CD Skripsi

Kedudukan Penerima Fidusia Dalam Proses Penyelesaian Wanprestasi Atas Objek Jaminan Yang Dikuasai Oleh Negara

---

The confiscation of a fiduciary object by the state due to an unlawful act is considered negligence by the fiduciary and the fiduciary must be held responsible. As happened in the Civil Lawsuit Decision Number 142/Pdt.G/2021/PN Pbr, where the party receiving the fiduciary tried to defend his rights because the object which was the object of the fiduciary guarantee was confiscated by the state due to the negligence of the fiduciary giver. The preferential right of the fiduciary recipient here becomes questionable when the object that is the object of the fiduciary guarantee is no longer in the hands of the debtor because the object is confiscated by the state. However, the confiscation of the object that is the object of the fiduciary guarantee here does not make the fiduciary guarantee invalid/destroyed, the fiduciary giver still has to resolve the default against the party receiving the fiduciary. The author aims to analyze how the position of the fiduciary recipient, namely as a preferred creditor, and the material rights owned by the fiduciary recipient are linked when the object that is the object of the fiduciary guarantee is confiscated by the state. Apart from that, the author also examines the process of resolving defaults when objects that are the object of collateral are confiscated by the state.
This type of research is sociological legal research. Sociological research is research carried out directly on location or in the field to obtain data to provide a complete and clear picture of the problem to be researched. The research was conducted at PT. MCF Pekanbaru branch office is the object of this research case. Then the population and sample are the Directors of PT. MCF, customer of PT. MCF, and the Legal and Human Rights Services Division of the Riau Regional Office of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights. The data sources used are primary and secondary data. Data collection techniques were carried out using interviews and literature review.
The conclusions obtained from the results of this research are first, the creditor, in this case PT MCF, has material rights so it is classified as a preferred creditor. The priority right in question is the right of the fiduciary recipient to collect the receivables for the proceeds from the execution of the object that is the object of the fiduciary guarantee. The preferred position of creditors is obtained, among other things, if they have material rights. Second, negligence regarding collateral objects is the debtor's responsibility. The creditor, namely PT MCF, who felt aggrieved as a result of the debtor's actions, submitted a request to the presiding judge at the trial examining the criminal case. Then, of course, the person being sued is the debtor as the provider of the fiduciary guarantee. The PT finally filed a lawsuit at the Bangkinang District Court which ended with a deed of peace stating that the collateral object would be returned to the creditor and auctioned off as repayment of the debtor's debt.

Keywords: Fiduciary Guarantee, Prefferred Creditor, Expropriation Bye the State

---

Ketersediaan

Informasi Detail

Judul Seri

-

No. Panggil

1909111447

Penerbit

Pekanbaru : Universitas Riau - F. Hukum - Hukum Perdata., 2023

Deskripsi Fisik

-

Bahasa

Indonesia

ISBN/ISSN

-

Klasifikasi

1909111447

Tipe Isi

-

Tipe Media

-

Tipe Pembawa

-

Edisi

-

Subjek

HUKUM PERDATA

Info Detail Spesifik

-

Pernyataan Tanggungjawab

Vina

Versi lain/terkait

Lampiran Berkas

Komentar

---

Anda harus masuk sebelum memberikan komentar