Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Sktipsi ini membahas tentang konsep dana pihak ketiga (DPK) yaitu metode pendanaan alternatif sebagai solusi untuk mengatasi kenaikan biaya diperlukan dalam penyelesaian sengketa dan penerapannya di Indonesia. Di Secara khusus, tesis ini mengkaji apa itu konsep DPK dan kegunaannya yang mulai berkembang dalam penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase. Kemudian, juga membahas upaya beberapa negara untuk mengatur konsep ini dalam undang-undang perjanjian nasional maupun internasional, serta yang penting harus diatur untuk mengajukan TPF dalam penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase. Pembahasan dalam tesis ini disusun berdasarkan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual, normatif, historis, dan hukum. Berdasarkan hasil Hasil penelitian, tulisan ini menyimpulkan bahwa DPK adalah metode pendanaan resolusi perselisihan sekarang semakin populer dan penggunaannya dalam penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase, yang kemudian disambut dengan upaya-upaya yang diatur oleh beberapa negara dalam hukum nasional serta dalam instrumen perjanjian internasional tentang hal-hal penting dapat mengatur dan meminimalkan risiko dalam penggunaan DPK. Meskipun mengenali praktik pendanaan informal dan mulai terlibat dalam perselisihan arbitrase internasional yang melibatkan TPF, Indonesia masih belum punya pengaturan khusus terkait TPF. Mengenai masalah ini, maka makalah ini mengusulkan beberapa hal yang perlu diatur untuk menerapkan konsep DPK dalam penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase di Indonesia.
ABSTRACT
This thesis discusses the concept of third party funds (DPK), namely Alternative funding methods as a solution to address rising costs are required in dispute resolution and implementation in Indonesia. In particular, this thesis examines what the DPK concept is and its uses which have begun to develop in dispute resolution through arbitration. Then, it also discusses the efforts of several countries to regulate this concept in national and international treaty laws, and what is important must be arranged to submit TPF in dispute resolution through arbitration. The discussion in this thesis is prepared based on normative juridical methods with conceptual, normative, historical, and legal approaches. Based on the results of the research, this paper concludes that TPF is a method of funding dispute resolution which is now increasingly popular and its use in dispute resolution through arbitration, which is then greeted by efforts regulated by several countries in national law as well as in international treaty instruments on matters it is important to be able to regulate and minimize risks in the use of TPF. Despite recognizing informal funding practices and starting to get involved in international arbitration disputes involving the TPF, Indonesia still does not have specific arrangements regarding the TPF. Regarding this issue, this paper proposes several things that need to be regulated to apply the DPK concept in dispute resolution through arbitration in Indonesia.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
This research was conducted through qualitative methods with literature study and in depth interviews data collecting techniques to provide an explanation on how the ideal political party funding system will influence the political partys recruitment system to encourage the realization of a substantive democracy. The result of the research shows that Indonesia needs a reformation in the political party funding source system by increasing the funding from the state and by involving their constituents. The aim is to break dependence from political party elites and to strengthen the relationship between the constituents and their parties. It can be concluded that political party reform through the role of the state and constituents should also be followed by periodic reports from parties to encourage transparency and financial accountability. Furthermore, it needs to be accompanied by administrative sanctions in the form of reduction or revocation of financial assistance by the state on the event that the party fails to fulfill its obligations.

Abstrak :
Third party funding merupakan salah satu opsi pendanaan arbitrase yang dapat dipilih dalam menyelesaikan sengketa melalui arbitrase internasional. Walaupun third party funder berperan sebagai pemberi dana untuk pelaksanaan arbitrase, third party funder kerap dituntut oleh pihak lawan dalam arbitrase untuk turut menanggung beban biaya kerugian yang dijatuhkan majelis arbitrase dalam putusan arbitrase internasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal. Penelitian ini menelaah pengaturan terkait third party funding dalam dan keterlibatan third party funder dalam menanggung biaya kerugian dalam putusan arbitrase internasional di beberapa badan arbitrase internasional, yaitu SIAC, ICSID, ICC, HKIAC, dan CIETAC. Penelitian ini juga meninjau penerapan pengaturan third party funding tersebut dalam praktik, melalui analisis Putusan Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Ltd. v. SBS Holdings Inc. & Ors. Judgment FAO(OS)(COMM) 59/2023 and CM NOS. 14793/2023 & 14794/2023. Analisis penerapan peraturan juga ditunjang dengan analisis Putusan Essar Oilfields Services Limited v. Norscot Rig Management Pvt Limited [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm) dan Putusan AMT Cameroun, AMT SA Advance Maritime Transports, and Privinvest v. AZ and Navitrans No. 20/12332. Penelitian ini menunjukkan pentingnya penegasan pengaturan untuk melindungi third party funder dari tuntutan untuk dibebani tanggung jawab atas biaya kerugian yang dijatuhkan dalam putusan arbitrase internasional. ......Third party funding is a funding option for parties intending to resolve disputes through international arbitration. Despite its role as a funder solely for the purposes of the arbitration, there have been instances where third-party funders are sued by an opposing party in the arbitration to share the burden of adverse costs imposed by the arbitral tribunal in an international arbitration award. This study uses a doctrinal research method. This study examines regulations related to third party funding and the involvement of third party funders regarding adverse costs liability arising from international arbitration awards in several international arbitration bodies, namely SIAC, ICSID, ICC, HKIAC, and CIETAC. This study also reviews the application of the regulations in practice through a case analysis of the Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Ltd. v. SBS Holdings, Inc. & Ors. FAO(OS)(COMM) Decision 59/2023 and CM Nos. 14793/2023 & 14794/2023 Judgment. The analysis of the application of the regulations is also supported by analyzing the Essar Oilfields Services Limited v. Norscot Rig Management Pvt Limited [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm) Judgment and the AMT Cameroun, AMT SA Advance Maritime Transports, and Privinvest v. AZ and Navitrans No. 20/12332 Judgment. This study demonstrates the importance of establishing stricter regulatory frameworks to protect third party funders from claims for adverse costs imposed in international arbitration awards.

