To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Payment of creditors.
Journal articles on the topic 'Payment of creditors'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Payment of creditors.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Johan, Suwinto. "Separatist Creditors Problems on Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations Based on the Supreme Court’s Decree Number 30/KMA/SK/I/2020." Fiat Justisia: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 15, no. 3 (June 29, 2021): 207–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v15no3.1956.
Full textAbstract:
Debt Payment Obligation postponement is an effort for creditors and debtors to settle the debts with a more efficient process. The creditor of a company consists of concurrent and separatist creditors. Based on the Supreme Court Decree Number 30/KMA/SK/I/2020 Book I on the Guidelines for the Settlement of Requests for Bankrupt and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia, the creditors who can submit Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation (PKPU) are only concurrent creditors. The separatist creditors are not allowed to submit PKPU. This is different from the Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Payment Law Number 37 of 2004. Based on Law Number 37 of 2004, Creditors who can submit Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation are creditors who estimate that the debtor cannot continue to pay debts that are due and can be billed, can request that the debtor be given a postponement of debt payment, to enable the debtor to submit a reconciliatory proposal which includes offering the payment of part or all of the debt to the creditor. However, based on the Supreme Court Decree, only the concurrent creditor can submit Debt Payment Obligation’s postponement. As a result of this Supreme Court Decree, the separatist creditors cannot apply for Debt Payment Obligation postponement. Separatist creditors can propose the postponement of debt payment obligations if the separatist creditor has turned into a concurrent creditor. Separatist creditors become concurrent creditors if the collateral provided value is insufficient for the company’s obligations so that the separatist creditors can propose to be part of the concurrent creditors. By becoming a concurrent creditor, the separatist creditors can submit to be part of the peace proposal and distribute the remaining company assets.
2
Johan, Suwinto. "Material Adverse Change: An Alternative Solution to Suspension of the Debt Payment." Humaniora 11, no. 3 (November 30, 2020): 211–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.21512/humaniora.v11i3.6606.
Full textAbstract:
The research aimed to provide alternative solutions with Material Adverse Change (MAC) before reaching the suspension of the debt payment obligation stage. The pandemic situation had caused many companies to experience difficulties in fulfilling their obligations, including payment obligations or debts to suppliers and creditors. If there were circumstances where the company could not fulfill its obligations, then the creditor would be able to collect through debt-restructuring to bankruptcy. The restructuring was carried out through the suspension of the debt payment obligation (Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang/PKPU). The research used normative juridical methods. It focused on credit and financing transactions between companies and creditors, both banking or finance companies. The research concludes that before the suspension of a debt payment obligation, companies and creditors should negotiate based on MAC before reaching a lawsuit. In the MAC, there is an explicit clause, and it is agreed by both parties, then the creditor should acknowledge the company’s actual condition.
3
Pramudita, Shabrina Aliya, Kartikasari Kartikasari, and Amelia Cahyadini. "KEDUDUKAN HUKUM MENKOMINFO DALAM PELAKASANAAN PERDAMAIAN MENURUT UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG." Legal Standing : Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 4, no. 1 (April 25, 2020): 101. http://dx.doi.org/10.24269/ls.v4i1.2347.
Full textAbstract:
Susension of Payment (PKPU) is the time given by the law through the commercial court’s judgment where the Creditor and the Debtor are given the chance to discuss the ways to pay their debts by giving the payment plan as a whole or in partial, including if it is considered necessary to restructure the debts. It is known that there is the implementation of the peace agreement in PKPU. The parties in the implementation of the peace agreement are the Creditor and the Debtor. Moreover, it is also known that there are Preferred Creditor and Concurrent Creditor. However, in regard to the classification of the Creditors, there are several cases that show that the Creditor’s legal standing is debatable and it creates a problem during the implementation of the peace agreement in PKPU.
4
Masakke, Fransisca Utami, Irena Hapsari, and Syaukah Az-Zahro. "ASPEK AGUNAN SEBAGAI PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI BANK SELAKU PENYEDIA LAYANAN KREDIT ONLINE." Perspektif Hukum 20, no. 1 (May 1, 2020): 1. http://dx.doi.org/10.30649/phj.v20i1.236.
Full textAbstract:
The implementation of lending and borrowing money or credit in general requires an additional agreement in the form of a guarantee agreement for the safety of the loan. Debt guarantees are giving confidence to creditors over the payment of debts they have given to debtors, this is due to the law or the issuance of an agreement that is assessoir of the principal agreement. Regarding the nature of the collateral agreement is the assessoir, that agreement follows the principal collateral in the form of a debt or credit agreement. The type of debt collateral can be in the form of material collateral which will give rise to material rights or individual collateral, commonly referred to as borgtocht which will give rise to individual rights as stated in Article 1820 BW. In general, creditors choose to use a material security, because by holding a material security the creditor's position will become the preferred creditor and the material rights over the guarantee will be transferred to the creditor who will give the right to receive debt payments in advance of the execution of collateral objects. In contrast to individual guarantees that only give rise to individual rights and can only be defended to the party making the agreement. However, if credit is done online with electronic mechanisms, how can collateral that can convince and protect creditors as the provider of online credit facilities
5
MAULUDIN, NOVIE AFIF. "KEDUDUKAN KREDITOR SEPARATIS DALAM PROSES KEPAILITAN." GANEC SWARA 17, no. 1 (March 4, 2023): 24. http://dx.doi.org/10.35327/gara.v17i1.366.
