Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas mengenai asas iktikad baik dalam perjanjian perkawinan khususnya dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 527K/Pdt/2014. Di Indonesia, perjanjian perkawinan merupakan suatu perjanjian yang tidak hanya merupakan bagian dari Buku III Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata, melainkan juga merupakan bagian dari Buku I. Dalam pelaksanaannya, perjanjian perkawinan masih menemui beberapa kendala. Skripsi ini dilatarbelakangi oleh salah satu kendala yang dapat dialami dalam perjanjian perkawinan, yaitu iktikad baik pihak-pihak yang memiliki hubungan dengan perjanjian perkawinan tersebut. Adapun tujuan dari dilakukannya penelitian ini adalah untuk menilik lebih dalam mengenai bagaimana seharusnya suatu perjanjian perkawinan dilakukan seraya memenuhi asas iktikad baik. Bentuk dari penelitian ini sendiri adalah yuridis normatif dengan tipologi penelitian deskriptif. Dengan dilakukannya penelitian ini, Penulis menyimpulkan bahwa dalam putusan yang dibahas terdapat berbagai pelanggaran asas iktikad baik dengan sebab-sebab yang beragam. Hal ini dapat disebabkan karena masih belum adanya kepastian hukum dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Indonesia mengenai asas iktikad baik. Oleh karena itu, pemerintah sebaiknya bergegas untuk merumuskan peraturan dari iktikad baik.

---

This thesis discusses good faith principle in marriage agreement, particularly in Supreme Court Verdict No. 527K Pdt 2014. In Indonesia, marriage agreement is not just a part of 3rd Book of Indonesian Civil Code but also a part of 1st Book. In real life practice, marriage agreement still encounters many obstacles. This thesis is made based on one of the obstacle many people encounter in marriage agreement, which is good faith principle of parties related to the marriage agreement. As for the purpose of this research is to look deeper into how a marriage agreement should be executed while fulfilling the good faith principle. This is a juridical normative research with descriptive typology. By doing this research, writer concluded that in the analyzed verdict, there are violations of good faith principle with various causes. This could happen because up until this thesis is written, there is no rule of law in Indonesian Legislation concerning good faith principle. Therefore, the government should hurry to formulate regulation on good faith principle."

"Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis mengenai penerapan asas itikad baik bagi para pihak dalam melaksanakan kesepakatan yang telah dituangkan dalam Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli (“PPJB”) dan juga kewenangan Notaris yang tidak menerapkan asas kehati-hatian dalam menjalankan wewenangnya. Bahwa dalam kasus penelitian ini dalam jual beli tanah baik pihak penjual dan juga pembeli tidak menjalankan asas itikad baik, yang dapat dilihat dari tindakan konkret para pihak yaitu penjual telah menjual kembali tanah yang telah disepakati dan pembeli yang masih memegang PPJB tidak lunas pun menjual kepada pihak lain. Di sisi lain, Notaris yang bersangkutan dengan sadar membuat PPJB Lunas bagi pihak pembeli atas tanah yang masih berstatus PPJB tidak lunas. Pokok Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah mengenai itikad baik dalam pelaksanaan PPJB serta pertanggungjawaban Notaris terhadap pembuatan PPJB lunas terhadap tanah yang belum memiliki status kepemilikan secara sah. Bentuk Penelitian yang digunakan untuk menjawab permasalahan tersebut adalah dengan penelitian yuridis normatif yang bertujuan untuk meneliti dan menganalisis permasalahan hukum yang timbul dengan tipe penelitian Deskriptif dan juga Preskriptif. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa pentingnya pengaturan asas itikad baik dalam pelaksanaan PPJB dan juga aturan yang detail megnenai PPJB Hat Atas Tanah agar terciptanya keseimbangan hukum antar penjual maupun pembeli. Notaris yang menangani kasus dalam penelitian ini berdasarkan tindakan pembuatan PPJB Lunas terhadap tanah yang belum memiliki status kepemilikan yang sah telah melanggar Pasal 16 ayat (1) huruf a Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris (“UUJN”), dalam frasa saksama yaitu kehati-hatian, maka dari itu Notaris bersangkutan dapat dikenakan sanksi administrasi, perdata maupun pidana.

