Update Artikelilmiah: 47088

MOCHAMMAD AULIA MARYONO

NIM

Judul Artikel

Abstrak (Bhs. Indonesia)

GUGATAN GANTI KERUGIAN AKIBAT PERBUATAN MELAWAN HUKUM TERHADAP PERJANJIAN SEWA MENYEWA ALAT  BERAT YANG DI PUTUSKAN SECARA SEPIHAK (Studi Putusan Perkara Nomor 944/Pdt.G/2021/PN Jkt.brt.)
Oleh : Mochammad Aulia Maryono

ABSTRAK
Penelitian ini mengkaji mengenai bagaimana pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam mengkualifisir unsur-unsur perbuatan melawan hukum dan bagaimana pertimbangan hukum hakim dalam mengabulkan tuntutan ganti kerugian perbuatan melawan hukum dalam Putusan Perkara Nomor 944/Pdt.G/2021/PN.Jkt.Brt, metode yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan perundang-undangan dan pendekatan kasus. Spesifikasi penelitian preskriptif analitis, sumber data sekunder dengan metode penyajian dalam bentuk teks naratif dan disusun secara sistematis menggunakan metode analisis normatif kualitatif.
Hasil penelitian dan pembahasan menunjukan bahwa Majelis Hakim mempertimbangkan perbuatan Tergugat Rekonvensi/Penggugat Konvensi telah melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum tanpa mengkualifisir unsur mana yang dilanggar. Menurut pendapat penulis, perbuatan Tergugat Rekonvensi/Penggugat Konvensi telah melakukan perbuatan melawan hukum yaitu bertentangan dengan hak subyektif berupa hak atas harta kekayaan (hak uang sewa alat berat dan truck, dan hak Penggugat Rekonvensi/Tergugat Konvensi karena dialangi oleh Tergugat Rekonvensi/ Penggugat Konvensi untuk mengambil, menguasai 19 unit alat berat dan truck milik Penggugat Rekonvensi/Tergugat Konvensi), Perbuatan Tergugat Rekonvensi/Penggugat Konvensi melanggar unsur kepatutan yang harus diindahkan dalam pergaulan masyarakat (mengenai penempelan kertas dengan tulisan “unit ini sedang dalam sengketa” pada alat berat dan truck milik Penggugat Rekonvensi/Tergugat Konvensi yang berada dibawah peguasaan Tergugat Rekonvensi/Penggugat Konvensi sehingga merugikan Penggugat Rekonvensi/Tergugat Konvensi). Majelis Hakim mengabulkan tuntutan ganti rugi materiil Penggugat Rekonvensi/ Tergugat Konvensi sebesar Rp. 5.247.929.800. Penggugat Rekonvensi/ Tergugat Konvensi telah memenuhi semua syarat menuntut ganti kerugian sesuai dengan Pasal 1365 KUH Perdata. Bentuk ganti kerugian akibat dari perbuatan melawan hukum yang dibebankan kepada Tergugat Rekonvensi/Penggugat Konvensi termasuk kedalam ganti rugi kompensasi/actual Tergugat Rekonvensi/ Penggugat Konvensi memberikan sejumlah upah atau pembayaran kepada Penggugat Rekonvensi/ Tergugat Konvensi atas dan sebesar kerugian yang benar dialami oleh Penggugat dari suatu perbuatan melawan hukum. Jenis ganti kerugian menurut Pasal 1243 KUH Perdata, kerugian yang dikabulkan oleh Majelis Hakim termasuk dalam schaden (rugi) yaitu belum dibayarnya uang sewa alat berat dan truck oleh Tergugat Rekonvensi/ Penggugat Konvensi dan tindakan Tergugat Rekonpensi/ Penggugat Konvensi yang menghalangi Penggugat Rekonvensi/ Tergugat Konvensi untuk mengambil, menguasai 19 unit alat berat dan truck miliknya sehingga karena perbuatan tersebut selama alat berat dan truck berada dibawah penguasaan Penggugat Konvensi/ Tergugat Rekonvensi belum dapat dipastikan dapat beroperasi secara normal.

Abtrak (Bhs. Inggris)

LAWSUIT FOR COMPENSATION DUE TO UNLAWFUL ACTS AGAINST HEAVY EQUIPMENT LEASE AGREEMENTS THAT WERE UNILATERALLY DECIDED (Study of Case Decision Number 944/Pdt.G/2021/PN Jkt.brt.)
By: Mochammad Aulia Maryono

ABSTRACT
This study examines how the judge's legal considerations in qualifying the elements of unlawful acts and how the judge's legal considerations in granting the claim for compensation for unlawful acts in Case Decision Number 944/Pdt.G/2021/PN.Jkt.Brt, a normative juridical method with a statutory approach and a case approach. Specification of analytical prescipitative research, secondary data sources with presentation methods in the form of narrative texts and systematically arranged using qualitative normative analysis methods.
The results of the research and discussion show that the Panel of Judges considers the actions of the Reconciliation Defendant/Convention Plaintiff to have committed an unlawful act without qualifying which elements were violated. In the author's opinion, the actions of the Reconvention Defendant/Convention Plaintiff have committed an unlawful act, which is contrary to the subjective rights in the form of property rights (the right to rent heavy equipment and trucks, and the right of the Reconvention Plaintiff/Convention Defendant because it is controlled by the Reconvention Defendant/Convention Plaintiff to take and control 19 units of heavy equipment and trucks belonging to the Reconvention Plaintiff/Convention Defendant), The actions of the Reconciliation Defendant/Convention Plaintiff violate the element of propriety that must be heeded in community relations (regarding the affixing of paper with the inscription "this unit is in dispute" on heavy equipment and trucks belonging to the Reconciliation Plaintiff/Convention Defendant which are under the supervision of the Reconciliation Defendant/Convention Plaintiff so as to the detriment of the Reconciliation Plaintiff/Convention Defendant). The Panel of Judges granted the claim for material damages of the Reconciliation Plaintiff/Convention Defendant in the amount of Rp. 5,247,929,800. The Reconciliation Plaintiff/ Convention Defendant has fulfilled all the conditions for claiming compensation in accordance with Article 1365 of the Civil Code. The form of compensation resulting from unlawful acts charged to the Reconvention Defendant/Convention Plaintiff is included in the compensation/actual compensation damages of the Reconvention Defendant/Convention Plaintiff providing a certain amount of wages or payments to the Reconvention Plaintiff/Convention Defendant and the amount of the losses actually suffered by the Plaintiff from an unlawful act. According to Article 1243 of the Civil Code, the losses granted by the Panel of Judges are included in schaden (loss), namely the unpaid rent of heavy equipment and trucks by the Reconciliation Defendant/Convention Plaintiff and the actions of the Reconciliation Defendant/Convention Plaintiff that obstruct the Reconciliation Plaintiff/Convention Defendant from taking and controlling 19 units of heavy equipment and trucks belonging to the Plaintiff so that because of these acts as long as the heavy equipment and trucks are under the control of the Plaintiff The Convention/Reconvention Defendant cannot be ascertained to operate normally.

Kata kunci

Pembimbing 1

Pembimbing 2

Pembimbing 3

Tahun

Jumlah Halaman