Full textAbstract:
The purpose of this study is to find out how the position of separatist creditors in the bankruptcy process is. To answer the problem formulation of the author. The research method used is a normative juridical research method, namely legal research conducted by examining library materials or secondary data. By collecting and then reviewing library materials or secondary data relevant to this research. The results of the research that the provisions in the Law on Guarantees and the Law on Bankruptcy and Debt Payment Delays in which the position of separatist creditors takes precedence over other creditors, and is a separation of creditors' rights, is the author's interpretation of the above discussion, so hereby the author draws conclusions based on the results of the above discussion. . Separatist creditors have the same rights to liquidate assets in the bankruptcy process as if the debtor is not declared bankrupt. However, there are no firm and fast rules between Article 55 paragraph (1) of Law 37/2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Debt Payment Delays and the Civil Code rules regarding the rights of creditors who decide, which can lead to disputes between creditors who decide and practitioners of bankruptcy. In particular Articles 56 and 59 of Law 37/2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Debt Payment Delays. To avoid the above scenario, the bankruptcy practitioner must ensure that the status of the separatist creditor as a lien holder is adequately protected in the settlement of his claim. The transfer of substantive rights by the curator is considered null and void by law, so the provision of Article 56 paragraph (3) of Law 37/2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Debt Payment Delay in the interpretation section needs to be changed. After the substantive rights expire, the guaranteed creditor will compete directly with other creditors
6
Aprita, Serlika, Amanda Mutia Carissa, Andini Yulia Putri, and Sabrina Sabrina. "PENDEKATAN HAK ASASI MANUSIA DEBITOR DAN KREDITOR DALAM PENGUJIAN UNDANG-UNDANG KEPALITIAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN MEMBAYAR UTANG DIMASA MENDATANG." Solusi 21, no. 1 (January 1, 2023): 1–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.36546/solusi.v21i1.715.
Full textAbstract:
The Human Rights Approach of Debtors and Creditors in Testing Bankruptcy Laws and Postponing Bankruptcy Obligations to Pay Debts in the Future is discussed in this study, Along with how Indonesia's legal system's state or evolution with regard to bankruptcy law and the suspension of debt payment responsibilities. Indonesia. In this study, a normative research methodology is used to investigate problems with the law and pertinent literature. According to the study's findings, the Bankruptcy Law and Postponement of Obligation to Pay Future Debt regulates the human rights approach between debtors and creditors when it comes to testing the law. Law Number 37 of 2004 Concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations is the name of this regulation. By filing for bankruptcy or requesting a suspension of their debt payment responsibilities, debtors can reach an agreement with their creditors regarding the repayment of their debts. A delay in payment of debt is a time period allotted by law in line with a Commercial Judge's Decision, during which the creditor and debtor can discuss how to pay their debts by drafting a payment plan for all or any of those debts, including by restructuring the debt. Either the debtor or the creditor may ask for a suspension of the debt payment obligations.
7
Ariqah, Putri, and Siti Anisah. "ARRANGEMENT OF BANKRUPTCY DEBT REPAYMENT TOWARD EMPLOYEES IN INDONESIA AND GERMANY." Indonesia Private Law Review 3, no. 1 (June 29, 2022): 53–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.25041/iplr.v3i1.2598.
Full textAbstract:
Employees have special rights in the settlement of bankrupt debts to obtain their rights as regulated in the Indonesian Bankruptcy Law. However, employees must compete with other creditors who also have privileges under bankruptcy law, such as the tax office, insurance policy holder, and bankruptcy fees. Due to the existence of several special creditors, employees do not get their rights in the first order as regulated in the labor law. This study aims to determine the mechanism for filing bankruptcy against debtors in terms of legal entities and the position of employees in paying bankruptcy debts compared to other creditors in the Indonesian and German legal systems. This type of research is normative legal research conducted by examining library materials or secondary data. This study analyzes the mechanism for filing bankruptcy against debtors as legal entities according to the Indonesian and German legal systems which are divided into 3 (three) stages, namely registration, trial, and implementation of the bankruptcy decision. The position of employees in the settlement of bankrupt debts differs between Indonesia and Germany. In Indonesia, for the payment of ''wages'', the position of employees has a ''privilege'' which takes precedence over other creditors. However, for the settlement of ''other rights'' owned by employees, they do not have a privileged position as wages, so they are not included in priority payments. Whereas in Germany, there is a special feature called “bankruptcy money” where the payment of three months' wages will be paid at the preliminary stage of the bankruptcy proceedings. In addition, the position of rights to the social plan, the position of employee receivables are payments that are prioritized over other creditors. Finally, rights that are not included in the bankruptcy money, whose position in a settlement is after the demands of the creditor whose position is higher than the unsecured creditor have been fully fulfilled.
8
Nabiu, Musriyadi, Reflis, and Aswin. "KORELASI FAKTOR SOSIAL EKONOMI RUMAH TANGGA DENGAN TINGKAT PENUNGGAKAN PENGEMBALIAN KREDIT P4K DI KECAMATAN MUARA BANGKAHULU KOTA BENGKULU." Jurnal AGRISEP 8, no. 2 (September 16, 2009): 12–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.31186/jagrisep.8.2.12-23.
Full textAbstract:
This research is intended to study characteristics of P4K creditors who are delinquent their credit payments, examine factors influencing their late P4K credit payments. From 40 P4K creditors, only 23 creditors are able to accessed for this research and willing to participate. Rank spearman correlation and t-test methods are used to analyze the data gathered from respondents. The research finds that the level of family income and respondent’ perception on rural development are highly correlated to the level of P4K credit payment while number of family, working motivation and respondents perception on P4K program are not.Key words: credit payment, socio-economic factors
9
Simanjuntak, Jimmy. "TINJAUAN HUKUM ATAS KEWENANGAN KREDITOR MENGAJUKAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 37 TAHUN 2004." Honeste Vivere 33, no. 1 (January 30, 2023): 69–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.55809/hv.v33i1.193.
Full textAbstract:
: In essence, petition of suspension of debt payment under Indonesian Law (“PKPU) was designed for the achievement of peace between debtor and creditors through homologation. As regulated on Article 222 (3) Indonesian Law Number 37 Year 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment (“UU KPKPU”), competency to submit petition of suspension of debt payment was given not only to debtor but also given to creditors. This provision, however, has loopholes that might be misapplied by creditors who did not seek for peace but merely want to collect the debt, which did not aligned with the main purpose of PKPU. This research aims to provide an in-depth analysis concerning the conformity between creditor’s right to submit petition of PKPU under Article 222 (3) UU KPKPU and peace concept of PKPU.