---

This study aims to analyze the application of the principle of good faith for the parties in carrying out the agreement as outlined in the Sale and Purchase Agreement ("PPJB") and also the authority of a Notary who does not apply the precautionary principle in exercising his authority. That in the case of this study in buying and selling land, both the seller and the buyer did not carry out the principle of good faith, which can be seen from the concrete actions of the parties, namely the seller has resold the agreed land and the buyer who still holds the unpaid PPJB also sells it to the third party. other. On the other hand, the Notary concerned consciously makes the Settled Buy and Sale Binding Agreement for the buyer of land that still has the status of PPJB not paid off. The main problem in this study is regarding good faith in the implementation of the PPJB and the notary's responsibility for making the PPJB paid off for land that does not yet have legal ownership status. The form of research used to answer these problems is normative juridical research which aims to examine and analyze legal issues that arise with descriptive and prescriptive types of research. This research shows that it is important to regulate the principle of good faith in the implementation of PPJB and also the detailed rules regarding PPJB HAT on Land in order to create a legal balance between sellers and buyers. The notary who handled the case in this study based on the act of making Settled Buy and Sale Binding Agreement for land that did not yet have legal ownership status had violated Article 16 paragraph (1) letter a of the Notary Office Law ("UUJN"), in precise phrases namely caution, therefore the Notary concerned may be subject to administration,civil or criminal sanctions."

"Dalam melakukan kegiatan jual beli atas suatu tanah dihadapan Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah PPAT harusnya para pihak telah memenuhi semua persyaratan yang diatur dalam perundang-undangan, dimana persyaratan tersebut adalah yang terkait dengan objek jual belinya. Terhadap tanah yang akan diperjual-belikan harus dipastikan bahwa Hak Atas Tanah tersebut sepenuhnya telah dimiliki secara sah oleh orang yang akan menjual tanah. Penelitian ini berbentuk Yuridis Normatif dengan pengumpulan dan analisa data secara deskriptis analisis, serta dengan pemahaman secara analisis kualitatif untuk memahami data yang berasal dari hasil identifikasi masalah yang kemudian dianalisis bedasarkan konsepsi di Bidang Hukum Perdata dan Hukum Tanah Nasional. Suatu kedudukan dan kekuatan hukum perjanjian pengikatan jual beli PPJB yang dilakukan dihadapan Notaris melekatkan kewajiban bagi calon penjual dan pembeli dan jika tidak dilanjutkan ke tingkat pembuatan Akta Jual Beli maka akan berakibat pada kerugian bagi pembeli yang telah membeli tanah tersebut, karena kedudukan atas Pejanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli PPJB sebagai alat bukti kepemilikan hanya sebatas bentuk permulaan akan terjadinya Jual Beli bukan sebagai kepemilikan yang sah dan pembeli yang beritikad baik memiliki akibat hukum yang tidak pasti jika terjadi sengketa atas apa yang diperjanjikan. Bagi para pihak, khususnya pembeli pada saat telah terjadi pelunasan dalam pembayaran tanah, hendaknya segera membuat Akta Jual Beli agar kepemilikan atas tanah tersebut memiliki kekuatan hukum yang kuat, dan Notaris selaku Pejabat Umum hendaknya memberikan penyuluhan hukum kepada setiap orang yang membuat akta, agar meminimalisir terjadi permasalahan dikemudian hari.

---

Conducting Sale and Purchase activities over a land in front of Land Deed Authority, The Parties should be fulfill all requirements which is regulated in legislation, where is are related to the object of the sale. Against the land to be traded, it must be ensured that the Land Rights are fully owned legally by the person who will sell the land. This Study is Juridical Normative with collecting and analyzing descriptive analysis data, with qualitative analysis to understand the data which derived from the result of problem identification then analyzed based on conception in the Civil Law and National Land Law. A position and legal power of a Sale and Purchase Binding Agreement made in front of Notary just attaches a liability to a prospective seller and a buyer, if not proceeded to the next level of the Deed of Sale and Purchase, it will resulting in a loss to the buyer who has purchased the land, since the position of the Binding Agreement as the proof of ownership is only limited to the formation of the Sale and Purchase not as legitimate ownership and the buyer has a Good Faith having legal consequences if the law is uncertain if there any problems. For the parties, especially the buyer after made full payment, immediately their must register to Notary to make a Deed of Sale and Purchase for make a strong legal force, and the Notary as Public Official should help and provide legal counselling to every person when making the deed in their office, in order to minimize a problem in the future."

