kuasa menjual ditanda tangani tanpa dihadiri salah satu penghadap mengakibatkan penerima kuasa dari akta kuasa menjual mengalami kerugian. Notaris yang seharusnya sebagai penegah dalam hubungan antara para pihak malah memperbolehkan akta kuasa tersebut ditandatangani tanpa dihadiri salah satu penghadap. Hal ini telah tidak memenuhi syarat formil dalam undang-undang jabatan notaris bahwa penandatanganan akta harus segera dilakukan setelah akta tersebut dibacakan oleh notaris.

---

A notary to performs their authority as a public official shoud be based on the constitution of law of a notary, code of ethics and other applicable regulations. This is done to prevent legal issues in the future regarding the authentic deed their made. The problem in this case is about a notary who allows the signing of power of attorney sell without the presence one of the appearers. This has violated the provisions of Article 16 paragraph (1) letter M of the Law on Notary Positions. This form of research uses a normative juridical method. The results of this case indicate that, the act of a notary allowing the deed of power of attorney to sell to be signed without the presence one of the appearers, and the resulted in the recipient of the power of attorney from the deed of power of attorney to sell suffered a loss. The notary who is supposed to act as a mediator in the relationship between the parties even allows the deed of power to be signed without the presence of one of the presenters. This does not meet the formal requirements in the law on the position of a notary that the signing of the deed must be done immediately after the deed is read by the notary."

"Perjanjian simulasi dapat terjadi ketika ada penyimpangan antara kehendak dan pernyataan. Penyimpangan ini memberi kesan bahwa para pihak telah melakukan suatu perbuatan hukum, padahal sebenarnya di antara keduanya diakui bahwa tidak ada akibat hukum dari perbuatan hukum yang terjadi. Permasalahan yang diangkat dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai keabsahan akta yang di dalamnya terdapat kausa palsu dan akibat hukum bagi notaris yang terlibat dalam pembuatan perjnjian dengan kausa palsu. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode kepustakaan dengan mengumpulkan data sekunder. Analisa kasus dilakukan terhadap Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Pekanbaru Nomor 166/ Pid.B/ 2016/ PT.PBR mengenai notaris yang terlibat dalam pembuatan perjanjian dengan kausa palsu yang terlarang. Simpulan dari penelitian adalah bahwa perjanjian yang mengandung kausa palsu terlarang menjadi batal demi hukum dan notaris yang terlibat dijatuhi sanksi pidana serta dapat dikenakan sanksi administrasi dan sanksi dari organisasi Ikatan Notaris Indonesia (INI). Notaris sebaiknya bersikap professional dan paham mengenai perjanjian simulasi beserta kausanya sehingga dalam pembuatan perjanjian dapat memastikan apakah perjanjian tersebut benar dan tidak bertentangan dengan hukum.

---

Simulation agreements can occur when there is a deviation between will and statement. This deviation gives the impression that the parties have committed a legal act, even though in fact both of them are recognized that there are no legal consequences of legal actions that occured. The problems that raised in this study are about the validity of the deed in which there are fake causes and legal consequences for the notary who involved in making of deed with fake causes. This study uses the library method by collecting secondary data. Case analysis was conducted on the Decision of the Pekanbaru High Court Number 166 / Pid.B / 2016 / PT.PBR regarding the notary who involved in the making of agreement with fake causes.

The conclusion of the study is the deed that contain prohibited fake causes is null and void and the notary who involved in making of deed with prohibited fake causes get criminal sanctions and may get administrative sanctions, also sanctions from the organization of the Indonesian Notary Association (INI). Notaries should be professional and understand about the simulation agreement and the causal so can be certain in making of deed whether the deed is true and does not conflict with the law."