10
Prawira, Henry, and Christine S. T. Kansil. "ANALISIS PENERAPAN PASAL 245 UU NO. 37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PKPU DALAM (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NO:03/PDT.SUS-PKPU/2016/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST.)." Jurnal Hukum Adigama 2, no. 1 (July 24, 2019): 629. http://dx.doi.org/10.24912/adigama.v2i1.5255.
Full textAbstract:
Bankruptcy has become a common problem in today's business world, under the Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment Act, in addition to bankruptcy, one can do so through Suspension of Payment. Suspension of Payment is a method of debt-receivable dispute resolution which is supervised by a supervisory and administering judge, whose final legal product is peace or insolvency. Not all Debtors have good intentions, sometimes payments are made after Suspension of Payment's application is registered. According to the Article 245 of Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment, all payments made before the Suspension of Payment are not permitted, after the Suspension of Payment application has been applied for and has been registered at the commercial court in the district court. However there is a dualism of understanding of the prohibition, some claim that the payment is permissible, and some claim that the payment is not permitted. Many Debtors use these payments to abort the formal requirements of Suspension of Payment, which is not in accordance with the legal objectives of justice for all parties, because the usual payment is payment to only a portion of creditors, who have smaller debts, which makes other creditors not get legal certainty, and the consequence of that is that PKPU's application must be rejected. The purpose of this study is to find out how to apply Article 245 of Act No. 34 of 2004 as it should, so that it can be adjusted to the purpose of law, namely justice.
11
Denisanjaya, Marcellina, and Yovita Arie Mangesti. "PERTANGGUNGJAWABAN PIDANA PIHAK KREDITUR YANG MEMPEKERJAKAN DEBTCOLLECTOR DALAM PENYELESAIAN KREDIT MACET." Bureaucracy Journal : Indonesia Journal of Law and Social-Political Governance 2, no. 1 (April 30, 2022): 654–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.53363/bureau.v2i1.159.
Full textAbstract:
In this study, it will examine the criminal liability of creditors who employ debtcollectors in collecting bad debts. Card-Based Payment Instruments (APMK) regulated in PBI (Bank Indonesia Regulation) Number 14 of 2012, one example of a payment instrument that is often used by the public is the use of Credit Cards. With this payment instrument, it can pose several risks for the community, a problem that often occurs is delays or overdue in paying credit card bills. Until it finally causes credit bottlenecks in payments and also the nominal collection that is increasing due to late fees. The existence of credit congestion can cause other problems for the creditor and the debtor. In general, in the event of a bad debt, the creditor will use the services of a Debtcollector as a third party to collect debts. Debtcollector as a third party charged by the creditor (bank) in collecting debts to the debtor, but the power of attorney that has been given makes the debtcollector do various ways of collecting. There are some debt collection individuals who commit arbitrary acts or unlawful acts in collection. In this study, it uses normative juridical research methods with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results of this study show that the form of criminal liability of creditors who employ debtcollectors can be in the form of imprisonment and/or fines of a certain amount of money for compensation to the aggrieved party. It has not been clearly regulated in the laws and regulations regarding the form of criminal liability of creditors in hiring debtcollectors who commit unlawful acts at the time of debt collection.
12
Sunarmi, Sunarmi, Detania Sukarja, and Tri Murti Lubis. "The Standings of Tax Receivables in Bankruptcy Cases : A Study on Managing and Settling Assets." Syiah Kuala Law Journal 5, no. 3 (December 31, 2021): 329–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/sklj.v5i3.23347.
Full textAbstract:
The state's privilege right to tax receivables in bankruptcy cases is regulated differently under various laws and court decisions in Indonesia. In general, tax receivables in bankruptcy have privilege position over other creditors, including secured creditors such as banks, mortgage holders, fiduciary guarantees and finance companies, preferential creditors and concurrent creditors. The creditor’s tax debt to the state should be paid first before any payment to other creditors. However, the Director General of Tax under the Ministry of Finance of the Republic of Indonesia often faces problems in claiming the payment as the Ministry claims for the payment are always rejected by the Court. Each of the existing legal rules and decisions provides different answers to this problem, resulting in legal uncertainties. This research is conducted using the normative juridical approach and supported by the empirical analysis. The data collection is conducted by document studies and supported by court decisions. This research aims to inquire and analyse the position of tax receivables in the distribution of bankruptcy estate of debtors among other creditors, the role of the curators, both state and private curators, in the bankruptcy estate distribution in order to find a legal solution to the aforementioned issue according to the normative legal provisions that apply.
13
Mugito, Bryan. "How Concurrent Creditors Are Treated in Company’s Bankruptcy: A Comparison into Indonesia and Singapore." Lawpreneurship Journal 1, no. 2 (October 5, 2021): 158–75. http://dx.doi.org/10.21632/tlj.1.2.158-175.
Full textAbstract:
During the distribution of wealth in Indonesia’s corporation bankruptcy procedures, the wealth is often used to satisfy the debts owed by the debtor towards preferred creditors and secured creditors. The long process and enormous cost of the bankruptcy process before paying back the concurrent creditors puts a lack of emphasis towards these types of creditors’ rights since the company is dissolved and theoretically will not allow them to get any payment towards their loans given to the company. This leads to concurrent creditors earning a status of uncertainty and confusion in earning their credits. Compared to Singapore, even if the status of payment is quite similar to Indonesia, Singapore provides a better bankruptcy law system that incorporates public opinions and provides a better system for unfair preference and undervalued transactions that provides more wealth to be distributed to concurrent creditors during the distribution of wealth.