"Jual beli dengan objek tanah sebagai salah satu mekanisme peralihan hak atas tanah semestinya dilakukan sesuai dengan sesuai dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 5 Tahun 1960 tentang Peraturan Dasar Pokok-Pokok Agraria berikut peraturan pelaksananya, dalam hal ini adalah Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 24 Tahun 1997 tentang Pendaftaran Tanah. Namun kenyataannya banyak muncul sengketa dalam jual beli tanah yang dipicu oleh adanya perbuatan melawan hukum, seperti yang ditemukan dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1440 K/Pdt/2023. Oleh karena itu penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis kedudukan hukum pemilik asal dan pembeli yang beriktikad baik dalam jual beli tanah yang memunculkan sengketa serta menganalisis pelindungan hukum bagi mereka melalui pertimbangan Majelis Hakim dalam putusannya. Penelitian hukum ini berbentuk doktrinal dengan mengumpulkan data sekunder melalui studi kepustakaan yang selanjutnya dianalisis secara kualitatif. Dari hasil analisis dapat dijelaskan bahwa kedudukan hukum pemilik asal dan pembeli yang beriktikad baik dalam jual beli tanah yang memunculkan sengketa adalah bahwa pemilik asal berhak untuk memperoleh ganti rugi yang layak dan pembeli beriktikad baik berhak untuk menguasai hak atas tanah yang disengketakan. Adapun pelindungan hukum bagi pemilik asal dan pembeli beriktikad baik dapat diberikan melalui pertimbangan Majelis Hakim dalam putusannya dengan menegaskan bahwa pemilik asal berhak atas ganti rugi dari penjual yang tidak berhak (Tergugat I-IX) sementara pembeli beriktikad baik (Tergugat X) memang pantas untuk memperoleh hak atas tanah karena diterapkannya iktikad baik dalam jual beli sebagaimana ketentuan Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 7 Tahun 2012, Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 5 Tahun 2014, dan Surat Edaran Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2016.

---

The sale and purchase of land as one of the mechanisms for the transfer of land rights should be carried out following Law Number 5 of 1960 concerning Basic Agrarian Regulations and its implementing regulations, in this case, Government Regulation Number 24 of 1997 concerning Land Registration. However, in reality, many disputes arise in the sale and purchase of land triggered by unlawful acts, as found in the Decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 1440 K /Pdt/2023. Therefore, this study aims to analyze the legal position of the original owner and the buyer in good faith in the sale and purchase of land that gives rise to disputes and to analyze legal protection for them through the considerations of the Panel of Judges in their decisions. This legal research is in the form of doctrinal by collecting secondary data through literature studies which are then analyzed qualitatively. From the results of the analysis, it can be explained that the legal position of the original owner and the buyer in good faith in the sale and purchase of land that gives rise to disputes is that the original owner has the right to obtain appropriate compensation and the buyer in good faith has the right to control the rights to the disputed land. Legal protection for the original owner and the good faith buyer can be provided through the consideration of the Panel of Judges in its decision by affirming that the original owner is entitled to compensation from the unlawful seller (Defendant I-IX) while the good faith buyer (Defendant X) is indeed entitled to obtain land rights because of the application of good faith in the sale and purchase as stipulated in the Circular Letter of the Supreme Court Number 7 of 2012, Circular Letter of the Supreme Court Number 5 of 2014, and Circular Letter of the Supreme Court Number 4 of 2016."

"Perkembangan teknologi komunikasi bermanfaat untuk memproses dan menyampaikan informasi dengan cara yang semakin modern. Salah satu bentuk penyiaran dapat dilakukan melalui siaran televisi. Dalam skripsi ini membahas mengenai putusan pengadilan dalam Perjanjian Penunjukan Pelaksana Siaran Televisi Swasta Umum antara TVRI dan Indosiar. Perjanjian tersebut dimulai dari tahun 1994 sampai dengan tahun 2014, dalam perjanjian tersebut menyatakan bahwa TVRI sebagai pihak pertama menunjuk Indosiar untuk menjadi siaran televisi swasta umum, kemudian Indosiar berjanji untuk memberikan 12,5% dari seluruh penghasilannya kepada TVRI selama 20 tahun. Pada tahun 2000, pemerintah mengesahkan peraturan baru yang mengubah status TVRI dari Yayasan ke Perusahaan Jawatan. Hal tersebut membuat pihak Indosiar merasa tidak perlu lagi melaksanakan prestasinya. Kemudian TVRI mengajukan permohonan gugatan kepada Indosiar karena Indosiar tidak melakukan prestasinya sampai dengan tahun 2000. Namun sampai dengan putusan akhir, hakim menolak permohonan dari TVRI tersebut dan menyatakan bahwa Indosiar tidak melakukan wanprestasi.