"Notaris dan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah dalam menjalankan tugas jabatannya harus mengikuti kaidah tertulis, Peraturan tertulis Notaris ada pada Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris dan Kode Etik Notaris, sedangkan PPAT ada pada Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 2016 dan Peraturan Menteri Nomor 2 Tahun 2018. Notaris dianggap lalai dalam segala perbuatan melawan hukum, sedangkan lalai diartikan sebagai ketidaksengajaan, padahal tidak semua kasus hukum yang terjadi pada notaris merupakan ketidaksengajaan. Perbuatan melawan hukum juga bisa dikarenakan adanya unsur kesengajaan, namun Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata tidak menjelaksan perbedaan terkait ketidaksengajaan dan kesengajaan, sehingga sanksi hukumnya tidak memiliki perbedaan diantara keduanya. Menjawab permasalahan tersebut digunakan metode penelitian doktrinal. Penelitian berfokus pada norma hukum positif berdasarkan bahan sekunder. Tipologi penelitian bersifat eksplanatoris. Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh yaitu tindakan Notaris X dan PPAT Y tidak bisa dikatakan lalai, melainkan kesengajaan. Pada kasus terkait Notaris X tidak melaksanakan tugas jabatannya, seharusnya dibuat akta hutang piutang, namun pada akhirnya Notaris X membuat akta PPJB. PPAT Y, dalam membuat AJB tanpa sepengetahuan salah satu pihak. Akibat dari kelalaian Notaris X dan PPAT Y dapat dikenakan sanksi dari segi administrasi ketentuan tertulis, sanksi perdata terbukti memenuhi unsur PMH, dan pidana sebagai pembantu dari tindakan PMH.

---

Notaries and Land Deed Officials are obligated to follow established principles in their official duties, guided by written regulations such as the Notary Job Law, Notary Code of Ethics, Government Regulation Number 24 of 2016, and Ministerial Regulation Number 2 of 2018. Notaries are often accused of negligence, interpreted as unintentional, but not all cases involve unintentional actions; intentional elements can lead to wrongful acts. The lack of differentiation in legal sanctions between unintentionality and intentionality is due to the Civil Code. To address this issue, a doctrinal research method was employed, focusing on positive legal norms from secondary sources. Findings suggest that the actions of Notary X and PPAT Y are intentional rather than negligent. Notary X's failure to fulfill duties resulted in the non-creation of a debt agreement, opting for a PPJB deed. PPAT Y intentionally created an AJB without one party's knowledge. Consequences of their actions may lead to administrative, civil, and criminal sanctions."

"Tesis ini meneliti mengenai akibat hukum kesengajaan Notaris yang merubah isi akta tanpa dikehendaki oleh para pihak. Notaris yang bukan merupakan pihak dalam akta, tidak diperkenankan merubah isi akta yang merupakan kehendak dari para pihak. Permasalahan yang akan dibahas dalam tesis ini adalah bagaimana akibat hukum terhadap akta dan para pihak atas kesengajaan Notaris yang merubah isi akta perjanjian kerjasama tanpa dikehendaki para pihak, serta bagaimana tanggung jawab Notaris ditinjau dari berbagai aspek hukum terkait perbuatannya yang merubah isi akta. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif yang menekankan pada norma-norma hukum tertulis dengan pendekatan yuridis yang mempergunakan sumber data sekunder, digunakan untuk menganalisis berbagai peraturan perundang-undangan di bidang jabatan Notaris, bidang hukum perdata dan bidang hukum pidana, buku-buku dan artikel-artikel yang mempunyai korelasi dan relevan dengan permasalahan yang akan diteliti.Hasil dari penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa, akibat hukum atas perbuatan Notaris tersebut terhadap para pihak ialah PT BI sebagai pihak yang dirugikan tidak dapat mengajukan gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum karena perkaranya telah dinyatakan Nebis In Idem sebelumnya dan akibat hukum terhadap aktanya menjadi pembuktian di bawah tangan. Lalu tanggung jawab Notaris dari aspek jabatan Notaris ialah Notaris dapat dituntut penggantian biaya, ganti rugi, dan bunga sebagaimana Pasal 48 ayat 3 UUJNP, sedangkan dari aspek hukum perdata Notaris dapat dikenakan sanksi ganti rugi atas gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum yang diajukan kepadanya dan dari aspek hukum pidana Notaris dapat dijatuhi hukuman penjara maksimal 8 delapan tahun penjara sebagaimana Pasal 264 ayat 1 subsidair Pasal 263 ayat 1 KUHPidana.

