The International Arbitration Award as a Simple Proof Requirement in Bankruptcy
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15294/lslr.v8i1.14056Keywords:
Bankruptcy, Simple Proof, International ArbitrationAbstract
Bankruptcy and Arbitration are forms of mechanisms for resolving disputes among parties. The purpose of this research is to explore the use of international arbitration awards as a simple proof requirement in bankruptcy cases. The research methods employed include the statute approach and conceptual approach. The findings of this research indicate that international arbitration awards can be admissible as simple proof due to the final and binding nature of international arbitration awards when they meet certain requirements established by Indonesian positive law. Specifically, if an international arbitration award has been registered and requested for enforcement at the Central Jakarta District Court, the international arbitration award is considered valid. Meeting these criteria, international arbitration awards, as authentic evidence, fulfill the simple proof requirement. However, if an international arbitration award does not meet these requirements, it cannot be considered authentic evidence in bankruptcy proceedings under Indonesian positive law, as the authenticity of international arbitration awards is only recognized when they have been registered and requested for enforcement.
References
Achmad, Andyna Susiawati, and Astrid Athina Indradewi. “Hubungan Hukum Antar Perusahaan Dalam Sistem Perusahaan Grup Ditinjau Dari Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 Tentang Perseroan TerbataS.” Jurnal USM Law Review 4, no. 2 (2021): 470–83. https://doi.org/10.26623/julr.v4i2.3912.
Adlhiyati, Intan Setiyo Wibowo and Zakki Zakki. “Problematika Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional di Indonesia.” Verstek 8, no. 1 (2020). https://doi.org/10.20961/jv.v8i1.39624.
Al-Anshori, Huzaimah, Emi Puasa Handayani, and Gautam Kumar Jha. "Reformulation of Commercial Court Authority Regulations Relation to the Arbitration Clause." Journal of Law and Legal Reform 5, no. 1 (2024): 305-332.
Andani, Devi, and Wiwin Budi Pratiwi. “Prinsip Pembuktian Sederhana dalam Permohonan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang.” Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM 28, no. 3 (2021): 635–56. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol28.iss3.art9.
Candini, Tivana Arbiani, and Reisar Alka. “Insolvensi Tes Sebagai Dasar Permohonan Pailit dalam Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia.” Gloria Justitia 2, no. 2 (2022): 181–93. https://doi.org/10.25170/gloriajustitia.v2i2.3900.
Dewi, Ayu Atika. “Problematika Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional di Indonesia (Kajian Terhadap Konsep Keadilan dalam Perspektif Filsafat Hukum Dan Filsafat Hukum Islam).” Jurnal Panorama Hukum 2, no. 2 (2017): 185–202. https://doi.org/10.21067/jph.v2i2.2036.
Harahap, Syaiful Khoiri. “Telaah Kritis Putusan Arbitrase Sebagai Dasar Permohonan Pailit.” Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan 52, no. 3 (2022): 612–32. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol52.no3.3363.
Hartini, Rahayu. Hukum Kepailitan. (Malang: UMMPress, 2020).
Hutajulu, Marihot Janpieter. “Kajian Yuridis Klausula Arbitrase dalam Perkara Kepailitan.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 3, no. 2 (2019): 175–92. https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2019.v3.i2.p175-192.
Indonesia, Republik. Undang Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa. Accessed January 5, 2023. https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Home/Details/45348/uu-no-30-tahun-1999.
Insolvency, Restructuring and Dissolution Act 2018 (2018). https://sso.agc.gov.sg:5443/Act/IRDA2018.
Internasional, Arbitrase. “2021 Survei Arbitrase Internasional – Menyesuaikan Arbitrase dengan Dunia yang Berubah.” Arbitrase Internasional Informasi Arbitrase Internasional oleh Aceris Law LLC, December 27, 2021. https://www.acerislaw.com/2021-international-arbitration-survey-adapting-arbitration-to-a-changing-world/.
International Arbitration Act 1994 (1994). https://sso.agc.gov.sg:5443/Act/IAA1994.
Kapoyos, Nelson. “Konsep Pembuktian Sederhana dalam Perkara Kepailitan.” Jurnal Yudisial 10, no. 3 (2017): 331–46. https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v10i3.264.
Khoidin, M. Hukum Arbitrase Bidang Perdata. 3rd ed. (Yogyakarta: CV. Aswaja Pressindo, 2013).
Liulinnuha, Fachrudin Alfian. “Konsep Kedaulatan Negara Dalam Pemikiran Abu Bakar Ba’asyir (Studi Analisis Terhadap Buku Tadzkiroh).” Thesis (Yogyakarta: Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga, 2014).
Maretta, Astri, and Hudi Asrori S. “Proses Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Ditinjau dari UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 (Studi Putusan No. 86/PDT.G/2002/PN.JKT.PST).” Jurnal Privat Law 5, no. 2 (2017): 13–18. https://doi.org/10.20961/privat.v5i2.19380.
Marthasia, Kusumaningrum. “Perkembangan Pengertian Utang Menurut Undang-Undang Kepailitan di Indonesia.” Thesis. (Semarang: Diponegoro University, 2011).
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. (Jakarta: Kencana, 2005).
Negara, Nanda Chandra Pratama, and R. Murjiyanto. “Implementasi Prinsip Pembuktian Sederhana Sebagai Alasan Penolakan Pailit Dengan Dasar Cessie Atas Sebagian Piutang Cedent.” Kajian Hasil Penelitian Hukum 4, no. 2 (2022): 909–22. https://doi.org/10.37159/jmih.v4i2.1747.