---

Development of communication technology is useful to process and convey information in a way that the more modern. One form of broadcasting can be done via television broadcasts. This thesis concerning judgment of a court in agreement appointment of execution private television broadcast common between TVRI and Indosiar. The deal is started from 1994 until 2014, in the treaty states that TVRI as the first party constitute Indosiar to become a television broadcast of public, then Indosiar promised to give 12.5% of all income is to TVRI for 20 years. In 2000, the government adopt new rules that change the status TVRI from the foundation into the company jawatan. It makes Indosiar feel no longer have to carry out the performance. Then TVRI submit the application for a lawsuit to Indosiar because Indosiar did not do the performance until the end of year 2000. But until the end of the court, with a verdict the judge refused the request of TVRI and expressed that Indosiar not doing the tort."

"Penelitian ini membahas mengenai iktikad baik Pembeli dalam jual beli yang mengalihkan hak milik atas tanah yang merupakan harta bersama tanpa persetujuan pasangan berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3325/K/PDT/2020. Ada 3 (tiga) permasalahan hukum yang muncul dari kasus ini, yaitu pertama, pemenuhan syarat materiil dan formil berdasarkan kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3325/K/PDT/2020. Kedua, iktikad Pembeli dalam jual beli tanah berdasarkan kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3325/K/PDT/2020. Ketiga, permasalahan hukum iktikad baik Pembeli berdasarkan kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3325/K/PDT/2020. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan bentuk penelitian doktrinal yang menggunakan data-data sekunder dengan mencakup bahan hukum primer yang berupa peraturan perundang undangan yang dan sekunder yang berupa buku-buku, jurnal, dan hasil riset lain. Data-data tersebut dikumpulkan melalui studi dokumen literatur. Hasil penelitian dapat disimpulkan bahwa pertama, jual beli tanah yang dilakukan oleh Tergugat III dengan almarhumah istri Penggugat memenuhi syarat materiil penjual yang berhak, namun harus dengan persetujuan Penggugat karena tersebut merupakan harta bersama. Sementara dalam jual beli antara Tergugat III dengan Tergugat V, memenuhi syarat materiil penjual yang berhak karena sistem publikasi di Indonesia yaitu sistem publikasi negatif bertendensi positf yang mengharuskan agar data dalam sertifikat dianggap benar, selama belum dibuktikan sebaliknya. Kedua, Tergugat III dan Tergugat V dinyatakan sebagai Pembeli yang tidak beritikad baik karena telah mengetahui adanya cacat hukum dalam proses jual beli tanah tersebut. Ketiga, Tergugat III sebagai Penjual telah beritikad baik untuk menjelaskan kepada Tergugat V bahwa objek jual beli sudah tidak bermasalah, walaupun pada akhirnya pengalihan hak milik dalam objek jual beli tersebut digugat dan menyebabkan Tergugat V dinyatakan tidak beritikad baik.

---

This research discusses the good faith of the Purchaser on Purchase and Sale in the terms of transferring the right of the land which is a joint property without spousal consent based on Supreme Court Decision Number 3325/K/PDT/2020. Three legal problems emerged from this case, first fulfillment of material and formal requirements in transferring land based on the case of Supreme Court Decision Number 3325/K/PDT/2020. Second, the implementation of good faith by the Purchaser in Purchase and Sale based on the case Supreme Court Decision Number 3325/K/PDT/2020. Third, the legal issue of the good faith of Purchaser based on Supreme Court Decision Number 3325/K/PDT/2020. The method of the research encompasses doctrinal research using secondary data which consists of two legal materials. There are primary legal materials which are current regulations and secondary legal materials in the form of books, journals, and other research results. Based on the research, it can be concluded that first, the sale and purchase of land conducted by The Third Defendant with Plaintiff's late wife would fulfill the material requirements of a seller who is entitled, if there was Plaintiff's approval because the object is a joint property. The sale and purchase between The Third Defendant and The Fifth Defendant can fulfill the material requirements of a seller who is entitled because the publication system in Indonesia is a negative publication system with a positive tendency which stipulates that the data in the certificate be considered correct, as long as it has not been proven otherwise. Second, The Third Defendant and The Fifith Defendant were declared as the purchasers who did not act in good faith because they were aware of the legal defects in the land sale and purchase process. Third, The Third Defendant as the Seller already explained to The Fifth Defendant that the object of the sale and purchase was not in dispute. However, in the end, the Plaintiff sued the process of transferring ownership of the land causing The Fifth Defendant to be declared not to have acted in good faith."