---

This thesis examines the legal consequences of a notary which alter the contents of the deed without the will of the parties. Notary which wasn rsquo t included as the party in the deed is not allowed to amend the contents of the deed which is the will of the parties. The Content Amendment of the deed may be changed by a notary in accordance with the UUNJP regulated procedures. In this study, the author raises 2 two main issues, the first is about the the legal effect on the deed and the parties that caused by a notary which deliberately alter the contents of the deed without obtaining consent from the parties. The second issue is about the responsibility of the notary in terms of various aspects of the law related to his action when modifying the contents of the deed as in the Supreme Court Decision number 1003k PID 2015 and the decision of Pekanbaru District Court number 247 Pdt.G 2016 PN PNBR. This study uses a normative juridical method that emphasizes the juridical norms which use secondary data sources, used the analyze various laws and regulations in the notary incumbency field, the field of civil law and the field of criminal law, books and articles that correlated and revelant with the problem to be studied.The results of this study indicate that the legal consequences of the notarial act against the parties which in this case is PT BI as the aggrieved party can not file a lawsuit against the law because the case has been declared as Nebis in Idem and the consequences of the act becoming a proof under the hand. Notary responsibility on this case from the aspect of notary incumbency is the claim for cost reimbursement, compensation, and interest as stated on article 48 paragraph 3 UUJNP, while from the aspect of civily law Notary can be claimed a sanctioned compensation on the lawsuit against the law and for the criminal law aspect, the notary may be sentenced to maximum 8 years imprisonment as stated on Article 264 paragraph 1 subsidiary Article 263 paragraph 1 of the criminal code."

"Dalam melaksanakan jabatannya sebagai pejabat umum pembuat akta otentik Notaris untuk melaksanakan jabatannya sesuai dengan peraturan yang berlaku. Namun dalam prakteknya Notaris dapat melakukan perbuatan yang oleh pengadilan diputuskan telah melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum dan akta yang dibuatnya dinyatakan cacat hukum. Dalam hal ini Notaris telah membuat akta pembatalan jual beli tanpa sepengetahuan salah satu pihak. Akta pembatalan sepihak ini membuat pihak yang dirugikan mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan meminta akta dibatalkan. Mengacu pada persoalan diatas penulisan tesis ini menelaah beberapa hal yaitu bagaimana bentuk dan substansi akta yang cacat hukum karena Notaris melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum dan implikasi hukumnya dan bagimana tanggung jawab notaris terhadap akta yang dinyatakan cacat hukum karena Notaris melakukan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum ? Dalam penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitan yuridis normatif serta menggungakan jenis data sekunder berupa bahan hukum primer maupun bahan hukum sekunder. Analisis kasus dilakukan terhadap putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor : 895K/Pdt/2013. Adapun terhadap akta yang dinyatakan cacat hukum dapat berimplikasi paenurunan status atau degradasi kekuatan alat bukti. Degradasi kekuatan bukti akta notaris dari otentik menjadi kekuatan bukti dibawah tangan, dan cacat yuridis akta notaris mengakibakan akta notaris dapat dibatalkan atau batal demi hukum atau non existent. Terhadap perbuatannya, Notaris dapat dimintai pertanggungjawaban secara perdata, pidana dan administratif.