14
Zulfikar, Muhamad. "Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations as an Effort to Save Concurrent Creditors’ Rights to Debtors Engaged in Investment." Devotion Journal of Community Service 4, no. 6 (June 14, 2023): 1261–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.59188/devotion.v4i6.497.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to analyze how legal protection for creditors who invest in companies engaged in investment, then the creditors experience losses due to the failure of the promised payment by the debtor within the specified time, so that the creditor files a PKPU application. This research was conducted using normative legal research methods. Based on the analysis of this problem, the PKPU process can be a solution to save the rights of concurrent creditors who have a very disadvantaged position if the debtor is declared bankrupt. Bankruptcy has the potential to be used as a shortcut for debtors to escape their obligation to pay debts. The existing regulations are also not enough to provide protection for concurrent creditors, especially for the existence of conditions of helplessness of concurrent creditors.
15
Avivah, Putri Avi, and Eddie Imanuel Doloksaribu. "ANALISIS YURIDIS PENGGUNAAN ASET PERSONAL GUARANTEE DALAM MELUNASI UTANG PAILIT." Gloria Justitia 1, no. 2 (February 3, 2022): 134–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.25170/gloriajustitia.v1i2.3067.
Full textAbstract:
In bankruptcy, the use of personal guarantee assets is something that can be done in bankruptcy debt if the assets belonging to the main debtor cannot meet repayments, in bankruptcy, there are 3 types of credit, namely preferred, separatist and concurrent creditors, the three creditors are creditors who have rights and obligations. their respective positions, such as preferred creditors who have the priority right to have their debts repaid, then separatist creditors who have collateral to pay their debts, and separatist creditors who do not have collateral rights or the right to loans. If the debtor's payment to the creditor exceeds the limit after the assets of the main debtor have been auctioned, therefore the responsibility of the Personal Guarantee is to provide the assets in paying off the debt of the main debtor. Personal guarantee assets are guarantees that can be used to pay off their debts because if the assets belonging to the main debtor cannot be sufficient to pay the total debt, the personal guarantee will be responsible for settlement, the assets belonging to the personal guarantee can be directly auctioned, the payment of the bankruptcy debt is calculated by method “Pro Rata Pari Passu Parte”. The Personal Guarantee which guarantees its assets to creditors can also be bankrupt if the main debtor is unable to pay its debts.
16
Anisah, Lilies, and Eni Suarti. "Analisis Alternatif Restruturisasi Utang Atau Penutupan Perusahaan Pada Pandemi Covid-19 Melalui Pkpu, Kepailitan dan Likuidasi." Wajah Hukum 6, no. 2 (October 14, 2022): 446. http://dx.doi.org/10.33087/wjh.v6i2.1082.
Full textAbstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic situation has caused the destruction of economies throughout the world, including Indonesia. The negligence of the debtor due to the COVID-19 pandemic can be used as a reason to apply for a postponement of debt obligations. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic which disrupts the financial stability of the debtor, so that the debtor cannot pay off his debt or is negligent to the creditor, he can apply for a suspension of debt payment obligations. On the basis of the covid-19 pandemic, that the impossibility of carrying out the contract in the form of financial incapacity. UUK & PKPU provide legal protection to debtors in the midst of the covid-19 pandemic so they don't fall into bankruptcy through PKPU as stipulated in article 222 of the UUK & PKPU. The type of research used is normative legal research. The practice of paying debts through applications for postponement of debt payment obligations (PKPU) based on Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, which starts from the procedure for submitting a PKPU application, temporary PKPU, publication of PKPU decisions, receipt of invoices, making a list of temporary receivables, implementation of the reconciliation meeting for the preparation of a list of permanent receivables, a discussion meeting on the reconciliation plan which includes restructuring of offers to creditors related to the reconciliation plan. The postponement of debt payment obligations (PKPU) is not enough to provide an opportunity for debtors with good intentions to carry on their business. Because the peace process is determined by the creditor, the UUK & PKPU require a reconciliation process with the approval of the creditor. The rules of Article 229 UUK & PKPU give full power to creditors, this causes debtors to depend on the decisions of creditors.
17
Usanti, Trisadini Prasastinah, Anindya Prastiwi Setiawati, and Ninis Nugraheni. "The Legal Principle of Collateral in Fintech Lending." Hang Tuah Law Journal 3, no. 2 (January 6, 2020): 158. http://dx.doi.org/10.30649/htlj.v3i2.137.
Full textAbstract:
Simple procedures and quick service on fintech lending gives an ease for fulfilling capital needs. Indeed, it does not require any collateral which may constrain debtors to deal with it. However, although this activity brings convenience, efficiency, quickness, and simplicity in lending services, many possible risks such as debtors delayed payment or even default which may burden the creditors are likely to follow as well. Without any collateral as assurance, the risks may become much higher on fintech lending as the creditor becomes a concurrent creditor who only has relatively individual rights whose position is equal to the other creditors, no <em>droit de suite</em> principle, and the claim is individual with general assurance.
18
Sihabudin, Sihabudin, and Edo Adhitama. "HAK KREDITOR DENGAN TAGIHAN PIUTANG TERTOLAK DALAM PROSES PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG." Arena Hukum 16, no. 1 (April 27, 2023): 83–104. http://dx.doi.org/10.21776/ub.arenahukum.2023.01601.5.
Full textAbstract:
One of the stages in delaying payment of receivables obligations (PKPU) is the verification of receivables. There may be a possibility that the claim for receivables being rejected at the verification stage may occur, but there is no legal remedy that can be taken by the creditor, either ordinary or extraordinary legal remedies. This article aims to analyze the legal protection of creditors' receivables which are rejected at the receivables verification stage by administrators in the PKPU process and the authority of the supervisory judge in terms of the creditor's bill being rejected at the receivables verification stage. This normative research uses a statutory approach. The results show that Law Number 37 of 2004 does not regulate legal remedies if receivables are rejected in the accounts receivable verification. Efforts are made when this happens, the supervisory judge has the authority to reconcile creditors and debtors in determining. Thus, the debtor does not need to wait for the emergence of a settlement homologation if the bill is rejected in the verification of receivables to submit an appeal to the Supreme Court.
