Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

Abstrak :
Dalam tatanan hukum perdata Indonesia mengatur bahwa suatu perjanjian dibuat harus didasarkan oleh itikad baik. Permasalahannya adalah bagaimana pengaturan dalam tahap sebelum perjanjian mengikat yang menimbulkan hubungan hukum bagi para pihaknya, atau disebut juga dengan tahap pra kontrak. Hukum positif Indonesia dalam Pasal 1338 ayat (3) Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata hanya mengatur ruang lingkup itikad baik dalam pelaksanaan perjanjian saja, tidak meliputi pra kontrak. Terdapat ketidakjelasan atau kekosongan hukum dalam pelaksanaan itikad baik dalam pra kontrak. Sementara itu, dalam sistem hukum di Amerika Serikat dikenal dengan doktrin Promissory Estoppel. Doktrin ini mengatur bahwa suatu kerugian yang timbul akibat dari ditariknya janji yang disampaikan sebelum adanya suatu kontrak yang mengikat, dapat dimintakan penggantian kerugian karenanya. Oleh karena itu, Penulis dalam tulisan ini akan membandingkan penerapan doktrin Promissory Estoppel di Amerika Serikat dan asas Itikad Baik pra kontrak di Indonesia dari segi teori dan penerapannya. Kata kunci: promissory estoppel, itikad baik, janji, pra kontrak. ...... An agreement made must be based on the good faith of the parties. In the Indonesian civil law system, this is also regulated. The problem is how the arrangements in the pre-contract stage are binding and create a legal relationship for the parties or also known as the pre-contract stage. Indonesia's positive law in Article 1338 paragraph (3) of the Civil Code only regulates the scope of good faith in agreements, not including pre-contracts. There is ambiguity or legal vacuum in the implementation of good faith in the pre-contract. Meanwhile, in the legal system in the United States, it is known as the Promissory Estoppel doctrine. This doctrine stipulates that a loss that arises as a result of a promise made prior to the existence of a binding contract can be requested for compensation for it. Therefore, the author in this paper will compare the application of the Promissory Estoppel doctrine in the United States and the pre-contract Good Faith principle in Indonesia in terms of theory and application.

Abstrak :
Di Indonesia asas iktikad baik diatur dalam Pasal 1338 ayat (3) KUH Perdata. Iktikad baik yang diatur dalam ketentuan tersebut terbatas hanya meliputi tahap pelaksanaan perjanjian saja. Berbeda dengan Indonesia, beberapa negara penganut sistem civil law telah mengakui iktikad baik pada tahap negosiasi atau pra-kontrak, sehingga janji-janji pra-kontrak diakui dan jika dilanggar menimbulkan akibat hukum. Karena belum ada perjanjian yang mengikat maka gugatan yang diajukan untuk memperoleh ganti rugi dianggap sebagai Perbuatan Melawan Hukum (PMH). Dengan konsep yang sama, di dalam sistem common law khususnya di Amerika Serikat, muncul doktrin promissory estoppel yang berakibat bahwa meskipun belum ada consideration namun janji-janji dapat mengikat. Adapun yang menjadi tujuan dari penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui bagaimana penerapan asas iktikad baik pada tahap pra-kontrak di Indonesia melalui putusan pengadilan. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yang bersifat yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statue approach), perbandingan (comparative approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Dalam penelitian ini diperoleh kesimpulan bahwa sampai saat ini belum ada pengaturan yang khusus mengatur penerapan asas iktikad baik pada tahap pra-kontrak. Namun demikian, berdasarkan putusan-putusan di pengadilan negeri yang dianalisis pada penelitian ini diketahui bahwa Hakim telah mengakui adanya keharusan beriktikad baik pada tahap pra-kontrak oleh para pihak. ......In Indonesia, good faith principle set in article 1338 subsection (3) on the Indonesian Civil Code. The implementation of good faith principle set out from this article is limited only to the contractual phase. In contrast to Indonesia, some civil law countries have recognized the principle of good faith on the phase of negotiations or pre-contractual phase, so the promises of the pre-contract is recognized and lead to legal consequences if its broken. Since there is no binding agreement on the pre-contractual phase, therefore to the injured party in this phase can sue for reliance damages based on tort. Based on the same concept, in the common law system, particularly in US the promissory estoppel doctrine has the effect of making some kinds of promise binding even where they are not supported by consideration. This research aims to determine how the implementation of good faith principle on the pre-contractual phase in Indonesia through court orders. It is a judicial-normative research, with statute, case and comparative approach. In this research, author concluded that til nowadays there is no regulation that specifically regulates the application of good faith principle on the pre-contractual phase. Moreover, based on court orders which analyzed in this research, note that the Judge has recognizes the necessity of good faith at the pre-contractual phase by the parties. ;In Indonesia, good faith principle set in article 1338 subsection (3) on the Indonesian Civil Code. The implementation of good faith principle set out from this article is limited only to the contractual phase. In contrast to Indonesia, some civil law countries have recognized the principle of good faith on the phase of negotiations or pre-contractual phase, so the promises of the pre-contract is recognized and lead to legal consequences if its broken. Since there is no binding agreement on the pre-contractual phase, therefore to the injured party in this phase can sue for reliance damages based on tort. Based on the same concept, in the common law system, particularly in US the promissory estoppel doctrine has the effect of making some kinds of promise binding even where they are not supported by consideration. This research aims to determine how the implementation of good faith principle on the pre-contractual phase in Indonesia through court orders. It is a judicial-normative research, with statute, case and comparative approach. In this research, author concluded that til nowadays there is no regulation that specifically regulates the application of good faith principle on the pre-contractual phase. Moreover, based on court orders which analyzed in this research, note that the Judge has recognizes the necessity of good faith at the pre-contractual phase by the parties.

