Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Skripsi ini membahas penerapan frase ‘under the law of which’ dalam Pasal V (1) (e) Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 oleh Pengadilan Indonesia dalam Perkara Karaha Bodas. Penerapan oleh Pengadilan Indonesia ini akan dibandingkan dengan satu putusan dari Pengadilan India dan dua putusan dari Pengadilan Amerika Serikat. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian kuantitatif dengan desain deskriptif analitis. Hasil penelitian ini di antaranya menyarankan agar sebuah klausula arbitrase disusun dengan hati-hati dan para pihak yang berarbitrase memiliki itikad baik untuk melaksanakan suatu putusan arbitrase.

---

This study is to analyse the interpretation of the phrase ‘under the law of which in Article V (1) (e) Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 by Indonesian Court. The interpretation is compared to that of Indian and American Court. The researcher suggests that the parties to a contract draft their arbitration clause carefully and undertake to carry out the arbitral award with good faith. This is a quantitative and descriptive-analytical research."

"Kondisi Indonesia yang saat ini telah menjadi salah satu negara anggota New York Convention on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention 1958) membuka peluang bagi putusan arbitrase internasional untuk dapat diakui dan dilaksanakan di wilayah hukum Republik Indonesia. Dalam hal ini klasifikasi suatu putusan arbitrase, apakah merupakan putusan arbitrase internasional atau putusan arbitrase nasional, menjadi penting karena berpengaruh terhadap kewenangan pengadilan terhadap perkara arbitrase internasional. Namun pada praktiknya dijumpai adanya perbedaan persepsi mengenai putusan arbitrase internasional menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (Undang-Undang Arbitrase) dan konvensi internasional. Dengan menggunakan pendekatan yuridis normatif skripsi ini akan memberikan analisis mengenai aspek-aspek Hukum Perdata Internasional serta analisis mengenai pertimbangan hukum para hakim di Indonesia dalam pengklasifikasian putusan arbitrase internasional pada perkara Nomor 144/K/Pdt/2012 dan perkara Nomor 175/PDT/2018/PT.DKI. Selain itu juga ditemukan keperluan atas keselarasan pengaturan mengenai putusan arbitrase internasional dalam Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan konvensi-konvensi internasional demi mencapai kepastian hukum.

---

The condition of Indonesia which is one of the member country of the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1958 (New York Convention 1958) give an opportunity to the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the jurisdiction of Indonesia. According to this condition the classification of arbitral awards, whether international arbitral award or national arbitral award, is important because it could affects the authority of the national court against international arbitration cases. In fact, there is a different perspective about international arbitral awards under the Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Arbitration Law) and international convention.

By using juridical normative approach, this thesis would give an analysis about the Private International Aspects and law considerations of Indonesian judges in the classification of international arbitral awards on case No. 144/K/Pdt/2012 and case No. 175/PDT/2018/PT.DKI. In addition, it is also requiring the regulation conformity of international arbitral awards under Arbitration Law and international conventions in order to attain the legal certainty."

"Tesis ini membahas mengenai pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase asing di Indonesia. Indonesia telah mengaksesi Konvensi New York 1958 sejak 1981 yang berarti Indonesia tunduk pada konvensi untuk mengakui dan melaksanakan putusan dari arbitrase asing. Selanjutnya Indonesia membuat Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1 Tahun 1990 tentang Tata Cara Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Asing sebagai peraturan pelaksana dan mengisi kekosongan dari peraturan hukum. Pada tahun 1990 dibuat Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa yang memuat peraturan mengenai arbitrase asing. Meskipun telah terdapatnya aturan yang mengatur mengenai putusan arbitrase asing akan tetapi pelaksanaan dari putusan arbitrase asing belum berjalan dengan baik. Indonesia dianggap sebagai “unfriendly arbitration state” yang terkadang sulit untuk melaksanakan putusan arbitrase, terutama yang melibatkan pihak asing. Pelaksanaan ini menjadi penting sebab penyelesaian sengketa kerap menjadi pilihan utama bagi investor asing. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penelitian ini adalah doktrinal terhadap bahan hukum serta dilakukan studi putusan dengan Nomor Putusan 26/PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, Putusan Nomor 88 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2014, Putusan Nomor 795 K/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017. Putusan Nomor 154 K/Pdt/2018. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa Indonesia telah memiliki ketentuan hukum mengenai putusan arbitrase asing. Pada studi putusan menunjukkan terdapat satu putusan yang ditolak dan tiga putusan yang diterima untuk diakui akan tetapi pihak yang kalah dalam putusan tersebut mengajukan upaya hukum sehingga putusan arbitrase asing tidak berjalan. Efektivitas dari putusan arbitrase belum berlaku efektif.