19
Novitasari, Novitasari. "Pembatasan Jangka Waktu Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang terhadap Debitor dalam Kepailitan." Lambung Mangkurat Law Journal 2, no. 2 (September 25, 2017): 123. http://dx.doi.org/10.32801/lamlaj.v2i2.39.
Full textAbstract:
The aims of the research is to analyze reasons for short term restriction onthe Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation (PDPO), the existence of time limitprovisions resulting the failure of the debtors’ debt efforts with creditors, and thePKPU’s term limits on legal protection for the interests of debtors to prevent bankruptcy.This research is a normative juridical research. Data used in this researchwere secondary data obtained from official documents, books related to the objectof research, research results in the form of reports, bachelor thesis, master thesis,dissertation and regulations. This research was also supported with primary databy conducting an interview with Advocates as resource persons to support the research.Data were analyzed qualitatively. The results of the research indicated that:(1) the term restriction given by Law no. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy andPostponement of Debt Payment Obligation has an objective of making debtors ableto offer amicable resolution to creditors related to debt payments so that debtors cancontinue their business. (2) The term is not a determinant of the failure of amicableresolution effort in the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation, but affect theprocess of achieving the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation, (3) Law No.37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligationprovides security guarantee such as giving the debtors an opportunity to reorganizebusiness or company management or to restructure their debts within the period ofPostponement of Debt Payment Obligation, and the debtor does not lose their rightsto take care of the company and assets, so that the debtors still have the authorityto manage the company. It can be concluded from the research that (1) Law no.37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligationprovides a short term for the debtors so that the debtors are really able to makeamicable resolution to the creditor in relation to the payment of debts. (2). The termis not a determinant of the failure of amicable resolution effort in the Postponementof Debt Payment Obligation, but affect the process of achieving the Postponementof Debt Payment Obligation. (3). Law no. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation has provided a guarantee of legal protection in the form of certainty to the debtor to prevent bankruptcy.
20
Bustomi, Abuyazid. "HAK-HAK NORMATIF PEKERJA PADA PERUSAHAAN PAILIT." Solusi 17, no. 1 (January 1, 2019): 1–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.36546/solusi.v17i1.141.
Full textAbstract:
Workers have a very important role and position as actors and in national development. Therefore, there must be labor rights stipulated in the laws and regulations in Indonesia which regulate the rights and protection of workers. Protection of workers is intended to guarantee the basic rights of workers while taking into account the development of fair business actors. Normative Rights of Workers whose companies are declared bankrupt are Priority Creditors after fulfilling the rights of separatist creditors, whose payment is carried out by the curator. The Curator's Authority to the Normative Rights of Employees in Bankrupt Companies is to complete all management and repayment of Debtor's assets and debts, including the Normative Rights of workers as stipulated in Law No. 13 of 2003 and Law No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Delays in the Payments of Debt Payments, that Normative Rights of Workers including Preferred Creditors or Creditors are prioritized.
21
Potts, Shaina. "(Re-)writing markets: Law and contested payment geographies." Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space 52, no. 1 (April 5, 2018): 46–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0308518x18768286.
Full textAbstract:
While many emphasize the supposed frictionlessness and instantaneity of global financial flows, economic geographers have done important work placing globalization in concrete practices and spaces. Yet, cross-border payment transactions, which are constitutive of transnational markets, remain understudied. In this paper, I use creditor litigation against Argentina as a lens through which to explore material geographies of transnational financial payments. This litigation sheds light on the fundamental role of law (especially US common law) in structuring most major payment transactions today. Payment “flows” are not continuous at all, but rather legally divided into discrete spatial segments—and remapping these divisions, via litigation, has become a focal point of struggle between creditors and debtors, as well as among financiers. Fierce debates over contracts and their interpretation have been central in these battles. Furthermore, these financial geographies remain inextricably entangled not only with business actors, but with legal and political actors as well—law anchors economic geographies in state spaces and (often contradictory) state interests at a variety of scales.
22
Kumar, Avinash. "POSITION OF OPERATIONAL CREDITORS: IN REGARD TO CIRP AND LIQUIDATION." International Journal of Legal Developments & Allied Issues 09, no. 02 (2023): 15–34. http://dx.doi.org/10.55662/ijldai.2023.9202.
Full textAbstract:
The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 became effective in May 2016 after receiving final presidential approval. The IBC is a complete code that acts as the focal point for all insolvency procedures. It was created to address the concerns about subpar loans that the Indian banking industry had. Previously, there was a lot of pending litigation regarding insolvency proceedings because of the protracted, years-long legislative process. But after the IBC was put into operation in 2016, the procedure has significantly improved in terms of both investor friendliness and cost-effectiveness. The regulation attempts to safeguard the interests of small investors by enabling recovery. The company must complete the insolvency procedure within 180 days of the process’s beginning, and recovery proceedings under the IBC may be initiated by either the debtor or the creditor. Financial creditors and operational creditors are two separate types of creditors recognized by the IBC. Most of the company’s creditors are simply under contractual or financial obligations to it, such as via loans or debt security. Among the operational creditors are the government, contractors, and employees. By designating them as Operational Creditors under IBC, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, has worked to strengthen and advance the position of the Company’s suppliers and service providers since its establishment. But unhappily, over time and as a consequence of multiple judgments, operational creditors’ positions have become worse, especially in terms of their chances of receiving payment via the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process. Several court decisions, committee recommendations, and legislative changes have all addressed the issue of giving operational creditors the same status as financial creditors. In this study, we will carefully examine the situations of operational creditors. The first part of the article will discuss who qualifies as an operational creditor. In the second segment, we’ll look at how operational creditors are affected by CIRP and liquidation. Thirdly, it will address various situations pertaining to the debate over whether operational creditors should be treated equally to financial creditors. Lastly, the paper figures out how operational creditors are treated under the IBC.