---

In doing the function as a Public Official who makes the authentic deed, a Notary required to perform his duty based on actual law. As for the practice, Notary may do some inappropriate action or against the law that by the court has been punished for Unlawful Acts and the deed stated as disable. In this case, Notary has made the cancellation deed of sell and purchase without any notification to other party. This cancellation deed made without notification has trigger the other party as a buyer to bring this case to the court where they sue the seller for the deed their made without notification and ask to cancel the deed. Based on the case above this thesis try to analyze several issues for instance how the form and substance from the disability of deed and its implication because Notary has done unlawful acts and how is Notary responsibility for his deed that has been declared as disabled because of unlawful acts This research using normative juridical methods and using secondary data namely primary law materials and secondary legal materials. In this regard, the case analysis taken from the decisions of the Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 895K Pdt 2013. Regarding to the disability of deed, its implication is the degradation of strength of evidence from the deed. Degradation the strength of evidence of deed cause an authentic deed become unauthentic and disability of deed cause Notary deed can be cancelled or null or non existent. Related to his action, several sanction may imposed to Notary which are civil sanction, administrative sanction and criminal sanction."

"Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham (RUPS) terkait perubahan susunan pemegang saham seharusnya dilaksanakan sesuai prosedur serta persyaratan pelaksanaan RUPS dan syarat pemindahan hak atas saham sebagaimana ditentukan dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Namun pada kenyataanya RUPS PT AN tidak memenuhi syarat pemindahan hak atas saham yang mengakibatkan pembatalan akta pernyataan keputusan RUPS seperti yang ditemukan dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 223 PK/PDT/2022. Oleh karena itu penelitian ini dilakukan dengan mengangkat permasalahan tentang keabsahan pemindahan hak atas saham pada PT AN dan tanggung jawab notaris terhadap akta pernyataan keputusan RUPS yang telah dibatalkan oleh hakim. Penelitian hukum doktrinal ini dilakukan dengan melakukan pengumpulan bahan hukum primer, sekunder, dan tersier melalui studi dokumen yang selanjutnya dianalisis. Dapat dikemukakan 2 (dua) hasil analisis dari penelitian ini yaitu: Pertama, pemindahan hak atas saham pada Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Bersama Para Pemegang Saham Nomor 42 Tanggal 28 November 2014 sebagian sah untuk 60 (enam puluh) saham karena telah memenuhi prosedur serta persyaratan pengambilan keputusan sirkuler dan syarat pemindahan hak atas saham tetapi sebagian lainnya tidak sah untuk 129 (seratus dua puluh sembilan) saham karena tidak ada akta pemindahan hak atas saham. Pada Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham Nomor 14 Tanggal 24 Desember 2014 tidak sah seluruhnya serta melawan hukum karena melanggar syarat pemindahan hak atas saham yaitu tanpa akta pemindahan hak atas saham dan tanpa persetujuan pemegang saham melalui RUPS; Kedua, notaris memiliki tanggung jawab atas pembatalan Akta Pernyataan Keputusan Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham Nomor 14 Tanggal 24 Desember 2014 secara perdata berupa ganti rugi. Notaris juga dapat diberikan sanksi administratif berupa teguran lisan/tulisan atau pemberhentian dengan hormat/tidak hormat sebagai notaris oleh majelis pengawas notaris. Selain itu, notaris juga dapat dikenakan sanksi kode etik oleh dewan kehormatan notaris berupa teguran lisan/tulisan atau pemberhentian dengan hormat/tidak hormat dari keanggotaan organisasi notaris.

