The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license.
ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP OBJEK BENDA TAK BERGERAK SEBAGAI OBJEK JAMINAN DALAM PERKARA GUGATAN SEDERHANA DI PENGADILAN NEGERI YOGYAKARTA
This research is motivated by the ambiguity of norms in Pasal 3 ayat (2) huruf b PERMA Nomor 4 Tahun 2019. While the regulation explicitly excludes land rights disputes from the scope of small claims court, in practice at the Yogyakarta District Court (PN Yogyakarta), several breach of contract (wanprestasi) judgments include collateral objects in the form of land and buildings within their injunctions. The primary focus of this study is to examine the legal standing of these immovable objects and to analyze the case settlement process when a debtor defaults on their obligations. This research is an empirical legal study with a descriptive-analytical nature. The approaches used include the statutory approach and the sociological approach (sociological approach) to observe the gap between ideal law (das sollen) and the reality in the field (das sein). Data were collected through documentation studies of Judgments Number 5/Pdt.G.S/2025/PN Yyk, 8/Pdt.G.S/2024/PN Yyk, and 21/Pdt.G.S/2024/PN Yyk, as well as through in-depth interviews with judges at the Yogyakarta District Court (PN Yogyakarta). Data analysis was conducted qualitatively using the Theory of Legal Certainty as the primary analytical framework. The results indicate that based on the Legal Certainty Theory, the legal standing of the immovable objects in the three judgments is not as an object of dispute, but rather as an accessory collateral object. The judges argue that the dispute being examined is a breach of contract regarding a debt acknowledgment letter; therefore, the mention of land certificates does not violate PERMA provisions because there is no contention regarding the ownership or physical status of the object itself. This judicial step successfully provides substantive legal certainty for the creditor. Regarding the case settlement process, if the debtor remains negligent after the 7 (seven) working days of aanmaning procedure, the collateral object will be directly auctioned through the Office of State Assets and Auction Services (KPKNL) without the need for a conservatory attachment (sita jaminan) since the original certificate is already held by the creditor. This study suggests the need for more specific technical regulations from the Supreme Court regarding the boundary of immovable collateral objects in small claims court to align with the principles of simple, fast, and low-cost justice.
FAKULTAS SYARIAH DAN HUKUM, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP OBJEK BENDA TAK BERGERAK SEBAGAI OBJEK JAMINAN DALAM PERKARA GUGATAN SEDERHANA DI PENGADILAN NEGERI YOGYAKARTA (Text)
ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP OBJEK BENDA TAK BERGERAK SEBAGAI OBJEK JAMINAN DALAM PERKARA GUGATAN SEDERHANA DI PENGADILAN NEGERI YOGYAKARTA (Other)
HTML Summary of #76918 ANALISIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP OBJEK BENDA TAK BERGERAK SEBAGAI OBJEK JAMINAN DALAM PERKARA GUGATAN SEDERHANA DI PENGADILAN NEGERI YOGYAKARTA