23
Simanjuntak, Jimmy. "PENGGUNAAN INFORMASI DEBITOR DARI SISTEM LAYANAN INFORMASI KEUANGAN OTORITAS JASA KEUANGAN (SLIK OJK) SEBAGAI ALAT BUKTI PERMOHONAN PKPU." Jurnal Hukum to-ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur dan Melindungi Masyarakat 9, no. 1 (April 26, 2023): 73–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.55809/tora.v9i1.209.
Full textAbstract:
Suspension of debt payment (PKPU) is an Indonesian Bankruptcy Law instrument to resolve disputes over receivables through reconciliation between debtors and creditors, so that debtors can continue their business. Parties that can submit a PKPU application are creditors and debtors themselves. If the creditor submits an application for PKPU against the debtor, then the creditor is obliged to simply prove the fulfillment of Article 2 paragraph (1) of the KPKPU Law, where the debtor has more than one creditor and there is a debt that is due and collectible. This study aims to analyze the use of debtor information from SLIK OJK which is used as valid evidence, to fulfill the requirements of Article 8 paragraph (4) jo. Article 2 paragraph (1) of the KPKPU Law in the PKPU application submitted by creditors. In the event that the creditor is a business entity in the banking sector, in the case of a commercial bank, it has the right to access debtor information from the OJK SLIK as stipulated in Article 2 paragraph (1) jo. Article 14 paragraph (2) POJK 18/POJK.03/2017, the creditor can submit debtor information from SLIK OJK as evidence to prove the existence of other creditors who have receivables from the same debtor. The validity of using debtor information from SLIK OJK as evidence is confirmed by Decision No. 92/Pdt.Sus-PKPU/2023/PN Niaga.Jkt.Pst. however, the use of data from the OJK SLIK in submitting PKPU applications must be carried out with caution and limited to the existence of debtors' debts contained in the OJK SLIK data.
24
Cojocaru, Cristina. "Recovery of the prejudice caused by an insolvent company." Proceedings of the International Conference on Business Excellence 15, no. 1 (December 1, 2021): 903–7. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/picbe-2021-0083.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract A recent decision of the Romanian High Court of Justice dated 6 March 2019 offers the possibility to analyse the recovery of the prejudice caused to a creditor by a company under court proceedings after on its insolvency. The applicable regulations (i.e. Law no. 85/2015) represent the legal framework, which aims at debt payment by the insolvent debtor to his creditors. Therefore, the procedure is collective and all the known creditors are involved. Consequently, the law regulates the means and the conditions of this procedure. The prejudice caused to a creditor by the insolvent company shall be recovered following the rules of the special law and not through the general applicable rules, i.e. the Civil Code. The article aims to identify the relevant theoretical aspects and their applicability in practice by the courts of law.
25
전, 휴재. "추심소송과 기판력의 주관적 범위 — 추심소송과 채권자대위소송의 비교를 중심으로 —." Korea Association of the Law of Civil Procedure 26, no. 2 (June 30, 2022): 139–85. http://dx.doi.org/10.30639/cp.2022.6.26.2.139.
Full textAbstract:
The collection lawsuit and the subrogation lawsuit of creditors are structurally similar in that they exercise the debtor's rights against the third debtor in the creditor's position. In particular, in the case of a so-called “direct payment” creditor subrogation lawsuit, which has a preferential repayment effect by directly receiving money from a third debtor and offsetting the debtor's return and preserved bonds, it functions similar to a collection lawsuit for the satisfaction of an executive creditor. In addition, if the debtor knows the fact in any circumstances when a lawsuit by subrogation of creditors is filed, the debtor cannot counter the disposition of his rights to the creditor under Article 405 (2) of the Civil Act, which is similar to the effect of the seizure order on the debtor.
However, the above two types of litigation reveal significant differences in the status of the legal system, origin of the system, purpose of the system, eligibility of parties, and prohibition of disposition, and considering these differences, attempts to easily apply or infer one legal principle to the other should be avoided.
The target judgment comprehensively reviewed the principle of relativity of res judicata under the Civil Procedure Act, the interpretation of provisions on collection lawsuits under the Civil Execution Act, and the degree of legal risk that third debtors can face.
As a result, the Supreme Court reached a different conclusion from the attitude of existing precedents on subrogation of creditors regarding the subjective scope of the final judgment of collection litigation, so it is reasonable and valid in terms of the discrimination between the collection litigation and subrogation litigation.
In resolving issues such as prohibition of double lawsuit, co-litigation, etc., related to the subjective scope of res judicata in the collection litigation revealed in the target judgment, it is necessary to distinguish from the existing legal principles on creditor subrogation litigation and seek an independent and appropriate interpretation consistent with collection litigation.
26
Afilia Dinda Dhiya Ulhaq. "The Position of Creditors of Individual Collateral Holders In Insolvency Law." YURISDIKSI : Jurnal Wacana Hukum dan Sains 19, no. 1 (June 27, 2023): 41–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.55173/yurisdiksi.v19i1.173.
