Object Of Fiduciary Guarantee Research Articles

Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Kreditur Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019

After the Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019, the execution of fiduciary collateral created a sense of injustice and lack of legal certainty for creditors as money lenders. This decision eliminates the Creditor's authority to execute fiduciary collateral objects, as previously stated in article 15 paragraph 3 of the fiduciary law. As a result, the Creditor experienced problems in executing the fiduciary guarantee object after the Debtor failed to fulfil its obligations. The purpose of this writing is to find out what the ideal form of legal protection for Creditors is after the Constitutional Court decision Number: 18/PUU-XVII/2019. The research method used in this research is normative juridical, which only focuses on legal materials using a conceptual approach and a statutory approach. The results of this research are Constitutional Court Decision Number: 18/PUU-XVII/2019 which has made the fiduciary law lose its role as the law establishing fiduciary guarantee institutions. Fiduciary guarantee certificate has lost its identity because the executorial power over the object of fiduciary guarantee which is considered to be the same as the district court decision no longer applies if the Debtor does not voluntarily hand over the object which is the object of fiduciary guarantee to the Creditor.

Copyright as an Object of Fiduciary Guarantee from the Perspective of Law Number 42 Year 1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee

Law Number 28 Year 2014 on Copyright brings legal reform, especially for holders of rights to Intellectual Property Rights, especially Copyright. Although juridically normative copyright can be used as an object of fiduciary guarantee, it does not necessarily make banks easily provide loans. Because, the arrangement in the Copyright Act, requires further elaboration of implementing regulations related to guarantees for the Bank (as a creditor) to obtain certainty of return of funds that have been loaned to the debtor. The research used is normative juridical legal research that focuses on the review or study of positive law. The research approach is a method or way to conduct a study so that researchers get information from various aspects to find the issues they are looking for answers to. In accordance with the type of research that is normative juridical, then the research approach used in this study is the Legislation Approach, Conceptual Approach, Conceptual Approach and Case Approach. The result of his research is that Copyright as an object of fiduciary security is in accordance with Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees where Copyright can be encumbered by collateral in the form of fiduciary, but not on the object encumbered by the Copyright, but the economic value attached to the copyright. In addition, the Copyright must first be registered with the Directorate General of Intellectual Property of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights before it can be pledged. This is important because it is proof that the fiduciary is the holder of the Copyright. However, some provisions in the Fiduciary Guarantee Act are difficult to apply to fiduciary guarantees in the form of copyright.

AN IMPLICATIONS OF THE DEBTOR'S DEFAULT ON THE EXECUTION OF TWO-WHEEL MOTORCYCLES WITHOUT A FIDUCIARY GUARANTEE CERTIFICATE

This research aims to explain to the public regarding fiduciary issues as well as the consequences that the finance company will receive if it assigns a debt collector forcibly withdrawing two-wheeled motorized vehicles without a fiduciary guarantee deed. This paper uses normative legal research with a statutory regulatory approach (Statuta Opproach). The results of this research show that the execution of the fiduciary guarantee object cannot be carried out whether they have a fiduciary guarantee deed or not, except based on the debtor's voluntariness or based on a court decision which says that the debtor is in default, This is based on the decision of the Constitutional Court which said the sound of article 15 paragraph (2) of Law No. 42 of 1999 is unconstitutional.

Kepastian Hukum Kreditur Preferen Dalam Upaya Parate Executie Perjanjian Fidusia Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Jaminan Fidusia

