Tinjauan yuridis atas imbalan jasa pengurus sebagai bagian proses homologasi dalam penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU) (Studi kasus putusan nomor 092/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2017/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst) = Juridical Review Of Administrator Fee As Part Of The Homologation Process In Suspension Of Payment (Pkpu) (Case Study Of Decision Number : 092/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2017/Pn.Niaga.Jkt.Pst

Lumban Tobing, Bontor Octavianus (2020) Tinjauan yuridis atas imbalan jasa pengurus sebagai bagian proses homologasi dalam penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang (PKPU) (Studi kasus putusan nomor 092/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2017/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst) = Juridical Review Of Administrator Fee As Part Of The Homologation Process In Suspension Of Payment (Pkpu) (Case Study Of Decision Number : 092/Pdt.Sus-Pkpu/2017/Pn.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. Masters thesis, Universitas Pelita Harapan.

	Text (Title) Title.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (57MB) | Request a copy
Preview	Text (Abstract) abstract.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (1MB) | Preview
Preview	Text (ToC) ToC.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (267kB) | Preview
Preview	Text (Chapter1) Chapter1.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (326kB) | Preview
	Text (Chapter2) Chapter2.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (385kB) | Request a copy
	Text (Chapter3) Chapter3.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (207kB) | Request a copy
	Text (Chapter4) Chapter4.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (586kB) | Request a copy
	Text (Chapter5) Chapter5.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (136kB) | Request a copy
Preview	Text (Bibliography) Bibliography.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (263kB) | Preview
	Text (Appendices) Appendices.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (188kB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Suspension of payment (PKPU) as period given by the Commercial Court Judge to the Debtor and creditor to negotiate the Debtor's payment method, both in part or in full, including if need to restructure the debt. While the Wages Rewards service must be paid to the Curator or the Administrator after the bankruptcy and postponement of the debt payment obligation ends. The problem in this research is how the process of achieving Homologation in Suspension of payment (PKPU) and How is Juridical Review of Administrator recompense as part of the Homologation Process in Suspension of payment (PKPU) (Case Study of Decision Number: 092/Pdt.Sus/ PKPU/2017/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST). The method of juridical normative legal research approaches. Data collection is based on literature study and decision study, while data processing is done by editing methods, classification of data and systematization of data, then analyzed with qualitative descriptive analysis. The results of the research on the problem point 1 are the PKPU process of PT. Danau Winata Indah Judge Court decision was based on Article 281 and Article 285 of the UUKPKPU so that by not complying with Article 285 the PT. Danau Winata Indah is declared bankrupt. The results of the research on the problem point 2 are based on the Judge's decision that the implementation of the settlement plan submitted by the Debtor is declared insufficient in payment and until the final Decision on Recompense and costs incurred by the Administrator have not been paid or by the Debtor is not guaranteed for payment, so based on Article 285 section (2) letters b and d of the UUKPKPU the Debtor is declared bankrupt with all the consequences. Suggestions that are expected to be in determining the amount of the Administrator Services Rewards in UUKPKPU as well as in PermenkumHAM Number 11 of 2016 are not explicitly and clearly regulated in the amount of compensation for the Recompense, so many cases of failure of Homologation as in this Research are due to the absence of an agreement on the amount of service fees submitted by the Administrator as well as the approval of the Debtor, according to the Author, then according to the author, it would be better if the Fees for Administrator Services must be determined by the Panel of Judges by involving the Administrator and Debtors through Determination. / Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) adalah suatu masa yang diberikan oleh Hakim Pengadilan Niaga kepada Debitur dan kreditur untuk menegosiasikan cara pembayaran utang Debitur, baik sebagian maupun seluruhnya termasuk apabila perlu merestrukturisasi utang tersebut. Sedangkan Imbalan Jasa adalah upah yang harus dibayarkan kepada Kurator atau Pengurus setelah kepailitan dan penundaan kewajiban pembayaran utang berakhir. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah Bagaimanakah proses tercapainya Homologasi dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) dan Bagaimanakah Tinjauan Yuridis atas Imbalan Jasa Pengurus sebagai bagian Proses Homologasi Dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU) (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor : 092/Pdt.Sus/PKPU/2017/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST). Metode pendekatan Penelitian Hukum yuridis no¬rmatif. Pengumpulan data berdasarkan studi kepustakaan dan studi putusan, sedangkan pengolahan data dilakukan dengan metode editing, klasifikasi data dan sistematisasi data, selanjutnya dilakukan analisis dengan analisis deskriptif kualitatif. Hasil penelitian rumusan masalah poin 1 adalah proses PKPU PT. Danau Winata Indah dalam Pertimbangan Hakim memberikan Putusan dalam proses PKPU telah sesuai berdasarkan Pasal 281 dan Pasal 285 UUKPKPU sehingga dengan tidak memenuhi Pasal 285 maka PT. Danau Winata Indah ditetapkan Pailit, hasil penelitian rumusan masalah poin 2 adalah berdasarkan Putusan Hakim pelaksanaan rencana perdamaian yang diajukan oleh debitur dinyatakan tidak cukup terjamin pembayaran dan sampai dengan Putusan akhir Imbalan Jasa dan biaya yang dikeluarkan oleh Pengurus belum dibayar atau oleh Debitor tidak dijamin untuk pembayarannya, sehingga berdasarkan Pasal 285 ayat (2) huruf b dan d UUKPKPU Debitur dinyatakan Pailit dengan segala akibatnya. Saran yaitu Diharapkan hendaklah Dalam menentukan besaran Imbalan Jasa Pengurus dalam UUKPKPU serta dalam PermenkumHAM Nomor 11 Tahun 2016 tidaklah diatur secara eksplisit dan jelas besaran imbalan jasa Pengurus, sehingga banyak kasus gagalnya Homologasi seperti dalam Penelitian ini dikarenakan tidak adanya kesepakatan besaran imbalan jasa yang diajukan oleh Pengurus maupun persetujuan dari Debitor, maka menurut Penulis alangkah baiknya mengenai Imbalan Jasa Pengurus haruslah ditentukan oleh Majelis Hakim dengan melibatkan Pengurus dan Debitur melalui Penetapan.

Actions (login required)

View Item