Update Artikelilmiah: 33149

GUSTI ALJIHAD

NIM

Judul Artikel

Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia)

Perbuatan melawan hukum (Onrechtmatige Daad) diatur pada Pasal 1365 sampai dengan Pasal 1380 KUHPerdata. Gugatan perbuatan melawan hukum didasarkan Pasal 1365 KUHPerdata yang berbunyi : “setiap perbuatan melanggar hukum, yang membawa kerugian kepada orang lain, mewajibkan orang yang karena salahnya menerbitkan kerugian itu, mengganti kerugian tersebut”. Penelitian ini mengkaji mengenai bagaimana pertimbangan hukum Hakim dalam mengkualifisir unsur-unsur perbuatan melawan hukum pada putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1736/K/Pdt/2019 dan bagaimana Majelis Hakim mempertimbangkan tuntutan ganti rugi termasuk penerapan hukum Hakim pada putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1736/K/Pdt/2019 menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan undang-undang dan analisis kasus. Spesifikasi penelitian deskriptif analitis, sumber data sekunder dengan metode penyajian dalam bentuk teks naratif dan disusun secara sistematis menggunakan metode analisis normatif kualitatif.
Dari hasil penelitian ini, Majelis Hakim dalam Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1736/K/Pdt/2019 mempertimbangkan perbuatan para Tergugat dan turut Tergugat telah melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum yaitu melanggar hak orang lain, bertentangan dengan kewajiban hukum dari si pembuat, dan bertentangan dengan kepatutan yang harus diindahkan dalam pergaulan masyarakat mengenai diri atau barang orang lain serta memenuhi syarat-syarat melakukan tuntutan ganti rugi berdasarkan Pasal 1365 KUH Perdata, yakni adanya suatu perbuatan melawan hukum, adanya kesalahan dari pihak pelaku, adanya kerugian bagi korban, dan adanya hubungan kausal antara perbuatan dengan kerugian sehingga perbuatan para Tergugat dan turut Tergugat bertentangan dan sangat merugikan kepentingan Penggugat yakni menguasai dan mendirikan bangunan diatas tanah milik Penggugat. Tuntutan ganti rugi penggugat oleh kuasa hukum ditolak sebagian oleh Majelis Hakim yaitu mengukum para Tergugat secara sukarela tanpa syarat untuk mengosongkan dan menyerahkan tanah obyek sengketa dalam keadaan kosong dan baik, bebas dari segala perikatan dan beban pihak ketiga kepada Penggugat. Dalam hal kewenangan Majelis Hakim menerapkan hukum pada putusan Pengadilan Negeri Selong Nomor 22/Pdt.G /2018/PN.Sel hingga Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1736/K/Pdt/2019 sudah didasarkan pertimbangan hukum Hakim dan juga peraturan perundang-undangan yang berlaku walaupun ada perbaikan amar putusan Pengadilan Negeri di tingkat Pengadilan Tinggi.

Kata Kunci : Perbuatan Melawan Hukum, Unsur, Ganti Rugi, Penerapan Hukum

Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris)

Act against the law (Onrechtmatige Daad) is regulated in Articles 1365 to Article 1380 of the Civil Code. The lawsuit against the law is based on Article 1365 of the Civil Code which reads: "any unlawful act, which brings harm to others, obliges the person who, because of his or her fault, indemnifys the damages". This study examines how the judge's legal considerations in analyzing the elements of unlawful acts in the supreme court decision No. 1736/K/Pdt/2019 and how the Panel of Judges considers compensation claims including the application of the Law of Judges in the supreme court decision No. 1736/K /Pdt/2019 using normative juridical methods with legal approach and case analysis. Specifications of analytical descriptive research, secondary data sources with presentation methods in the form of narrative text and systematically compiled using qualitative normative analysis methods.
From the results of this study, the Panel of Judges in the Supreme Court Decision No.1736/K/Pdt/2019 considers the actions of defendants and also defendants have committed unlawful acts that violate the rights of others, contrary to the legal obligations of the maker, and contrary to the propriety that must be heeded in the association of the community regarding themselves or other people's goods and meet the conditions of claiming damages under Article 1365 of the Civil Code, namely the existence of an act against the law, the existence of errors on the part of the perpetrator, the existence of losses for victims, and the existence of a causal relationship between the deeds with losses so that the actions of the Defendants and co-Defendants are contrary and very detrimental to the interests of the Plaintiff, namely controlling and erecting buildings on plaintiff's land. The plaintiff's claim for damages by the attorney is rejected in part by the Panel of Judges, namely to voluntarily charge the Defendants unconditionally to vacate and surrender the land object of the dispute in an empty and good state, free from all engagements and burdens of third parties to plaintiffs. In terms of the authority of the Panel of Judges applying the law to the decision of the District Court of Selong Number 22/Pdt.G/2018/PN. Cells up to the Supreme Court Number 1736/K/Pdt/2019 have been based on consideration of the Judge's law and also applicable laws and regulations despite the improvement of the decision of the District Court at the High Court level.

Keywords : Unlawful Act, Elements, Indemnity, Application of The Law

Kata kunci

Pembimbing 1

Pembimbing 2

Pembimbing 3

Tahun

Jumlah Halaman