---

The General Meeting of Shareholders (GMS) related to changes in the composition of shareholders must be carried out by the procedures and requirements for implementing the GMS and the provisions for transferring rights to shares as stipulated in Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies. However, in reality, PT AN's GMS did not fulfill the requirements for transferring rights to shares, which resulted in the cancellation of the deed of the statement of the GMS decision as found in Supreme Court Decision Number 223 PK/PDT/2022. Therefore, this research was conducted by raising issues regarding the validity of the transfer of rights to shares in PT AN and the responsibility of the notary regarding the deed of the GMS decision, which the judge canceled. This doctrinal legal research was conducted by collecting primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials through document studies which were then analyzed. It can be stated 2 (two) results of the analysis of this study, namely: First, the transfer of rights to shares in the Deed of Statement of Joint Contract of Shareholders Number 42 dated 28 November 2014 is partially valid for 60 (sixty) shares because it has fulfilled the procedures and decision-making requirements circular and requirements for the transfer of rights over shares, but the other part is not valid for 129 (one hundred twenty-nine) shares because there is no deed of transfer of rights over shares. The Deed of Statement of Resolutions of the General Meeting of Shareholders Number 14, dated 24 December 2014 invalid as a whole and against the law because of a violation of the requirements for the transfer of rights to shares, namely without the deed of transfer of shares ownership and without the approval of shareholders through the GMS; Second, the notary has the responsibility for canceling the Deed of Statement of Resolutions of the General Meeting of Shareholders Number 14 dated 24 December 2014 in the form of compensation. Notaries can also be subject to administrative sanctions in the form of verbal/written warnings or respectful/disrespectful dismissal as a notary by the notary supervisory board. In addition, notaries can also be subject to code of ethics sanctions by the notary honor council in the form of verbal/written warnings or dismissal with respect/disrespect from the notary organization."

"Notaris dalam menjalankan jabatannya untuk pembuatan akta dan telah melakukan kewajibannya tetapi Notaris berkemungkinan melakukan kelalaian yang berakibat akta yang dibuatnya batal demi hukum. Klien notaris yang menderita kerugian akibat akta batal demi hukum berhak untuk menuntut pertanggungjawaban notaris yang membuat akta tersebut didasarkan pada Undang-Undang yang berlaku. Permasalahan yang diangkat adalah bagaimanakah bentuk kelalaian notaris dan akibat hukum kelalaian notaris dalam pembuatan akta perjanjian sewa menyewa dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 2750 K/PDT/2018. Metode Penulisan tesis ini menggunakan bentuk penelitian hukum yuridis normatif dan tipe penelitian deskriptif analitis. Dari penelitian ini diketahui bahwa bentuk kelalaian notaris dalam putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor yaitu Notaris EM melanggar ketentuan pasal 16 ayat (1) UUJN karena Notaris EM tidak teliti dan juga melanggar kewajiban penyampaian penyuluhan hukum berkaitan dengan hal-hal penting dalam pembuatan akta sewa menyewa serta keberpihakan notaris EM pada para penghadap dalam akta perjanjian sewa-menyewa yaitu ER, SH,dan FIT yang merugikan OC. Kesimpulan dari penelitian ini adalah akibat hukum kelalaian notaris dalam pembuatan akta perjanjian sewa menyewa pada putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia nomor ditolaknya permohonan kasasi dari Pemohon banding oleh FIT dan Menghukum FIT untuk membayar biaya perkara dalam tingkat kasasi sejumlah Rp500.000,00. Kata Kunci: Akibat Hukum, Kelalaian Notaris, Akta, Perjanjian Sewa Menyewa

---

Notary in performing their duties in a deed and Notary has carried out its obligations but the Notary is likely to carry out negligent consequences the deed he made is null and void.Clients who suffered losses due to the notary deed null and void right to demand accountability of the notary who made the deed based on the applicable law. Issue in this thesis is how are the form of notarys negligences and as a result of the law of notary negligence in the making of deed of rent agreement in Supreme Court Republic of Indonesia Decision Number 2750K/PDT/2018. 

This thesis research method is using the form of normative juridical legal research and the type of analytical descriptive research. The result of this study is the form of notarys negligences in Supreme Court Decision Republic of Indonesia Number "https://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/putusan/ namely Notary EM violates the provisions of Article 16 (1) of the UUJN because the Notary EM is not careful in reviewing the authority of the parties acting as subjects and the viewer in the deed of rent agreement and violates the obligation to submit information on the law relating to the important things that need to be considered in making the deed of rent agreement.

The conclusion of this study as a result of negligence law in a deed notarized rent agreement on Supreme Court Republic of Indonesia Decision Number "htts://putusan.mahkamahagung.go.id/putusan is rejected the appeal from the Appellant by FIT and Sentenced the FIT to pay the court fees in this appeal amounting to Rp500,000.00. "