Fidusia comes from the word fides means belief. Juridically, the Fiduciary Giver has transferred his material rights to the Fiduciary Giver gives the Fiduciary Giver the right to control the fiduciary guarantee object. Based on UUJF, it has been regulated to the execution of the Fiduciary Guarantee Object if the giver of fiduciary fails to promise by the execution of the executorial title. Through the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 that in order to carry out an execution if the debetor does not wish to voluntarily submit the Fidicuary Guarantee Object, it must be requested to the Chair of the Court and the determination of breach of contract must have an agreement between creditors and debtors or through legal remedies. Then questioned the legal certainty of preferred creditors in the efforts of the parate executie. This legal research is a normative legal research. The analytical method for this type of normative legal research is a prescriptive method using a statute approach and a case approach. This study aims to determine the legal certainty of preferred creditors in the efforts of parate executie of the fiduciary agreement based on UUJF and the legal consquences and judges’ considerations which are the basis for deciding the case application for the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019. The result of the research conclude that legal certainty legal certainty has been stated in UUJF for creditors by executing Fidicuary Guarantee if the debtor fails the promise. The certainty is included in order to “Demi Keadilan Berdasarkan Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa” means it has the same executorial power as court decision has obtained permanent legal force. However, in reality the execution process cannot be carried out automatically. so that the execution process becomes longer and it is quite difficult to achieve the executive parate. The Constitutional Court emphasizes on an agreement on when the breach of contract between creditors and debtors occurs so that creditors can carry out the parate executie. So that it is often used by the Fiduciary to take refuge in the interpretation of the Constitutional Court, which is actually the default clause agreed in the agreement.

Implementation of Copyright as an Object of Fiduciary Collateral in Indonesia

Objective: The aims of this study is to examine the application of copyright as an object of fiduciary guarantee in Indonesia, considering both the legal certainty aspect and a comparative analysis with other countries. Theoretical Framework: The Fiduciary agreement mechanism is that there will be guaranteed law and mortgage rights when there is an impasse. Based on a huge need, it is necessary to offset with provision clear and complete laws governing institution guarantee. Method: This study is normative legal research that produces prescriptive analytics of the legal issues raised. Study This uses approach laws and approaches producing a conceptual something draft where is Copyright can made as an object guarantee fiduciary. Results: The results of this study indicate that Copyright including in object guarantee fiduciary that has fulfilled all elements and terms for become object guarantee fiduciary, then the Copyright possible for made object debt guarantee form guarantee fiduciary. Conclusions: Application rights created as object guarantee fiduciaries in Indonesia are still hampered because regulation legislation has yet to be comprehensive. To sum it up, the types of objects are fiduciary collateral objects. Copyright, on the one hand, is included in the realm of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR). Similar properties with the right property in general (can be transferred and owned mark the economy).

Implementation of Online Fiduciary Security Registration in Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 9 of 2013

In Minister of Law and Human Rights Regulation Number 9 of 2013, online registration of fiduciary guarantees has been regulated. The purpose of writing this article is to gain an understanding of the implementation of this system. In addition, another objective is to gain a better understanding of the online fiduciary registration process, as well as the supporting components and barriers that occur during the process. This research utilizes a statutory and factual approach. A guarantee of legal certainty has been provided through the registration of collateral with the object of fiduciary guarantee through computer media and the internet. One of the barriers to registering fiduciary guarantees electronically and connected to the internet is slow internet speed and interruptions. Many financing institutions do not register fiduciary guarantees due to the high cost of making the deed and registering it. As a result, creditors will not have preference rights over unregistered fiduciary guarantees.

Legal Certainty on the Execution of a Fiduciary Whose Movable Object Has Been Transferred to Third Parties

The debtor does not have the legality or rights before the law to transfer the fiduciary guarantee object to a third party and the transfer of the fiduciary guarantee object without the approval of the creditor becomes invalid. This compensation is because the debtor has committed an unlawful act, therefore it requires innovation or renewal debt in this case the old debt is removed and replaced with a new debt in accordance with Chapter 1413 Civil Code. Fiduciary Guarantee Act Should provide more specific arrangements regarding the position of objects that have been made object fiduciary guarantee because things made object Collateral are the main key in terms of providing guarantees from debtors to creditors. Given the fact that there are still many of them constraint-obstacles faced by creditors during the execution process of fiduciary collateral objects.

