Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Kreditor Berkaitan Pembatalan Perjanjian Perdamaian Akibat Perbuatan Melawan Hukum yang dilakukan oleh Debitor Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.main##

Andika Jinaratana
Richard C. Adam

Abstract

This research examines the legal protection provided to creditors when a peace agreement is canceled due to unlawful acts by a debtor during suspension of debt payment obligation proceedings. The suspension of debt payment obligation aims to restructure debt and facilitate a mutually beneficial settlement. However, debtors sometimes engage in unlawful actions involving their assets, harming creditors. One such case is Supreme Court Decision No. 440K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2024, where PT. Prowell Energi Indonesia, as the PKPU debtor, caused harm to creditors by nullifying a peace agreement. Using a normative legal methodology with a statutory approach, the study finds that the Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments Obligation Law provides essential legal protection for creditors whose rights are harmed by debtor misconduct. Preventive protection includes applying bankruptcy law principles such as balance and business continuity, requiring debtors to disclose all relevant information honestly and ensure fair remuneration for the administrator’s services throughout the Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments Obligation Law process. Additionally, repressive protection within the Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments Obligation Law stipulates that actions by debtors that harm creditors or display bad faith in asset management may result in the termination of the suspension of debt payment obligation process and a declaration of bankruptcy. This research underscores the role of the Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payments Obligation Law in safeguarding creditors’ rights, enforcing debtor accountability, and ensuring a fair and balanced debt restructuring process.

##plugins.themes.academic_pro.article.details##

How to Cite
Jinaratana, A. and Adam, R. C. (2024) “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Kreditor Berkaitan Pembatalan Perjanjian Perdamaian Akibat Perbuatan Melawan Hukum yang dilakukan oleh Debitor Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang”, Ranah Research : Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Development, 7(2), pp. 764-772. doi: 10.38035/rrj.v7i2.1282.

References

Aprita, S., & Qosim, S. (2022). Optimalisasi Wewenang Dan Tanggung Jawab Hakim Pengawas Dalam Hukum Kepailitan Di Indonesia. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 7(2), 192–206. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v7i2.3963

Dewi, V. K., Yuhelson, & Nainggolan, B. (2023). Akibat Hukum Putusan Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) Terhadap Status Sita dan Eksekusi Jaminan Ditinjau Dari Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004. Jurnal Studi Interdisipliner Perspektif, 22(2), 128–133.

Dian Pribadi Sihotang. (2024). Pertanggungjawaban Debitor Terhadap Kreditor Konkuren Setelah Homologasi Perjanjian Perdamaian Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU). Aliansi: Jurnal Hukum, Pendidikan Dan Sosial Humaniora, 1(2), 01–12. https://doi.org/10.62383/aliansi.v1i2.47

Fatahillah, F., & Winanti, A. (2023). Perbandingan Konsep Hukum Kepailitan Amerika (Chapter 11) dan Hukum Kepailitan Indonesia. Jurnal USM Law Review, 6(3), 1262–1278. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7906

Hariyadi, H. (2020). Restrukturisasi Utang sebagai Upaya Pencegahan Kepailitan pada Perseroan Terbatas. SIGn Jurnal Hukum, 1(2), 119–135. https://doi.org/10.37276/sjh.v1i2.61

Idham, I., Nawi, S., & Baharuddin, H. (2020). Perlindungan Hukum Kreditor Konkuren Dalam Kepailitan: Studi Putusan Nomor. 04/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu.Pailit/2018/Pn.Niaga Mks. Journal of Lex Generalis (JLG), 1(5), 745–758. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.52103/jlg.v1i5.197

Irwanda, T. G., & Selian, M. A. H. (2024). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Kreditor Konkuren Terkait Wanprestasi Debitor dalam Pembatalan Perdamaian Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang. Mavisha: Law and Society Journal, 1(1), 14–29. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.15408/zv6xh388

Kalundas, S., Kurnia, M. P., & Fauzi, M. (2024). Analisis Yuridis Pembatalan Perjanjian Perdamaian (Homologasi) Perkara Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang Pada Pengadilan Niaga. The Juris, 8(1), 238–248. https://doi.org/10.56301/juris.v8i1.1251

Kiemas, A., Matheus, J., & Gunadi, A. (2023). Redefining Bankruptcy Law: Incorporating the Principle of Business Continuity for Fair Debt Resolution. Rechtsidee, 11(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.21070/jihr.v12i2.996

Mantili, R., & Trisna Dewi, P. E. (2021). PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG (PKPU) TERKAIT PENYELESAIAN UTANG PIUTANG DALAM KEPAILITAN. Jurnal Aktual Justice, 6(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.47329/aktualjustice.v6i1.618

Marzuki, P. M. (2019). Penelitian Hukum: Edisi Revisi (19th ed.). Prenada Media Group.

Nugroho, S. A. (2018). Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia: dalam Teori dan Praktik serta Penerapan Hukumnya. Prenadamedia Group.

Putri, G., Fionita, J., & Matheus, J. (2024). Lelang Eksekusi Kepailitan atas Tanah dan Bangunan yang Dimiliki Bersama oleh Pihak Ketiga dan Debitor Pailit. Jurnal Supremasi, 14(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.35457/supremasi.v14i2.3810

Ridwan. (2018). Kedudukan Kurator dalam Melakukan Eksekusi Budel Pailit yang Berimplikasi pada Pelaporan Secara Pidana Suatu Kajian Undang-Undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang. Jurnal Ius Constituendum, 3(2), 197–211. https://doi.org/10.26623/jic.v3i2.1040

Sirait, P., Junaidi, M., Sudarmanto, K., & Sofyan, S. (2023). Pencabutan Putusan Pailit Dalam Hal Harta Pailit Tidak Cukup Untuk Membayar Biaya Kepailitan. Jurnal USM Law Review, 6(3), 1279–1294. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v6i3.7911

Sjahdeini, S. R. (2016). Sejarah, Asas, dan Teori Hukum Kepailitan: Memahami Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran (2nd ed.). Prenada Media Group.

Warsito, L. (2024). Urgensi Pembuktian Syarat Kepailitan dan Tes Insolvensi Dalam Permohonan Kepailitan. Jurnal USM Law Review, 7(2), 822–834. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v7i2.9018