"Notaris sebagai pejabat umum mendapatkan kewenangan atributif dari negara untuk menjalankan sebagian fungsi publik dengan membuat alat bukti berupa akta autentik. Sudah sepatutnya, Notaris tunduk pada Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris serta Kode Etik Jabatan Notaris. Dalam kasus ini, Notaris membuat akta perubahan perjanjian utang piutang yang mengandung cacat kehendak para pihak karena adanya penyalahgunaan keadaan. Penyalahgunaan keadaan menyebabkan salah satu pihak mengajukan gugatan ke pengadilan untuk membatalkan akta tersebut. Permasalahan yang diangkat Penulis dalam tesis ini adalah pelanggaran penyalahgunaan keadaan yang dilakukan oleh para pihak dalam pembuatan akta perubahan perjanjian utang piutang dalam kasus pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 324 PK/Pdt/2018 serta pertanggungjawaban Notaris TIBM dan Notaris JSW terhadap akta yang dinyatakan batal demi hukum berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 324 PK/Pdt/2018. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah yuridis normatif bersifat deskriptif analitis dengan menggunakan jenis data sekunder yang berasal dari studi dokumen dan dianalisis melalui metode analisis kualitatif.Hasil penelitian yang diperoleh bahwa pelanggaran penyalahgunaan keadaan yang dilakukan oleh para pihak dalam pembuatan akta perubahan perjanjian utang piutang dalam kasus pada Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 324 PK/Pdt/2018 merupakan pelanggaran penyalahgunaan keadaan ekonomi sebagai salah satu cacat kehendak yang tidak memenuhi syarat sah perjanjian dalam Pasal 1320 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata yang mengakibatkan perjanjian dinyatakan batal. Berkaitan dengan pertanggungjawaban Notaris TIBM dan Notaris JSW terhadap Akta yang dinyatakan batal demi hukum berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 324 PK/Pdt/2018 sepatutnya diberikan sanksi berupa sanksi administratif, sanksi etika dan sanksi perdata.

---

A notary as a public official gets the authority from the state attribute to run part of the state functions in the form of the civil law to make evidence in the form of an authentic deed. Rightly, the notary must obey the Notary Law and Notary`s Code of ethics. In this case, The Notary has made the amendment of debt agreement deed that contains of the defective will from the parties due to the misuse condition. The misuse conditions caused on of the parties to file a lawsuit to cancel the amendment of debt agreement deed. The issues of this thesis is about violations of the misuse conditions carried out by the parties in making the amendment of debt agreement deed in the case of the Verdict of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 324 PK/Pdt/2018 and the responsibility of the TIBM Notary and JSW Notary for the deeds which are declared null and void based on the Verdict of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 324 PK/Pdt/2018. The research method used in this study is normative juridical in descriptive analytical by using secondary data types from documents studies and analyzed through qualitative analysis method.The result of this study showed that violations of the misuse conditions carried out by the parties in making the amendment of debt agreement deed in the case of the Verdict of The Supreme Court of The Republic of Indonesia Number 324 PK/Pdt/2018 is an economic misuse conditions as one of the defective will that did not fulfill the legal agreement terms in the article 1320 Code of Civil Law, resulting in being declared null and void. Relating to the TIBM Notary and JSW Notary responsibility for the deeds declared null and void in the Supreme Court Verdict in the case, in the form of administrative sanctions, ethical sanctions, and civil sanctions."

"[Perkawinan campuran sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1974 adalah perkawinan antara dua orang yang di Indonesia tunduk pada hukum yang berlainan, karena perbedaan kewarganegaraan dan salah satu pihak berkewarganegaraan Indonesia. Perkawinan campuran dapat dilaksanakan di Indonesia maupun di luar Indonesia. Dalam hal perkawinan campuran dilaksanakan di luar Indonesia adalah sah bilamana dilakukan menurut hukum yang berlaku di Negara di mana perkawinan itu dilangsungkan dan bagi Warga Negara Indonesia tidak melanggar ketentuan-ketentuan Undang-Undang Perkawinan. Dalam jangka waktu 1 (satu) tahun sejak sekembalinya mereka ke Indonesia, bukti perkawinan mereka harus didaftarkan di Kantor Pencatatan perkawinan tempat tinggal mereka. Pasangan perkawinan campuran yang hendak melangsungkan perkawinan campuran di luar negeri juga dapat membuat perjanjian perkawinan. Perjanjian perkawinan adalah perjanjian tertulis yang dibuat oleh calon suami isteri sebelum atau pada saat perkawinan dilangsungkan untuk mengatur akibat-akibat perkawinan terhadap harta kekayaan mereka. Pentingnya pembuatan perjanjian perkawinan bagi pasangan yang hendak melangsungkan perkawinan campuran adalah terkait dengan perlindungan hukum terhadap hak milik atas tanah di Indonesia yang hanya dapat dimiliki oleh Warga Negara Indonesia, sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Pokok Agraria. Penulisan tesis ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif, yaitu dilakukan dengan menelusuri bahan hukum sekunder berupa norma-norma dari peraturan perundang-undangan yang berkaitan dengan permasalahan. Prosedur pembuatan perjanjian perkawinan dalam perkawinan campuran yang dilangsungkan di luar negeri, tetap mengacu pada ketentuan Undang-Undang Perkawinan yaitu dibuat sebelum atau pada saat perkawinan dilangsungkan dan berdasarkan pada hukum yang berlaku di Indonesia. Dalam hal setelah perkawinan dilangsungkan di luar negeri dan mereka kembali ke Indonesia namun tidak mendaftarkan perkawinannya tersebut dan kemudian mereka membuat perjanjian perkawinan, maka perjanjian perkawinan tersebut menjadi batal demi hukum karena melanggar ketentuan Undang-undang yaitu dibuat setelah perkawinan berlangsung.