TINJAUAN KOMPARATIF ANTARA UNDANG-UNDANG HAK CIPTA NO No.19 Tahun 2002 TENTANG HAK CIPTA DENGAN UU No. 28 Tahun 2014 TENTANG HAK CIPTA

This study aims to examine normatively what are the differences between the old and new Copyright Laws. This research is normative legal research, namely research based on written laws and regulations and various literature related to this problem. There are several differences in the arrangements in the new and old Copyright Law, namely that copyright protection is carried out for a longer period of time. Better protection of the economic rights of creators and/or owners of related rights, including limiting the transfer of economic rights in the form of sold flats. Effective dispute resolution through mediation, arbitration or court processes, as well as the application of complaint offenses for criminal prosecution. The trading place manager is responsible for the point of sale and/or copyright infringement and/or related rights in the shopping center they manage. Copyright as an intangible movable object can be used as a fiduciary guarantee object. The minister is given the authority to delete works that have been registered, if the creation violates religious norms, moral norms, public order, state defense and security, as well as statutory provisions. Authors, copyright holders, owners of related rights become members of the Collective Management Organization in order to collect fees or royalties. Authors and/or related rights owners receive royalty payments for creations or related rights products made in an official relationship and used commercially. The Collective Management Institution whose function is to collect and manage the economic rights of creators and owners of related rights is required to submit an application for an operational permit to the Minister. The use of copyright and related rights in multimedia means to respond to developments in information and communication technology.

Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Setelah Adanya Keputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 18/PUU-XVII/2019 dan Nomor 2/PUU-XIX/2021

Public interest in fiduciary guarantees is increasing and creates opportunities for several problems to occur, such as the execution of fiduciary guarantees when the debtor breach the contract. In the execution process, the creditors often done an arbitrary action that cause the debtor suffers a loss. The polemic over the execution of fiduciary guarantees has led to a judicial review of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law. From the judicial review, MK Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 and MK Decision Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021 were issued. On the other hand, the decision is considered to have caused a loss to the creditor. The law is expected to create justice and provide legal certainty to all people. The author uses a normative juridical method to further examine legal certainty for creditors regarding the existence of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 and the Constitutional Court Decision Number 2/PUU-XIX/2021 in carrying out the execution of fiduciary guarantee objects. Execution of fiduciary guarantees must still be carried out by creditors in accordance with Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees if they fulfill the conditions in the form of an agreement about a breach of contract and secondly, namely the fiduciary giver (debtor) voluntarily surrenders the fiduciary guarantee object in the context of execution. With the Constitutional Court's decision, it is hoped that the agreement between the creditor and the debtor will be made in more detail, especially on the point of default of the debtor.

The Position of Creditors in Consumer Financing Agreements Due to Fiducian Guarantee Not Registered

Research with the title creditor position in consumer financing agreements as a result of fiduciary guarantees not being registered, will raise two problems as follows, first, what are the characteristics of consumer financing agreements with fiduciary guarantees, and second, how default is non-fulfillment of achievements or obligations set by certain parties in an engagement. The methodology used in analyzing the problems in this study uses a normative juridical method with two approaches, namely the statutory approach and the concept approach, to produce an in-depth analysis. Based on the discussion that has been carried out in the previous chapter, the following conclusions can be formulated: First, that the characteristics of consumer financing agreements with fiduciary guarantees. The agreement is made by default the contents of the agreement, and the agreement is the principal agreement. Furthermore, it is bound by a fiduciary guarantee agreement which is an assecoir agreement (additional agreement) to the main agreement. After an agreement is reached, then the fiduciary guarantee will be charged and the fiduciary guarantee will be registered in accordance with Government Regulation No. 21 of 2015. The position of the creditor does not register the fiduciary guarantee object as a concurrent creditor. Second, default is the non-fulfillment of achievements or obligations set by certain parties in an engagement. Default in the guarantee is said to cancel the guarantee agreement, and only the main agreement applies. The implementation of the execution of fiduciary guarantees can be done in 3 ways, in accordance with article 29 UUJF, the 3 ways are by means of executorial titles, parateexecutie and private sales. Legal protection for debtors in the forced withdrawal of fiduciary collateral objects that are not registered, namely there are preventive and repressive protections. And the settlement can be done peacefully (kindly), win-win solution or through consumer dispute resolution institutions such as BPSK.