Abstrak :
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata yang berlaku di Indonesia tidak mengenal secara eksplisit mengenai Kuasi Kontrak. Namun, Kuasi Kontrak dapat dipersamakan dengan ketentuan yang mengatur mengenai Negotiorum Gestio (Perwakilan Sukarela) dan Solutio Indebiti (Pembayaran yang tidak wajib) pada Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Skripsi ini akan membandingkan hukum kontrak di Indonesia dengan sistem hukum Common law yakni mengenai ketentuan mengenai Negotiorum Gestio dan Solutio Indebiti dengan Kuasi Kontrak sebagai Equitable Remedies di Inggris dan Amerika Serikat. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif. Hasil penelitian ini menunjukan bahwa terdapat persamaan dan perbedaan kuasi kontrak dalam hal pengertian, syarat, dan bentuk pemulihannya. Adanya perbedaan dan persamaan yang ditermukan dalam penelitian ini adalah akibat dari adanya perbedaan tradisi hukum yang dianut oleh ketiga negara.

---

Indonesian Civil Code did not openly recognize the term of Quasi Contract. However, the concept of Quasi Contract are identical with the provisions regarding Negotiorum Gestio (Managements of another's affais) and Solutio Indebiti in the Indonesian Civil Code. This Paper compares the law of contracts in Indonesia with Common Law, regarding the provisions of Negotiorum Gestio and Solutio Indebiti (Payment of Something not Owed) with Quasi Contract as an Equitable Remedies in England and United States. This study is a normative juridical research. Results of this study shows that there are similarity and differences concerning Quasi Contract in sense of Definition, Terms, and Remedies. Similaritis and differences found, are the results of the difference law tradition that the three countries abide to.