---

Mixed marriage as stipulated in Law No. 1 of 1974 is a marriage between two people in Indonesia which subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and one party is having Indonesian nationality. Mixed marriage can be implemented and held in Indonesia and outside Indonesia. In the case of mixed marriages conducted outside Indonesia is legal if carried out under the applicable law in the State where the marriage was celebrated and for Indonesian citizens do not violate the provisions of the Marriage Act. Within a period of one (1) year since upon their return to Indonesia, evidence of their marriage should be registered in the marriage registration office where they live. Mixed marriage couples who want to hold the marriage abroad can also make a prenuptial agreement. Prenuptial agreement is a written agreement made by the prospective spouses before or at the day of the marriage took place to regulate the effects of marriage on their property. The importance of making prenuptial agreements for couples who want to have a mixed marriage is associated with legal protection of property rights over land in Indonesia that can only be owned by an Indonesian citizen, as stipulated in the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). This thesis using normative juridical method, which is carried out by tracing the secondary law in the form of norms of the legislation relating to the cases. The procedure of making the prenuptial agreement in mixed marriages held abroad, still have to refer to the provisions of the Marriage Act is made before or at the day of the marriage took place and according to the laws in force in Indonesia. In the event that after the marriage held abroad and they return to Indonesia but did not register the marriage and then they make a prenuptial agreement, then the prenuptial agreement becomes null and void because it violated the provisions of the Act that is made after the marriage took place. Mixed marriage as stipulated in Law No. 1 of 1974 is a marriage between two people in Indonesia which subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and one party is having Indonesian nationality. Mixed marriage can be implemented and held in Indonesia and outside Indonesia. In the case of mixed marriages conducted outside Indonesia is legal if carried out under the applicable law in the State where the marriage was celebrated and for Indonesian citizens do not violate the provisions of the Marriage Act. Within a period of one (1) year since upon their return to Indonesia, evidence of their marriage should be registered in the marriage registration office where they live. Mixed marriage couples who want to hold the marriage abroad can also make a prenuptial agreement. Prenuptial agreement is a written agreement made by the prospective spouses before or at the day of the marriage took place to regulate the effects of marriage on their property. The importance of making prenuptial agreements for couples who want to have a mixed marriage is associated with legal protection of property rights over land in Indonesia that can only be owned by an Indonesian citizen, as stipulated in the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). This thesis using normative juridical method, which is carried out by tracing the secondary law in the form of norms of the legislation relating to the cases. The procedure of making the prenuptial agreement in mixed marriages held abroad, still have to refer to the provisions of the Marriage Act is made before or at the day of the marriage took place and according to the laws in force in Indonesia. In the event that after the marriage held abroad and they return to Indonesia but did not register the marriage and then they make a prenuptial agreement, then the prenuptial agreement becomes null and void because it violated the provisions of the Act that is made after the marriage took place.