Hak Cipta sebagai Objek Jaminan Fidusia dalam Pembiayaan Mudharabah pada Perbankan Syariah

The Fatwa (decision) of the National Sharia Council Number 7 of 2000 on Mudharabah asserts that shahibul maal are allowed to ask for guarantees from mudharibs. Article 16 paragraph (3) Law no. 28 of 2014 on Copyright has also stated that copyright can be used as an object of fiduciary guarantee. As a result of this provision, copyright can legally be used as an object of collateral. However, in terms of implementation in society, this cannot be done because it appears to be unfair and there is uncertainty in assessing value. Sharia principles prioritize justice and certainty in every aspect, of course this is in direct conflict with sharia principles. This research uses a normative juridical research method. The results of this research indicate that copyright as an object of fiduciary security in sharia banking cannot yet be used, because there is no institution that assesses the value of copyright, which results in the value of copyright being unclear. In other words, if this is implemented it will violate existing sharia principles

The National Collective Management Institute (LMKN) as an Appraiser of Economic Value in the Binding of Music and Song Copyrights as Objects of Fiduciary Guarantees

One of the creations protected by copyright is songs and/or music. Legal protection for them is a necessity in order to create a conducive climate to the development of music industry in Indonesia. In order to facilitate song and/or music writers with better control over their works, they can appoint representatives to regulate the management of their royalty, in this case LMKN (The National Collective Management Institute). Law number 28 of 2014 concerning copyrights regulates that copyright can be used as an object of fiduciary guarantee. However, its use is still hampered by the fact that the economic value of music and song copyrights cannot be determined easily, especially if it is used for fiduciary guarantee. Most banks do not accept it for loan collateral. The objective of this research was to analyze the roles of LMKN as the determiner of the economic values of song and music copyrights for the purpose of binding them for objects of fiduciary guarantee. This normative study uses statutory approach, conceptual approach, analytical approach, and futuristic approach. The determination of the economic values of song and music copyrights can be done by LMKN, a one- stop service institution that collects the royalty of music and song in Indonesia. The National Collective Management Institute (hereinafter briefly referred to as LMKN) as an institution that can provide an appraiser of the economic value of Music and Song Copyrights. The use of SILM (a music and song information system and data center) can help the estimation of music and song’s economic value based on the royalty accepted by the art’s creator or copyright holder. The amount of royalty can determine the binding of music and song copyrights for the objects of fiduciary guarantee.

Legal Implications of Not Performing Roya Fiduciary Guarantee by the Creditor

The purpose of this research is to find out and analyze the obstacles of the creditor not doing roya fiduciary when the debtor's debt is paid off, legal protection to the debtor if the creditor does not do roya fiduciary guarantee and the legal implications of not doing roya fiduciary at PT Verena Multi Finance Medan City. This type of research is normative juridical legal research, the nature of the research is descriptive analysis, the techniques used are library research and field research. The results of the study state that the obstacles of creditors in carrying out fiduciary security roya are constraints on the removal system and constraints on legal arrangements. Legal protection to the debtor if the creditor does not make a fiduciary guarantee roya is stated in Article 25 paragraph (3) of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law that upon the abolition of the fiduciary guarantee the fiduciary recipient notifies the Fiduciary Registration Office of the abolition of the fiduciary guarantee by attaching a statement regarding the abolition of debt. The legal implication of not doing fiduciary roya at PT Verena Multi Finance Medan City is that the object of fiduciary guarantee that has not been royaed cannot be used as collateral if the object of the guarantee is to be re-guaranteed as an object of fiduciary guarantee, then the object must be royaed first.