---

This thesis discusses the recognition and implementation of foreign arbitration awards in Indonesia. Indonesia has acceded to the 1958 New York Convention since 1981, which means that Indonesia is subject to the convention to recognize and enforce awards from foreign arbitration. Furthermore, Indonesia made Supreme Court Regulation Number 1 of 1990 Concerning Procedures for Executing Foreign Arbitration Awards as implementing regulations and filling the gaps in legal regulations. In 1990 Law Number 30 of 1999 Concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution was enacted which contained regulations regarding foreign arbitration. Even though there are rules governing foreign arbitration awards, the implementation of foreign arbitration awards has not gone well. Indonesia is considered an “unfriendly arbitration state” where it is sometimes difficult to implement arbitration awards, especially those involving foreign parties. This implementation is important because dispute resolution is often the main choice for foreign investors. The research method used in this research is doctrine on legal materials and a decision study was carried out with Decision Number 26/PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2016, Decision Number 88 PK/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2014, Decision Number 795 K/Pdt.Sus-Arbt/2017, Decision Number 154 K/Pdt/2018. The research results show that Indonesia has legal provisions regarding foreign arbitration awards. The study of decisions shows that there was one decision that was rejected and three decisions that were accepted to be recognized, but the party who lost the decision filed legal action so that the foreign arbitration award did not take effect. The effectiveness of the arbitration award has not yet become effective."

"Penelitian ini meninjau mengenai penerapan Article V(1)(b) Konvensi New York 1958 dalam permohonan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase asing pada pengadilan Amerika Serikat dan Inggris, dengan menggunakan metode yuridis normatif melalui studi kepustakaan. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian, dapat diketahui bahwa Amerika Serikat dan Inggris merupakan negara anggota peserta Konvensi New York 1958 yang telah menerapkan reciprocity reservation berdasarkan Article I(3) konvensi tersebut. Penerapan Article V(1)(b) di kedua negara tersebut tunduk pada standar hukum nasional masing-masing mengenai due process. Sebagaimana dapat dilihat dalam kasus CEEG (Shanghai) Solar Science & Technology Co. Ltd. V. Lumos LLC, Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone Int'l Trade Serv. Co. v. Tiancheng Chempharm, Inc. U.S. dan Zavod Ekran Oao v. Magneco Metrel UK Ltd, pengadilan menerapkan standar yang berbeda dan memiliki pertimbangan yang berbeda dalam menentukan apakah telah terjadi pelanggaran terhadap Article V(1)(b) Konvensi New York 1958.

---

This research attempts to examine the application of Article V(1)(b) of the 1958 New York Convention in the application for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in the United States and England Court, using the juridical normative research method through literature studies. The findings of this research shows that the United States of America and England are parties to the 1958 New York Convention and have implemented the reciprocity reservation based on Article I(3) of the convention. The application of Article V(1)(b) in both countries is subject to the due process standard in each of their respective national laws. As seen from the cases of CEEG (Shanghai) Solar Science & Technology Co. Ltd. V. Lumos LLC, Tianjin Port Free Trade Zone Int'l Trade Serv. Co. v. Tiancheng Chempharm, Inc. U.S., and Zavod Ekran Oao v. Magneco Metrel UK Ltd, the courts have applied different standards and have set forth different considerations in determining whether there has been a breach of Article V(1)(b) of the 1958 New York Convention."