Full textAbstract:
This researcher aims to find out about the rights of creditors of individual collateral holders in the norms of Law No. 37 of 2004 on Insolvency and Delay of Debt Payment Obligations. The researcher's method uses norrmative law with a statutory problem approach and a conceptual approach. Broadly speaking, the position of individual guarantees in the norms of the Bankruptcy Law if the insurer and debtor are declared bankrupt simultaneously, then it is a concurrent creditor and all the assets of the insurer as bankruptcy property. In the process of managing and releasing bankruptcy property, that the position of concurrent creditors in the process of division of bankruptcy property is at the bottom, because in principle it can but if the creditors are many while the property is few, then potentially do not get the share or even if it can be very small percentage. So that the position of creditors of individual collateral holders who are concurrent creditors is very weak in the process and distribution of bankruptcy property. When the debtor is declared bankrupt while the insurer is not declared bankrupt, then all the assets of the insurer do not include bankruptcy property. So creditors have the right to make a default lawsuit in accordance with Article 1243 kuhper to the insurer, if the process and enactment of the debtor's bankruptcy property is insufficient creditor debt. The mechanism of fulfilling achievements to individual guarantee holder creditors, namely creditors can execute the collateral object directly without having to apply for bail and execution to the court, because after the bail object is registered with the guarantee institution, the certificate will be issued as a guarantee that has executory power.
27
Budiono, Doni. "Analisis Pengaturan Hukum Acara Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang." ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata 4, no. 2 (May 1, 2019): 109. http://dx.doi.org/10.36913/jhaper.v4i2.81.
Full textAbstract:
In carrying out its business, businessmen often establish a debt agreement. Debt agreements are a common thing between creditors and debtors. However, at times, it may cause a dispute between debtors who are negligent and unable to pay their debts to creditors. One of the eff orts to overcome the unpaid debt is through Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations petitioned by the debtors or the creditors. Bankruptcy is the general seizure of all the assets of a bankrupt debtor whose management and settlement is carried out by the Curator under the supervision of the Supervisory Judge. On the other hand, Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) is the settlement of the debt, also aiming to establish a peace off er that includes off ers of partial payment or whole payment of the debt to the creditors. Bankruptcy and PKPU in its implementation have been regulated in Indonesian Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations, Herziene Indonesisch Reglement (HIR), Reglement of De Rechtsvordering (Rv), Buitengewesten Rechtsreglement (RBg), and further stipulated in the Civil Law Procedure-Draft. In Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligation’s procedural law arrangements contained in various regulations and in the Civil Law Procedure-Draft, there are shortcomings that need to be analyzed to provide a legal basis for Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations procedural law arrangements. Considering the upcoming legalization of the Civil Law Procedure-Draft, this study will analyze several important points that can be used as a reference for the Civil Law Procedure-Draft.
28
Butyrskyi, A. A., and L. M. Nikolenko. "PAYMENT OF REMUNERATION TO THE ARBITRATION MANAGER IN BANKRUPTCY: THEORETICAL AND PRACTICAL PROBLEMS." Economics and Law, no. 2 (September 9, 2021): 25–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.15407/econlaw.2021.02.025.
Full textAbstract:
The arbitral trustee faces many problems in his work, but the most important is question about pay for his services. The purpose of the article is to study the legal regulation of remuneration to the trustee in bankruptcy, identify problems that arise in practice in the application of the relevant provisions of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedure and highlight on this basis the author’s vision of the remuneration of the trustee in bankruptcy. The authors argued the introduction of a provision on the appointment of an arbitral trustee to perform the powers of the administrator of property in the event of bankruptcy proceedings on the application of the initiating creditor as a permanent one, which will work after the launch of the Unified Judicial Information and Telecommunication System. This will allow to adhere to the principle of dispositiveness, as one of the principles of the Code of Ukraine on Bankruptcy Procedure, according to which the bankruptcy procedure is carried out. Based on the results of the study, the authors conclude that the arbitral trustee should be able to choose in which bankruptcy case to participate, and which to refuse, what amount of remuneration he should receive and so on. In reorganization and liquidation proceedings, only creditors (through the creditors’ committee) should elect an arbitration trustee to perform the powers of the reorganization trustee and liquidator. Creditors must pay a fee to the trustee if they are interested in settling their claims. The arbitral trustee shall exercise his / her powers for a fee, which shall consist of a principal and an additional fee. The arbitration trustee may also receive funds from creditors from the fund to advance the monetary reward. It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts of “the emergence of the right to monetary remuneration” and “payment of monetary remuneration”. The emergence of the right to monetary remuneration means that only the first condition has come — the payment deadline. However, the payment of monetary remuneration is not automatic, as only creditors can assess the effectiveness of the arbitral trustee in the procedure of disposition of property.
29
Ramachandra, Thanuja, and James Olabode Rotimi. "The Nature of Payment Problems in the New Zealand Construction Industry." Construction Economics and Building 11, no. 2 (June 20, 2011): 22–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.5130/ajceb.v11i2.2171.
Full textAbstract:
Delay and loss of payment is a serious problem in the construction industry of many countries. These affect the cash flow of contractors which is critical to meeting their financial obligations. Payment defaults by the principal leads to insolvency of contractors and in turn other parts of the project chain. In recognition of some of these problems, most countries have established payment-specific construction industry legislation and other contractual measures to mitigate the problems, but nevertheless the problem persists. In this context, the paper examines the nature of payment problems in the construction industry in New Zealand. It is part of a larger study, that seeks solutions to payment losses in the construction industry.The study uses two approaches; an analysis of liquidators’ reports, and an analysis of court cases involving payment disputes to determine the magnitude of payment problems on construction parties. The findings are presented using simple descriptive and interpretive analyses. The study finds that trade creditors are impacted negatively (payment delays and losses) by the liquidation of property developers, general construction and construction trade companies. 75% of trade creditors are unable to be paid fully by these categories of construction companies after liquidation proceedings. Liquidation proceedings take an average 18 months before they are finalised. The analysis of court cases found that 80% of payment disputes are between principals and contractors; with considerably significant percentage of disputes resulting in outright loss of payments. Only 40% of the cases are successful, in which case claimants are able to fully recover the amount in dispute. Payment losses are more prevalent in liquidation than delays and unlike in legal disputes, there is no security for those losses. The study finds that construction parties use remedies contained in the security of payment provisions within standard conditions of contract, and legislative documents.