OBJECTIVE RIGHTS FOR FINANCING COMPANIES AS FIDUCIARY GUARANTEE HOLDER

The purpose of this research is to explain the objective rights of the Fiduciary Guarantee in the Financing Company. This research uses a normative method using primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials with descriptive analysis and inductive drawing conclusions. As it is known that the Fiduciary Guarantee will basically continue to bind to the Fiduciary Guarantee Object. Fiduciary guarantees given to Financing Companies as creditors receiving fiduciary rights are granted imperfectly. The agreement usually separates the ownership documents that are authorized to the creditor receiving the fiduciary and the object of the guarantee to the debtor providing the fiduciary. The imperfect objective rights have led to a lot of speculation that the owner of the object is the owner who fully controls the object without regard to the existence of ownership documents. For this reason, sometimes finance companies have difficulty in executing the fiduciary guarantee object. The results of the research show that material rights will always follow wherever the owner of the object is, but in this short study it can be seen that every object that is still guaranteed status has a lien which will continue to be attached until the object is paid off by the debtor.

Legal Protection for Creditors Regarding Default and Unilateral Transfer of Fiduciary Guarantee Vehicles Based on the Principle of Justice

Indonesian people generally buy private vehicles by using credit facilities or making monthly payments to finance companies to own their vehicles. Vehicles purchased on credit are bound by using fiduciary guarantees prone to being pawned, rented out and transferred by the debtor unilaterally. The reason was due to default so that the fiduciary guarantee vehicle was diverted so that it could be confiscated by POLRI investigators to be used as evidence. As a result of the unilateral transfer of the debtor, the creditor suffers a loss, so that the creditor must be legally protected. The purpose of this research is to find out and analyze the legal protection for credit related to violations and diversion of vehicles based on the principle of justice. The method in this research is qualitative research with empirical and normative juridical approaches. Empirical juridical research prioritizes secondary data, books, laws and regulations and examines positive legal principles from literary data and comparative law. The fiduciary giver must be responsible, carry out his obligations and keep the collateral object under his control. However, in reality it does not rule out the possibility of the Fiduciary Guarantee object changing hands or transferring control to a third party because it is transferred by the debtor, usually due to economic factors. The existence of Law no. 42 of 1999 concerning guarantees in Indonesia which are lex specialis derogat legi general, is one of the legal principles which implies that specific legal rules will override general legal rules.

Tinjauan Yuridis Konten Youtube sebagai Objek Jaminan di Bank

Youtube is also increasingly in demand because it can become a new niche for finding or increasing income (salary). With this rapid development, more and more people are creating YouTube accounts to use as a business as a source of income. YouTube itself opens wide opportunities for content creators who want to create content to earn income. Currently in Indonesia there are many popular names among YouTubers. With the development of the content creator profession in the digital media industry, they earn a higher income than people in general. So that digital media gets a trial opportunity to ensure that the content created is worthy of being used as a loan value at the bank. This research is normative-juridical research. By using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. Data collection techniques were carried out using the library study method. The data analysis technique was carried out in a qualitative descriptive manner. Article 16 of the 2014 Copyright Law has regulated a new provision regarding legal certainty to guarantee copyrights (copyright works) as the basis for borrowing money. issued Government Regulation (PP) No. 24 of 2022 concerning Regulations for Implementing Law No. 24 of 2019 concerning the Creative Economy which regulates intellectual property-based financing schemes. In the procedure for binding YouTube account content as a fiduciary guarantee object that is categorized as copyright, it must first be registered and ratified at the Director General of Intellectual Property at the Ministry of Law and Human Rights.

Application of the Droit De Suite Principle in Dispute Settlement of Fiduciary Guarantee Agreements

