Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKPelaksanaan Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia, dalam beberapa perkara, kerap menarik perhatian para pelaku usaha nasional maupun internasional. Perhatian tersebut berkaitan dengan tidak terdapatnya norma yang melindungi perusahaan atau pelaku usaha dengan kondisi finansial yang sehat (solvent) dari kepailitan. Hal tersebut dapat dilihat melalui beberapa perkara kepailitan, seperti perkara PT. AJMI, PT. Prudential Assurance dan yang teranyar adalah perkara kepailitan PT. Telkomsel Seluler serta PT Eastwood Timber Industries. Rezim kepailitan Indonesia pasca terjadinya krisis moneter pada dasarnya membuka diberlakukannya upaya hukum kepailitan terhadap siapa pun sepanjang memenuhi persyaratan mengenai jumlah kreditor dan unsur utang yang bersifat luas. Prinsip utang yang bersifat luas tersebut kerap menjadi loophole penyebab terjadinya kepailitan yang mendera perusahaan atau pelaku usaha solvent. Oleh sebab itu, untuk memberikan perlindungan bagi perusahaan atau pelaku usaha solvent, solvency test seharusnya diadopsi kedalam Hukum Kepailitan nasional kedepan untuk menghindari digunakannya pranata hukum kepailitan secara tidak tepat. Penulisan tesis ini bermaksud untuk melihat bagaimana solvency test diberlakukan dalam hukum kepailitan di Amerika Serikat. Kemudian, melihat sejauhmanakah solvency test tersebut dikenal dalam proses peradilan kepailitan di Indonesia. Berkaitan dengan permasalahan tersebut, dua buah kasus kepailitan di Indonesia, masing-masing PT. Telkomsel Seluler Tbk dan PT. Eastwood Timber Industries, dianalisa untuk melihat pemberlakuan dari solvency test dan melihat sikap pengadilan mengenai hal tersebut.

---

ABSTRACTThe implementation of bankruptcy law in Indonesia has attracted attention among business people, nationally and internationally. The attention and discussion is of concern the absent of protection available for solvent company or business individuals from threats using bankruptcy regime. Since the enactment of bankruptcy law in 1998 several cases involving solvent companies had happened, such as the case of PT AJMI and PT. Prudential Assurance, which had been successfully bankrupted. Those two companies were considered solvent at the time the petition was filed by their creditors. Moreover, since the new bankruptcy regime has been amended with the new law of 37 of 2004, cases involving solvent company remain happened, inter alia: the case of PT. Telkomsel Seluler and PT Eastwood Timber Industries. Both company were solvent at the time the involuntary petition was filed by their creditors. The bankruptcy regime of 2004 clarifying claim (debt) shall be seen within a broad perspective. However, this resulted in complexity in the examination of such claims, as a result it will likely to be contradictive to the requirement stated in article 8 (2) bankruptcy law 2004. The broad perspective of claim is likely to be the loophole, causing solvent company open from the exposure of bankruptcy regime. Therefore, solvency test should be adopted into the Indonesian bankruptcy law. This Thesis comprise of a study on American Bankruptcy Code that set solvency test and also look at 2 (two) bankruptcy cases to see how the implementation of solvency test in America. Moreover, it also making an attempt to see how the commercial court in Indonesia treat argumentation using solvency test in 2 (two) cases, involving PT. Telkomsel Seluler and PT. Eastwood Timber Industries."

"Tesis ini membahas Kasus Kepailitan PT Dirgantara Indonesia yang berstatus sebagai BUMN berbentuk Persero berdasarkan ketentuan UU Kepailitan dan permasalahan terkait aset PT Dirgantara Indonesia, termasuk ke dalam aset Negara atau aset perusahaan tersebut serta diperlukannya tes kemampuan untuk membayar utang dan kesehatan keuangan (solvency test) dalam kasus Kepailitan PT Dirgantara Indonesia. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kualitatif dengan desain perskriptif. Hasil penelitian menyarankan bahwa langkah terbaik yang dapat dilakukan adalah mengubah ketentuan dalam Penjelasan Pasal 2 ayat (5) UU Kepailitan dengan menghilangkan kata-kata “terbagi atas saham”; MA Sebagai Pengadilan Negara Tertinggi harus konsisten dengan putusannya, khususnya mengenai putusan MA dalam memandang status aset BUMN; UU Kepailitan harus segera direvisi dengan mencantumkan tes kemampuan untuk membayar utang dan kesehatan keuangan (solvency test) sebagai salah satu syarat mengajukan Kepailitan.

---

The focus of this study is discusses the Bankruptcy case of PT Dirgantara Indonesia, which are shaped as the state-owned company based on the Bankruptcy Law and problems related with assets of PT Dirgantara Indonesia, including assets of the State or assets of the company and the needs of test for the ability to pay debt and financial health (solvency test) in the Bankruptcy case of PT Dirgantara Indonesia. This research is qualitative research with perskriptif design. Research results suggest that the best step that can be done is to change the provisions of the Explanation of Article 2, paragraph (5) of Bankruptcy Law with erase the words “divided into shares”; Mahkamah Agung as a State Supreme Court must be consistent with the decision, especially about the decision of the Supreme Court considered the status of the state-owned company assets; Bankruptcy Law should be revised to include tests of test for the ability to pay debt and financial health (solvency test) as one of the requirements to Bankruptcy."