Abstrak :
Di Indonesia asas itikad baik hanya diatur dalam tahap pelaksanaan perjanjian. Namun, permasalahan yang timbul akibat salah satu pihak tidak beritikad baik kerap kali muncul pada tahap prakontrak. Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk membandingkan penerapan asas itikad baik pada tahap prakontrak di Indonesia dan Prancis dengan doktrin promissory estoppel di Malaysia. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis-normatif dengan metode perbandingan hukum. Penelitian ini menggunakan jenis data sekunder yang dikumpulkan dengan teknik studi kepustakaan dan dianalisis secara kualitatif. Berdasarkan penelitian yang dilakukan, diketahui bahwa di Indonesia asas itikad baik masih didasarkan pada teori klasik hukum kontrak yang membatasi ruang lingkup itikad baik hanya sebatas pada saat pelaksanaan perjanjian sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 1338 ayat (3) KUHPerdata. Sedangkan di Prancis sudah mengikuti teori hukum kontrak modern yang mengatur penerapan asas itikad baik sejak tahap prakontrak sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 1112 Civil Code Prancis 2016. Sedangkan di Malaysia, sebagai negara yang menganut sistem hukum common law, perjanjian prakontrak dilindungi oleh doktrin promissory estoppel melalui resepsi hukum Inggris yang diatur dalam Pasal 3 ayat (1) Civil Law Act 1956. ......In Indonesia the principle of good faith is only regulated in the implementation stage of the agreement. However, problems arising from one of the parties having bad intentions often arise at the pre-contract stage. This paper aims to compare the application of the principle of good faith at the pre-contract stage in Indonesia and France with the promissory estoppel doctrine in Malaysia. This research is a juridical-normative research using comparative law method. This research uses secondary data types that were collected using literature study techniques and analyzed qualitatively. Based on the research conducted, it is known that in Indonesia the principle of good faith is still based on the classical theory of contract law which limits the scope of good faith only at the time of execution of the agreement as stipulated in Article 1338 paragraph (3) of the Civil Code. Whereas in France it has followed modern contract law theory which regulates the application of the principle of good faith since the pre-contract stage as stipulated in Article 1112 of the 2016 French Civil Code. Meanwhile in Malaysia, as a country that adheres to the common law legal system, pre-contract agreements are protected by the promissory estoppel doctrine through receptions of English law regulated in Article 3 paragraph (1) of the Civil Law Act 1956.

Abstrak :
ABSTRAK
Hukum kontrak di Indonesia mengenal asas itikad baik, terutama dalam tahap pelaksanaan kontrak. Seiring dengan perkembangan dan kebutuhan zaman, asas itikad baik juga dikenal dalam tahap pra kontrak sehingga dalam suatu proses negosiasi atau perundingan pun juga harus diterapkan. Skripsi ini akan membandingkan hukum kontrak di Indonesia dengan sistem hukum common law, yaitu mengenai itikad baik pada tahap pra kontrak dengan doktrin promissory estoppel dan Pasal 1359 ayat 1 KUH Perdata dengan doktrin unjust enrichment. Penelitian ini adalah penelitian yuridis normatif dengan deskriptif komparatif. Hasil penelitian menyarankan untuk menerapkan doktrin promissory estoppel pada kondisi dimana salah satu pihak percaya bahwa sudah lahir perjanjian diantara keduanya sehingga pihak tersebut melakukan tindakan demi tercapainya janji-janji pihak lawan, dan juga doktrin unjust enrichment dalam kondisi apabila salah satu pihak memperkaya diri sendiri secara tidak sah dari pengeluaran yang dilakukan pihak lain. Asas itikad baik juga harus dijunjung tinggi mengingat tidak adanya ketentuan dalam KUH Perdata yang mengatur mengenai pra kontrak secara tersurat.

---

ABSTRACT
Contract law in Indonesia identify the principle of good faith, especially in the implementation of the contract. Along with the development contract law, the principle of good faith is also known in the pre contractual phase so that in a negotiation process this principle must be applied. This paper compares the law of contracts in Indonesia with a common law system, which is about the good faith in the pre contractual phase with the doctrine of promissory estoppel and Article 1359 paragraph 1 of the Indonesian Civil Code with the doctrine of unjust enrichment. This study is a normative juridical research with comparative descriptive. Results of the study were advised to apply the doctrine of promissory estoppel in circumstances where one party believes that it has been born an agreement between the two so that the parties take action in order to achieve the promises of the opposition, and also the doctrine of unjust enrichment in a state where one party is enriching himself not legitimate expenses incurred from other parties. The principle of good faith must also be upheld because of the absence of any provision in the Civil Code concerning about pre contractual phase.