Analisis Yuridis Gugatan Wanprestasi Yang Tidak Dapat Diterima “Niet Onvantkelijke Verklaard” (Studi Kasus Nomor 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn)

Authors

  • Feby Oktavia br Tarigan Universitas Negeri Medan
  • Sarah Sabina Universitas Negeri Medan
  • Anna Maudina Manurung Universitas Negeri Medan
  • Parlaungan Gabriel Siahaan Universitas Negeri Medan
  • Dewi Pika Lbn Batu Universitas Negeri Medan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55606/sinov.v5i2.679

Keywords:

Lawsuits, Defaults, Case Studies

Abstract

A lawsuit is a civil claim regarding rights involving a dispute with another person. A lawsuit whose formulation does not meet the requirements or has formal defects so that the subject matter of the case is not examined results in the lawsuit not being accepted (niet ontvankalijeke verklaad). As in the Medan District Court decision Number 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn, it was stated that the lawsuit could not be accepted. This case study research aims to find out mistakes that might be made in filing a civil lawsuit and understand why the lawsuit was rejected in case Number 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn. This research was conducted using a normative juridical problem approach. Using primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials with library data collection techniques which are then analyzed using qualitative techniques. The results of this research show that a lawsuit filed in court must meet the formal requirements as regulated in article 118 HIR or article 142 RBG. In the decision in case Number 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn with the claim for breach of contract it was declared inadmissible because the plaintiff's claim was vague and unclear (obscuur libel). Vagueness and lack of clarity in the plaintiff's claim, which in the main case concerns breach of contract. and the plaintiff in the main case of breach of contract, whether in the posita or petitum of the plaintiff's lawsuit, does not specify any obligations that the defendant has not carried out to the plaintiff, including the number and date of the invoice for which the defendant has not yet fulfilled and paid the plaintiff, punishing the Plaintiff in the Convention/Defendant in the Reconvention to pay court costs which to date amount to Rp. 1,291,500.00 (one million two hundred ninety-one thousand five hundred rupiah).

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Anon. n.d. “Yurisprudensi-Mahkamah-Agung-RI-No-492K-SIP-1970-Tahun-1970.pdf.”

Benuf, Kornelius, Siti Mahmudah, dan Ery Agus Priyono. 2019. “Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Keamanan Data Konsumen Financial Technology Di Indonesia.” Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 3(2):145–60. doi: 10.24246/jrh.2019.v3.i2.p145-160.

Clarisa Adelia Tanry, Kartika Anjelina Sembiring Meliala. 2022. “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Gugatan Yang Tidak Dapat Diterima Oleh Majelis Hakim.” Jurnal Ilmiah Indonesia 7(3).

Hapsari, Indah Heppy. 2018. “Studi Putusan Yang Tidak Dapat Dieksekusi (Non Eksekutable) Dalam Perkara Perdata.” Jurnal Verstek 6(2):11.

Marjo. 2010. “Mengkritisi eksepsi tidak berkuasanya hakim dalam pemeriksaan perkara perdata di pengadilan negeri.” Mmh 39(2):110–15.

Mendrofa, Khairan, Berkat Telaumbanua, dan Suhaila Zulkifli. 2021. “Tinjauan Yuridis Gugatan Wanprestasi Yang Tidak Dapat Diterima Oleh Pengadilan (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 9/PDT.G/2018/PN.GST.” Jurnal Hukum dan Kemasyarakatan Al-Hikmah 2(2):252–56.

Nursolih, Enjang. 2019. “Analisis Penyusunan Surat Gugatan.” Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi 7(1):87. doi: 10.25157/jigj.v7i1.2142.

Putusan, Direktori, Mahkamah Agung, dan Republik Indonesia. 2023. “Putusan No. 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn.”

Sinaga, Dara Sari, dan Akmaluddin Syahputra. 2023. “Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Putusan Niet Ontvankelijke Verklaard Dalam Perkara Gugatan Kurang Pihak.” Jurnal Hukum Unissula 39(1):40–54. doi: 10.26532/jh.v39i1.30696.

Siregar, Maralutan, Tan Kamello, Hasim Purba, dan Rosnidar Sembiring. 2023. “Pemisahan Gugatan Wanprestasi dan Perbuatan Melawan Hukum dalam Perspektif Hukum Materiil dan Penerapan di Pengadilan.” Locus Journal of Academic Literature Review 2(6):532–48.

Suhendar. 2019. “Putusan No (Niet Ontvankelijk Verklaard) Terhadap Perbuatan Wanprestasi.” Jurnal Yustita 5(2):242–62.

Victor Ary Subekti, Rocky Marbun. 2022. “KAJIAN YURIDIS PENERAPAN TURUT TERGUGAT DALAM GUGATAN WANPRESTASI DAN SITA JAMINAN.” KAJIAN YURIDIS PENERAPAN TURUT TERGUGAT DALAM GUGATAN WANPRESTASI DAN SITA JAMINAN 8(8.5.2017):2003–5.

Yahman. 2014. Karakteristik Wanprestasi & Tindakan Pidana Penipuan. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Downloads

Published

2023-10-26

How to Cite

Feby Oktavia br Tarigan, Sarah Sabina, Anna Maudina Manurung, Parlaungan Gabriel Siahaan, & Dewi Pika Lbn Batu. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Gugatan Wanprestasi Yang Tidak Dapat Diterima “Niet Onvantkelijke Verklaard” (Studi Kasus Nomor 79/Pdt.G/2023/PN Mdn) . Media Informasi Penelitian Kabupaten Semarang, 5(2), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.55606/sinov.v5i2.679

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)