<p>ABSTRACT</p><p> This study contains a description of the application of the droit de suite principle in the settlement of disputes over the provision of fiduciary guarantees. The problem studied in this study is how the judge's considerations regarding the application of the droit de suite principle in dispute resolution of the fiduciary guarantee agreement where the object of the guarantee is on an individual third party due to the auction of the execution of the booty and the government as a result of being used to commit a crime. The method used in this research is sociological normative legal research, by taking a statute approach to the collected legal materials. The result of this research is that the judges' considerations in some of the court's decisions in favor of individual third parties or the government are wrong. This is because the fiduciary guarantee agreement made between the fiduciary recipient (PT/creditor) and the fiduciary giver (debtor) is legally and binding based on Article 14 paragraph (3) in conjunction with Article 15 paragraph (2) and (3). Therefore, the fiduciary recipient has the authority to carry out executions based on the droi de suite principle as regulated in Article 20 of the Fiduciary Guarantee Law. In addition, based on the prioritization principle, the fiduciary recipient's actions are correct to take and execute the fiduciary guarantee object. The output to be achieved from this research is to produce scientific works in the form of research journals that can be used as reference material for other writers in the future.</p>

Qualification of Copyrights as Objects on Fiduciary Warranty Objects

The economic and legal development of Copyright in Law Number 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright provides new regulations regarding Copyrights that can be used as objects of Fiduciary Guarantees. Article 16 paragraph (3) UUHC provides an opportunity to bind Copyrights as objects of Fiduciary Guarantees, Copyrights include intangible movable objects that are born in a declarative manner. However, based on the Civil Code, whoever has a right or proposes an act to confirm his right, or to refute the rights of others, must prove the existence of that right or the existence of such an act. The regulation regarding Copyright as the object of Fiduciary Guarantee is in accordance with the provisions on the loading, registration and transfer of Fiduciary Guarantee in Law Number 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantee. Philosophically, copyright as a material right is in accordance with the legal system of objects in Indonesia where each “object” and “right” can be controlled by property rights, as “intangible objects” which can be used as objects of guarantee as mandated by UUHC. The regulation of copyright as a fiduciary guarantee must have clear and detailed qualifications related to the assessment of copyright in each type of copyright that has been stipulated in the UUHC, there must be new operational regulations on fiduciary guarantees for each type of copyright so that it can be fully Fiduciary guarantees can be carried out in the banking sector.

Penerapan Hukum terhadap Tindak Pidana Pengalihan Objek Jaminan Fidusia

This study aims to examine the criteria for transferring fiduciary security objects into a criminal offense and the application of law in the case of criminal acts of transferring fiduciary security objects. This study is a nomrative legal research because it examines and analyzes the criteria for transferring fiduciary security objects according to the provisions of Law No. 42 of 1999 concerning Fiduciary Guarantees. The results show that there are two criteria where the act of transferring the object of fiduciary guarantee becomes a criminal offense, namely: a) The act of transferring the object of fiduciary guarantee which is carried out without the written consent of the Fiduciary Recipient. b) The act of transferring the object of fiduciary guarantee which is carried out when the fiduciary encumbrance process is not carried out jointly between the creditor and the debtor, but only based on the standard clause, namely the granting of power from the debtor to the creditor in accordance with Article 18 paragraph (1) letter h of Law No. 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection.DOI: https://doi.org/10.26905/mlj.v3i2.9219

The Transfer of Intellectual Property Rights as Object of Fiduciary Guarantee

The transfer in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) "can be transferred or transferred" only economic rights. The transfer must be made clearly and in writing either with or without a notarial deed so that the transfer must be based on an agreement. This study aims to examine and analyze the transfer of intellectual property rights in the property law system, and to analyze the transfer of intellectual property rights as objects of fiduciary guarantees. The approach in this study is to use a socio-legal approach. This type of research is a qualitative research. The types of data used are primary and secondary data. Techniques for collecting data, through literature and field studies. Data collection through field studies is through observation and interviews. Observation is research that is conducted directly on the object under study by conducting interviews with research resource persons. The data analysis used is qualitatively inductive. The results of the study found that intellectual property rights as object law in Article 499 and Article 507 of the Civil Code so that intellectual property rights are transferred as objects of fiduciary guarantees through agreements, in accordance with the main agreement. Furthermore, the transfer of IPR as a fiduciary guarantee, of course, underlies the transfer of property rights in accordance with the provisions of the Civil Code, the law on intellectual property rights and the law on fiduciary guarantees, which have been stated in the agreement clause authentically.