ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP KEADAAN INSOLVENSI DEBITOR DALAM KEPAILITAN (Studi Putusan Pailit PT. Perindustrian Njonja Meneer dan PT. Metro Batavia)
| Main Author: | Juniresta, Adheria |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article application/pdf eJournal |
| Bahasa: | ind |
| Terbitan: |
Kumpulan Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum
, 2018
|
| Online Access: |
http://hukum.studentjournal.ub.ac.id/index.php/hukum/article/view/2875 |
Daftar Isi:
- Adheria Juniresta, Dr. Budi Santoso, SH., LL.M., Ranitya Ganindha, SH., MH.Fakultas Hukum Universitas BrawijayaEmail : adheriajuniresta@gmail.com ABSTRAKUntuk mempailitkan debitor, Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 (selanjutnya disebut UUK dan PKPU) tidak mensyaratkan agar debitor berada dalam keadaan insolvensi. Hal ini tentu melindungi kepentingan kreditor, tidak diterapkannya insolvency test ini mengakibatkan banyak perusahaan di Indonesia dinyatakan pailit secara hukum. Seharusnya konsep insolvency test dimasukkan dalam UUK dan PKPU untuk membuktikan bahwa debitor benar-benar dalam keadaan solven atau tidak. Penelitian ini membahas mengenai kesesuaian dasar pertimbangan hakim dalam putusan pailit terhadap PT. Perindustrian Njonja Meneer dan PT. Metro Batavia dengan ketentuan dalam Pasal 2 ayat (1) UUK dan PKPU. Penelitian ini dilakukan dengan metode Yuridis-Normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan (statute approach) dan pendekatan kasus (case approach). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa dasar pertimbangan hakim dalam putusan pailit terhadap PT. Perindustrian Njonja Meneer tidak sepenuhnya sesuai dengan ketentuan dalam Pasal 2 ayat (1) UUK dan PKPU. Hal ini karena syarat debitor tidak membayar lunas sedikitnya satu utang yang telah jatuh waktu dan dapat ditagih belum terpenuhi. Hakim menilai adanya itikad tidak baik pada Termohon dalam melaksanakan pembayaran kepada Pemohon karena total jumlah pembayaran Termohon kepada Pemohon tidak sebanding (tidak signifikan) dengan kewajiban bayarnya. Berdasarkan hal tersebut menurut penilaian Majelis Hakim, permohonan pailit oleh Pemohon cukup beralasan untuk dikabulkan.Kata Kunci: Pailit, Dasar Pertimbangan Hakim, Insolvensi, Insolvency Test. ABSTRACTThe status of bankruptcy in a debtor, according to Law Number 37 of 2004 (further stated as UUK and PKPU), does not always mean that the debtor is in insolvency. Although this is beneficial in the debtor interest, not conducting insolvency test brings more companies in Indonesia to being declared bankrupt according to the law. It is essential that the concept of insolvency test be included in UUK and PKPU to prove whether a debtor is a solvent or not. This research is aimed to discuss the relevance of the basic consideration made by judges to the Decision of Bankruptcy for PT. Perindustrian Njonja Meneer and PT. Metro Batavia with the provision of Article 2 Paragraph (1) of UUK and PKPU. This research involved normative juridical method with statute and case approach. The research result revealed that the judges’ consideration in terms of deciding PT. Perindustrian Njonja Meneer bankrupt was not entirely relevant to the provision of Article 2 Paragraph (1) of UUK and PKPU. This is caused by the fact that the requirement where debtor failed to pay at least one loan that was due and collected was not met. The judges saw this as a bad faith from the debtor who should have paid the debt to the creditor, as the total that was paid was not equal to the amount that was required be paid. Therefore, Judges agreed that the status of bankruptcy proposed was considered reasonable to be accepted.Keywords: bankrupt, judges’ basic consideration, insolvency, insolvency test