Abstrak :
Third party funding merupakan salah satu opsi pendanaan arbitrase yang dapat dipilih dalam menyelesaikan sengketa melalui arbitrase internasional. Walaupun third party funder berperan sebagai pemberi dana untuk pelaksanaan arbitrase, third party funder kerap dituntut oleh pihak lawan dalam arbitrase untuk turut menanggung beban biaya kerugian yang dijatuhkan majelis arbitrase dalam putusan arbitrase internasional. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal. Penelitian ini menelaah pengaturan terkait third party funding dalam dan keterlibatan third party funder dalam menanggung biaya kerugian dalam putusan arbitrase internasional di beberapa badan arbitrase internasional, yaitu SIAC, ICSID, ICC, HKIAC, dan CIETAC. Penelitian ini juga meninjau penerapan pengaturan third party funding tersebut dalam praktik, melalui analisis Putusan Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Ltd. v. SBS Holdings Inc. & Ors. Judgment FAO(OS)(COMM) 59/2023 and CM NOS. 14793/2023 & 14794/2023. Analisis penerapan peraturan juga ditunjang dengan analisis Putusan Essar Oilfields Services Limited v. Norscot Rig Management Pvt Limited [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm) dan Putusan AMT Cameroun, AMT SA Advance Maritime Transports, and Privinvest v. AZ and Navitrans No. 20/12332. Penelitian ini menunjukkan pentingnya penegasan pengaturan untuk melindungi third party funder dari tuntutan untuk dibebani tanggung jawab atas biaya kerugian yang dijatuhkan dalam putusan arbitrase internasional. ......Third party funding is a funding option for parties intending to resolve disputes through international arbitration. Despite its role as a funder solely for the purposes of the arbitration, there have been instances where third-party funders are sued by an opposing party in the arbitration to share the burden of adverse costs imposed by the arbitral tribunal in an international arbitration award. This study uses a doctrinal research method. This study examines regulations related to third party funding and the involvement of third party funders regarding adverse costs liability arising from international arbitration awards in several international arbitration bodies, namely SIAC, ICSID, ICC, HKIAC, and CIETAC. This study also reviews the application of the regulations in practice through a case analysis of the Tomorrow Sales Agency Private Ltd. v. SBS Holdings, Inc. & Ors. FAO(OS)(COMM) Decision 59/2023 and CM Nos. 14793/2023 & 14794/2023 Judgment. The analysis of the application of the regulations is also supported by analyzing the Essar Oilfields Services Limited v. Norscot Rig Management Pvt Limited [2016] EWHC 2361 (Comm) Judgment and the AMT Cameroun, AMT SA Advance Maritime Transports, and Privinvest v. AZ and Navitrans No. 20/12332 Judgment. This study demonstrates the importance of establishing stricter regulatory frameworks to protect third party funders from claims for adverse costs imposed in international arbitration awards.

Abstrak :
Third-Party Funding merupakan metode pendanaan di mana penyandang dana memberikan dana kepada salah satu pihak dalam sengketa untuk menggugat atau meminimalkan gangguan arus kas, dan jika kasus dimenangkan, penyandang dana akan mendapatkan bagian dari putusan akhir yang diperoleh. TPF awalnya dipergunakan dalam litigasi di beberapa yurisdiksi, namun kini semakin populer dalam arbitrase investasi internasional. Peningkatan pemanfaatan TPF ini berpotensi menghadirkan dampak yang signifikan. Skripsi ini menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dengan menganalisis data sekunder dari studi literatur, terutama ICSID Rules and Regulations setelah amandemen keempat. Amandemen ini menghadirkan aturan baru terkait praktik TPF, yakni Pasal 14 dalam ICSID Arbitration Rules tentang Notice of Third-Party Funding. Analisis Skripsi ini terutama difokuskan pada potensi dampak pengaturan baru terhadap praktik arbitrase investasi internasional, bagi Indonesia sebagai host state dalam ICSID, serta sebagai negara pelaksana arbitrase. Skripsi ini diharapkan dapat mendukung implementasi TPF yang lebih mengutamakan akses keadilan berdasarkan prinsip-prinsip Konvensi ICSID, menganalisis hambatan dan tantangan yang mungkin dihadapi oleh Indonesia di kemudian hari, serta dampak yang mungkin dihadirkan terhadap pengaturan arbitrase di Indonesia. ......Third-Party Funding is a method in which a funder provides funds to one of the parties in a dispute to initiate a claim or minimize cash flow disruption. If the case is won, the funder will receive a share of the final award obtained. TPF was originally used in litigation in several jurisdictions, but is now increasingly popular in international investment arbitration. The increased use of TPF potentially presents significant implications. This thesis employs a normative legal research method by analyzing secondary data from literature studies, especially the ICSID Rules and Regulations after the fourth amendment. The amendment introduces new rules related to TPF practices, namely Article 14 in the ICSID Arbitration Rules concerning Notice of Third-Party Funding. This thesis analysis mainly focuses on the potential implications of the new regulation on international investment arbitration practices, for Indonesia as a host state in ICSID and a state that implements arbitration. This thesis is expected to support the implementation of TPF that prioritizes access to justice based on the principles of the ICSID Convention, analyze barriers and challenges that Indonesia may face in the future, and the potential impact on arbitration regulations in Indonesia.