Mixed marriage as stipulated in Law No. 1 of 1974 is a marriage between two people in Indonesia which subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and one party is having Indonesian nationality. Mixed marriage can be implemented and held in Indonesia and outside Indonesia. In the case of mixed marriages conducted outside Indonesia is legal if carried out under the applicable law in the State where the marriage was celebrated and for Indonesian citizens do not violate the provisions of the Marriage Act. Within a period of one (1) year since upon their return to Indonesia, evidence of their marriage should be registered in the marriage registration office where they live. Mixed marriage couples who want to hold the marriage abroad can also make a prenuptial agreement. Prenuptial agreement is a written agreement made by the prospective spouses before or at the day of the marriage took place to regulate the effects of marriage on their property. The importance of making prenuptial agreements for couples who want to have a mixed marriage is associated with legal protection of property rights over land in Indonesia that can only be owned by an Indonesian citizen, as stipulated in the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). This thesis using normative juridical method, which is carried out by tracing the secondary law in the form of norms of the legislation relating to the cases. The procedure of making the prenuptial agreement in mixed marriages held abroad, still have to refer to the provisions of the Marriage Act is made before or at the day of the marriage took place and according to the laws in force in Indonesia. In the event that after the marriage held abroad and they return to Indonesia but did not register the marriage and then they make a prenuptial agreement, then the prenuptial agreement becomes null and void because it violated the provisions of the Act that is made after the marriage took place.

;Mixed marriage as stipulated in Law No. 1 of 1974 is a marriage between two people in Indonesia which subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and one party is having Indonesian nationality. Mixed marriage can be implemented and held in Indonesia and outside Indonesia. In the case of mixed marriages conducted outside Indonesia is legal if carried out under the applicable law in the State where the marriage was celebrated and for Indonesian citizens do not violate the provisions of the Marriage Act. Within a period of one (1) year since upon their return to Indonesia, evidence of their marriage should be registered in the marriage registration office where they live. Mixed marriage couples who want to hold the marriage abroad can also make a prenuptial agreement. Prenuptial agreement is a written agreement made by the prospective spouses before or at the day of the marriage took place to regulate the effects of marriage on their property. The importance of making prenuptial agreements for couples who want to have a mixed marriage is associated with legal protection of property rights over land in Indonesia that can only be owned by an Indonesian citizen, as stipulated in the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). This thesis using normative juridical method, which is carried out by tracing the secondary law in the form of norms of the legislation relating to the cases. The procedure of making the prenuptial agreement in mixed marriages held abroad, still have to refer to the provisions of the Marriage Act is made before or at the day of the marriage took place and according to the laws in force in Indonesia. In the event that after the marriage held abroad and they return to Indonesia but did not register the marriage and then they make a prenuptial agreement, then the prenuptial agreement becomes null and void because it violated the provisions of the Act that is made after the marriage took place.

, Mixed marriage as stipulated in Law No. 1 of 1974 is a marriage between two people in Indonesia which subject to different laws, because of differences in nationality and one party is having Indonesian nationality. Mixed marriage can be implemented and held in Indonesia and outside Indonesia. In the case of mixed marriages conducted outside Indonesia is legal if carried out under the applicable law in the State where the marriage was celebrated and for Indonesian citizens do not violate the provisions of the Marriage Act. Within a period of one (1) year since upon their return to Indonesia, evidence of their marriage should be registered in the marriage registration office where they live. Mixed marriage couples who want to hold the marriage abroad can also make a prenuptial agreement. Prenuptial agreement is a written agreement made by the prospective spouses before or at the day of the marriage took place to regulate the effects of marriage on their property. The importance of making prenuptial agreements for couples who want to have a mixed marriage is associated with legal protection of property rights over land in Indonesia that can only be owned by an Indonesian citizen, as stipulated in the Basic Agrarian Law (UUPA). This thesis using normative juridical method, which is carried out by tracing the secondary law in the form of norms of the legislation relating to the cases. The procedure of making the prenuptial agreement in mixed marriages held abroad, still have to refer to the provisions of the Marriage Act is made before or at the day of the marriage took place and according to the laws in force in Indonesia. In the event that after the marriage held abroad and they return to Indonesia but did not register the marriage and then they make a prenuptial agreement, then the prenuptial agreement becomes null and void because it violated the provisions of the Act that is made after the marriage took place.

