Tanggung Jawab Penjamin (Avalist) Terhadap Utang Debitur Yang Wanprestasi (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1436.K/Pdt/2001)
| Main Author: | Tarigan, Samanto |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | Yamin, Muhammad, Ginting, Budiman, Bustami, Chairani |
| Format: | Masters |
| Bahasa: | ind |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
http://repository.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/20776 |
| ctrlnum |
123456789-20776 |
|---|---|
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<dc schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd"><title>Tanggung Jawab Penjamin (Avalist) Terhadap Utang Debitur Yang Wanprestasi (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor : 1436.K/Pdt/2001)</title><creator>Tarigan, Samanto</creator><subject>Avalist</subject><subject>Guarantee</subject><subject>Execution</subject><description>Banks as the financial institution, not only serves the payment and the circulation of money, but also as the main business which gives the loan to their clients. In giving the loan, banks always ask the clients to give principal guarantee and additional guarantee, which can be either collateral or surety. Collateral usually takes a long time and costs a lot of money. Therefore, a company which needs a loan from a bank for its capital, usually uses surety or personal guarantee. In this case, there will be an individual or corporate body that will take the responsibility for the paying off the debt if the debtor defaults. Some of the banks want the manager of a certain company who gets the loan to be bound by borgtocht. Not all companies can do this kind of binding, but only the companies which have legal entities. The company which has no legal entity, such as a business firm, and a limited company which has no legal entity can hardly do this borgtocht binding because its founder or manager is only responsible for his own assets. Therefore, a company which has not legal entity, will involve the third party as the guarantor. But it is very seldom for someone (third party) to guarantee other people’s debts. In the borgtocht which is regulated in the Civil Code, the bank (creditor) is not sure if its credit is secure because the debtor may default, because the bank does not know what collateral will be confiscated or auctioned. Therefore, the bank (creditor) usually asks for a mortgage to guarantee the debt. The regulation concerning the mortgage is found in the Code of Commercial Law, about giving aval guarantee in paying the bill of exchange (B/E).
The aim of the guarantor in giving the aval as the contract of giving surety, he, of course, will be responsible for the contract; in this case, he will be responsible for thedebt of the defaulting debtor of the limited company which has no legal entity. The example of this case is the debt and credit between BPDSU (Regional Development of North Sumatera Bank) and PT. Twin Jaya Steel, and Faisal Oloan Nasution SH., as the avalist which was in the verdict of the supreme Court of the Republic Indonesia Number 1436 K/Pdt/2001, on January 29, 2004.
This research was legal normative, using normative qualitative approach; therfore, it used library research. The Primary and secondary law’s data were obtained from library study,and the results of the research showed that, the avalist was not responsible for the debtor’s (PT.Twin Jaya Steel) debt because PT.Twin Jaya Steel hat not yet become the legal subject because there was no legalization from Menkumham (Minister of Justiceand Human Rights), the arrangement of the aval contract is found in the Code of Commercial Law, Article 130. In the Code of Commercial Law, it is in the provision about the form and the technique of the aval guarantee.The Binding of Both Parties in the aval contract is only based on signatures and the posisition of the execution/foreclosure on the collateral handed out by an avalist cannot be executed throught executory copy about IOU by giving the collateral because it must be done by process by making a claim a common civil case to the District Court.</description><description>087011113</description><contributor>Yamin, Muhammad</contributor><contributor>Ginting, Budiman</contributor><contributor>Bustami, Chairani</contributor><date>2010-11-02T03:58:25Z</date><date>2010-11-02T03:58:25Z</date><date>2010-11-02</date><type>Thesis:Masters</type><identifier>Franz</identifier><identifier>http://repository.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/20776</identifier><language>ind</language><recordID>123456789-20776</recordID></dc>
|
| language |
ind |
| format |
Thesis:Masters Thesis |
| author |
Tarigan, Samanto |
| author2 |
Yamin, Muhammad Ginting, Budiman Bustami, Chairani |
| title |
Tanggung Jawab Penjamin (Avalist) Terhadap Utang Debitur Yang Wanprestasi (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor : 1436.K/Pdt/2001) |
| title_sub |
1436.K/Pdt/2001) |
| topic |
Avalist Guarantee Execution |
| url |
http://repository.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/20776 |
| contents |
Banks as the financial institution, not only serves the payment and the circulation of money, but also as the main business which gives the loan to their clients. In giving the loan, banks always ask the clients to give principal guarantee and additional guarantee, which can be either collateral or surety. Collateral usually takes a long time and costs a lot of money. Therefore, a company which needs a loan from a bank for its capital, usually uses surety or personal guarantee. In this case, there will be an individual or corporate body that will take the responsibility for the paying off the debt if the debtor defaults. Some of the banks want the manager of a certain company who gets the loan to be bound by borgtocht. Not all companies can do this kind of binding, but only the companies which have legal entities. The company which has no legal entity, such as a business firm, and a limited company which has no legal entity can hardly do this borgtocht binding because its founder or manager is only responsible for his own assets. Therefore, a company which has not legal entity, will involve the third party as the guarantor. But it is very seldom for someone (third party) to guarantee other people’s debts. In the borgtocht which is regulated in the Civil Code, the bank (creditor) is not sure if its credit is secure because the debtor may default, because the bank does not know what collateral will be confiscated or auctioned. Therefore, the bank (creditor) usually asks for a mortgage to guarantee the debt. The regulation concerning the mortgage is found in the Code of Commercial Law, about giving aval guarantee in paying the bill of exchange (B/E).
The aim of the guarantor in giving the aval as the contract of giving surety, he, of course, will be responsible for the contract; in this case, he will be responsible for thedebt of the defaulting debtor of the limited company which has no legal entity. The example of this case is the debt and credit between BPDSU (Regional Development of North Sumatera Bank) and PT. Twin Jaya Steel, and Faisal Oloan Nasution SH., as the avalist which was in the verdict of the supreme Court of the Republic Indonesia Number 1436 K/Pdt/2001, on January 29, 2004.
This research was legal normative, using normative qualitative approach; therfore, it used library research. The Primary and secondary law’s data were obtained from library study,and the results of the research showed that, the avalist was not responsible for the debtor’s (PT.Twin Jaya Steel) debt because PT.Twin Jaya Steel hat not yet become the legal subject because there was no legalization from Menkumham (Minister of Justiceand Human Rights), the arrangement of the aval contract is found in the Code of Commercial Law, Article 130. In the Code of Commercial Law, it is in the provision about the form and the technique of the aval guarantee.The Binding of Both Parties in the aval contract is only based on signatures and the posisition of the execution/foreclosure on the collateral handed out by an avalist cannot be executed throught executory copy about IOU by giving the collateral because it must be done by process by making a claim a common civil case to the District Court. 087011113 |
| id |
IOS3619.123456789-20776 |
| institution |
Universitas Sumatera Utara |
| institution_id |
31 |
| institution_type |
library:university library |
| library |
Perpustakaan Universitas Sumatera Utara |
| library_id |
599 |
| collection |
USU - Institutional Repository |
| repository_id |
3619 |
| city |
KOTA MEDAN |
| province |
SUMATERA UTARA |
| repoId |
IOS3619 |
| first_indexed |
2016-11-06T08:19:22Z |
| last_indexed |
2016-11-06T08:19:22Z |
| recordtype |
dc |
| _version_ |
1550244873111601152 |
| score |
17.60897 |