Nrangwesti, Ayu. “Konsep Kedaulatan dalam Perspektif Hukum Internasional.” Hukum Pidana Dan Pembangunan Hukum 5, no. 1 (2022): 11–24. https://doi.org/10.25105/hpph.v5i1.15873.
Nugroho, Lucky Dafira. “Peluang Digunakannya Lembaga Mediasi Untuk Menyelesaikan Permasalahan Debitor Pailit.” Rechtidee 12, no. 2 (2017): 245–66. https://doi.org/10.21107/ri.v12i2.3453.
Permana, Adam, and M. Faiz Mufidi. “Aspek Sederhana Gugatan Pailit yang Dilakukan PT Relys Trans Logistic dan PT Imperia Cipta Kreasi kepada PT Mahkota Sentosa Utama atas Periklanan Proyek Meikarta Dihubungkan dengan Asas Kepastian Hukum.” Prosiding Ilmu Hukum 6, no. 1 (2020): 286–90. https://doi.org/10.29313/.v6i1.19318.
Permatasari, Yuanita, and Pranoto. “Kewenangan Pengadilan dalam Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional di Indonesia.” Jurnal Privat Law 5, no. 2 (2017): 26–33. https://doi.org/10.20961/privat.v5i2.19384.
Pramudita, Pramudita. “Pembuktian Sederhana Pengajuan Permohonan Pailit oleh Pekerja Atas Dasar Upah Yang Tidak Dibayar.” Jurist-Diction 4, no. 5 (2021): 1921–36. https://doi.org/10.20473/jd.v4i5.29826.
Putra, Andika Persada. Hukum Perbankan Analisa Mengenai Perjanjian Kredit dan Keterkaitannya dengan Batalnya Perkawinan Debitur Serta Alternatif Penyelesaiannya. (Surabaya: Scopindo Media Pustaka, 2021).
Rahmatsyah, Rahmatsyah. “Analisis Hukum Terhadap Putusan Perjanjian Arbitrase (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 891 K/Pdt.Sus/2012) dari Sisi Kepastian Hukum dan Keadilan.” Spektrum Hukum 19, no. 1 (2022). https://doi.org/10.35973/sh.v17i1.1186.
Republic of Indonesia. Pedoman Resmi UUD 1945 & Perubahan. 1st ed. (Jakarta: Wahyumedia, 2014).
Republic of Indonesia. “UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase Dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa,” 1999. Available online at https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/home/details/45348/uu-no-30-tahun-1999.
Republic of Indonesia. Keputusan Presiden (KEPPRES) Nomor 34 Tahun 1981 tentang Mengesahkan “Convention on The Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbital Awards”, Yang Telah Ditandatangani di New York Pada Tanggal 10 Juni 1958 Dan Telah Mulai Berlaku Pada Tanggal 7 Juni 1959, Pub. L. No. LN. 1981 No. 40. Accessed September 6, 2023, online at http://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/66483/keppres-no-34-tahun-1981.
Republic of Indonesia. Undang-undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, Pub. L. No. LN. 1999/ No. 138, TLN No. 3872. Accessed September 6, 2023. http://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/45348/uu-no-30-tahun-1999.
Republic of Indonesia. Undang-undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan Dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, Pub. L. No. LN. 2004/ No. 131, TLN No.4443. Accessed September 6, 2023, Available online at http://peraturan.bpk.go.id/Details/40784.
Republic of Indonesia. Undang-undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2022 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-Undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2011 tentang Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan. Accessed September 6, 2023, available online at http://peraturan.bpk.go.id/details/212810/uu-no-13-tahun-2022.
Rongkonusa, Rulman Ignatius, Yuhelson Yuhelson, and Cicilia Julyani Tondy. “Diskresi Penentuan Pembuktian Sederhana dalam Persidangan Permohonan Kepailitan Dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang (PKPU).” SEIKAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik dan Hukum 2, no. 2 (2023): 137–45. https://doi.org/10.55681/seikat.v2i2.466.
Sidik, Jafar, et al. "Choice of Arbitrators Regarding Dispute Settlement (Comparing Indonesia and Russia)." Journal of Law and Legal Reform 5, no. 1 (2024): 109-136.
Subekti, R., and R Tjitrosudibio. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata: Burgelijk Wetboek. 37th ed. (Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita, 2006).
Sukwanto, Bakti, and Taufik Siregar. “Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase Internasional di Indonesia.” Jurnal Mercatoria 3, no. 1 (2010): 1–19. https://doi.org/10.31289/mercatoria.v3i1.589.
Supeno, Supeno, Muhtar Dahri, and Hafid Zakariya. “Kedudukan Asas Hukum Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Melalui Arbitrase Berdasarkan Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999.” Wajah Hukum 3, no. 1 (2019): 51–59. https://doi.org/10.33087/wjh.v3i1.45.
Sutiarso, Cicut. Pelaksanaan Putusan Arbitrase dalam Sengketa Binis. (Jakarta: Yayasan Pustaka Obor Indonesia, 2011).
Yuniar, Vania Shafira, and Florentiana Yuwono. "The Comparison of Arbitration Dispute Resolution Process Between Indonesian National Arbitration Board (BANI) and London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA)." Journal of Private and Commercial Law 6, no. 1 (2022): 77-99.
Downloads
Article ID
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Rahayu Hartini, Hasani Moh. Ali, Mochammad Tanzil Multazam, Moh. Faizin, Ahmad Dzulfiqar Hibatullah Putra
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
All writings published in this journal are personal views of the authors and do not represent the view of this journal and the author's affiliated institutions. Authors retain the copyrights under this license, see our copyrights notice.