]"

"Dalam penulisan tesis ini diangkat sebuah kasus yang berkaitan dengan pelaksanaan tugas jabatan Notaris selaku PPAT. Kasus ini diambil dari putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 46 PK/Pid/2013, dimana pihak yang berperkara adalah Notaris/PPAT dan pihak klien yang menggunakan jasa Notaris/PPAT tersebut untuk mengurus surat pajak guna kepentingan pembayaran Pajak Penghasilan dan Bea Perolehan Hak atas Tanah dan Bangunan. Dalam kasus tersebut, surat pajak yang dibutuhkan ternyata palsu sehingga Notaris/PPAT dimintai pertanggungjawabannya. Penulis juga menyorot penerapan asas kehati-hatian dalam tindakan Notaris selaku PPAT dalam kasus tersebut. Pembahasan mengenai kewenangan dan kewajiban Notaris dan PPAT juga akan dituangkan dalam tesis ini dan akan menjadi landasan teori yang menghasilkan kesimpulan apakah tindakan Notaris/PPAT pada kasus yang diangkat sudah sesuai dengan asas-asas jabatan serta peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku. Penulisan ini menggunakan metode penelitian hukum normatif dengan bentuk hasil penelitian yang berupa preskriptif analitis.

---

This thesis raised a case relating to the duties execution of Notary as PPAT. This case is taken from the Supreme Court number 46 PK / Pid / 2013, which the litigants are Notary/PPAT versus the clients of the Notary/PPAT, who need to get tax letters for the purpose of payment of Income Tax and the Tax on Acquisition of Land and Building. In such case, the letter turned out to be false tax letters and therefore Notary/PPAT held accountable. In addition to legal liability, the author want to highlight the application of the precautionary principle in action of the Notary as PPAT in the case. The authority and obligation Notary and PPAT, as well as the guidance and supervision of these positions will also be outlined in this thesis, all of which will become a theorical basis that lead to the conclusion whether the acts of Notary/PPAT in this case in accordance with the principles and rules legislation in force. This writing is using normative legal research method with results in the form of prescriptive analytical research."

"ABSTRAKPerjanjian kawin merupakan perjanjian yang dilakukan oleh calon suami dan calon isteri sebelum melangsungkan perkawinan.Substansi dari perjanjian perkawinan salah satunya dapat berupapengaturan harta perkawinan.Perjanjian perkawinan dibuat secara tertulis dan disahkan oleh Pegawai Pencatat Pernikahan. Permasalahan yang dibahas yaitu bagaimana ketentuan mengenai perjanjian perkawinan menurut peraturan perundang-undangan serta bagaimana penyelesaian sengketa harta benda perkawinan yang memakai nama bersama yang berkaitan dengan perjanjian perkawinan analisis Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1358K/Pdt/2012 . Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan tipe penelitian deskriftif analitis. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian dapat ditarik kesimpulan bahwa dalam ketentuan perundang-undangan tidak diatur secara rinci tentang definisi dan isi mengenai perjanjian kawin. Ketentuan perundang-undangan yang berisi tentang perjanjian kawin terdapat dalam Pasal 139 Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata dan Pasal 29 Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 1974 tentang Perkawinan. Dalam sengketa harta perkawinan yang memakai nama bersama yang berkaitan dengan perjanjian kawin tersebut Majelis Hakim Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia menyatakan bahwa Saudari Budiati sebagai pihak yang berhak atas harta benda objek sengketa karena Saudari Budiati dapat menunjukkan bahwa seluruh harta benda objek sengketa adalah hasil pembeliannya. Namun seharusnya Saudara Ruddy Tri Santoso juga berhak atas seluruh harta benda objek sengketa karena nama Saudara Ruddy Tri Santoso tercantum di dalam bukti kepemilikan seluruh harta benda objek sengketa. Kata Kunci : perjanjian kawin, harta perkawinan, nama bersama.

---

ABSTRACTPrenuptial agreement is an agreement made by a prospective husband and a future wife before marriage. The substance of the prenuptial agreement may be the arrangement of marriage property. The prenuptial agreement is made in writing and authorized by the Registrar. The issues discussed are how the provisions concerning prenuptial agreement under the laws and regulations on how to settle dispute on joint matrimony that use share name in connection with a prenuptial agreement analysis of Supreme Court Decision Number 1358K Pdt 2012 . This research is a normative juridical research with analytical descriptive research type. Based on the results of the study can be concluded that in the provisions of legislation is not regulated in detail about the definition and contents of the prenuptial agreement. The provisions of legislation containing the marriage agreement are contained in Article 139 of the Civil Code and Article 29 of Act Number 1 1974 regarding Marriage. In a dispute on joint matrimony that use share name in connection with a prenuptial agreement the Supreme Court of Justice of the Republic of Indonesia declares that Budiati as the party entitled to the property of the disputed object because Budiati can show that all property of the disputed object is the result of her purchase. However, Ruddy Tri Santoso should also be entitled to the entire property of the disputed object because the name of Ruddy Tri Santoso is contained in the proof of ownership of all objects of disputed property. Keywords Prenuptial agreement, joint matrimony, share name. "