30
Murniati, Rilda, and Desma Cahya Selvya. "Separatist Creditors vs Preferred Creditors Rights in the Bankruptcy Case Based on the Decision of Constitutional Court of 2013." FIAT JUSTISIA:Jurnal Ilmu Hukum 13, no. 3 (October 4, 2019): 231. http://dx.doi.org/10.25041/fiatjustisia.v13no3.1616.
Full textAbstract:
Workers are preferred creditors whose payment must take precedence in the bankruptcy of the company. Problems in practice occur in the company's assets as collateral for debt to separatist creditors so that workers' rights are ruled out. Therefore, workers submit applications for judicial review of the Bankruptcy Law and Labor Law. This study is normative research using primary legal materials, namely laws and case study decisions that are analysed qualitatively. The results of the study and discussion determined that the Bankruptcy Law and the Labor Law regulate the same as the legal status of workers as preferred creditors who are entitled to prioritize payment in the distribution of bankrupt assets strengthened by the results of a judicial review in Decision of the Constitutional Court Number 67/PUU-XI/2013 The right of workers to wages is prioritized and calculated from collateral objects which are the rights of separatist creditors. For this reason, curators with authority must share the right of separatist creditors and preferred creditors with the principle of balance and justice so that all the assets of a bankrupt company can pay off the debts of its creditors.
31
Arzetta Zahra Metthania, Mhd Azmi Farid Lubis, Nyulistiowati Suryanti, and Deviana Yuanitasari. "Pertanggungjawaban Negara Atas Keadaan Persero BUMN Yang Pailit." Jurnal Hukum Sasana 9, no. 2 (December 14, 2023): 239–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.31599/sasana.v9i2.3099.
Full textAbstract:
Bankruptcy is a situation that could occur in a state-owned company. Istaka Karya is one of several state-owned companies. After going through several years with financial conditions that never improved, various news reports about this company with various active participation in the world of construction, finally officially closed due to bankruptcy in 2023, with a series of debts to creditors as well as arrears in salary payments to its employees. This research aims to analyze the legal certainty obtained by creditors, as well as the state's responsibility in the event of the bankruptcy of a state-owned company. The results of this research show the weak position of creditors in obtaining their rights. Therefore, to provide legal certainty, not only based on Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations, but the directors must also be fully responsible for all debts to creditors using personal assets owned, but not including assets that have been declared bankrupt by the Commercial Court.
32
Arifah, Risma Nur, and Arman Safril Adam. "Legal Protection of Concurrent Creditors for The Debts That are not Guaranteed by Property Rights According to Bankruptcy Law and Islamic Law." AT-TURAS: Jurnal Studi Keislaman 9, no. 1 (June 30, 2022): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.33650/at-turas.v9i1.3398.
Full textAbstract:
Bankruptcy is a condition where the debtor is unable to fulfill his obligations to pay debts to creditors. Revision of Law Number 4 of 1998 became Law Number. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations explains that concurrent creditors are creditors who do not hold collateral and who do not have special rights and whose claims are not recognized or recognized conditionally, of course, this causes the position of concurrent creditors to be very vulnerable to getting their rights back on the debt of the bankrupt debtor. This research is normative research using a statutory approach and a conceptual approach, where in this study the researcher examined the regulations on bankruptcy through the Act and analyzes the concept of legal protection for concurrent creditors. The results of the study showed that, first, Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and PKPU (Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations) explains that concurrent creditors are conditional creditors and do not have special rights, their position in paying off debtors' debts from the remaining proceeds from the settlement or auction of bankrupt assets. Second, Islamic law stipulates that the guaranteed of legal protection for creditors is to fulfill debt obligations as regulated in Surah al Baqarah verse 282 based on the principle of al ‘adalah.
33
Yuristian, Angga. "Hak Kreditor Separatis Dalam Mengeksekusi Jaminan Kebendaan Dari Debitor Pailit yang Berasal Dari PKPU." Jurist-Diction 5, no. 6 (November 30, 2022): 2051–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v5i6.40066.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractBankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations can occur to a company due to the inability to pay debts. PT. Baggai Jaya expedition in this study had debts that were past due and could be collected, so one of its creditors filed a PKPU legal action to obtain certainty regarding the payment of its receivables. The failure to achieve peace in the PKPU resulted in the debtor being automatically declared bankrupt by the Commercial Court. In this case, the separatist creditor cannot carry out the execution of the debtor's guarantee and must wait for the process of managing and settling the debtor's bankrupt assets. Based on this description, the author is interested in studying the authority of separatist creditors in executing guarantees in the event of bankruptcy originating from PKPU. The author uses a normative juridical research method and the results show that separatist creditors should have the right to carry out automatic executions if the debtor does not pay his debts past the time limit given in accordance with the agreement. So that the authority to execute separatist creditors means that it appears automatically when insolvency occurs, namely when the debtor is declared bankrupt. Keywords: Authority; Separatist Creditors; Bankruptcy; Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations; Execution. AbstrakPailit dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang dapat terjadi kepada suatu perusahaan akibat ketidakmampuan untuk membayar utang. PT. Ekspedisi Baggai Jaya pada penelitian ini memiliki utang yang telah jatuh tempo dan dapat ditagih, sehingga salah satu kreditornya mengajukan upaya hukum PKPU untuk mendapatkan kepastian mengenai pembayaran piutangnya. Tidak tercapainya perdamaian pada PKPU mengakibatkan debitor secara otomatis dinyatakan pailit oleh Pengadilan Niaga. Pada kasus ini, kreditor separatis tidak dapat melaksanakan eksekusi atas jaminan debitor dan harus menunggu proses pengurusan dan pemberesan harta pailit debitor. Berdasarkan uraian tersebut penulis tertarik untuk mengkaji mengenai kewenangan kreditor separatis dalam melakukan eksekusi jaminan saat terjadi pailit yang berasal dari PKPU. Penulis menggunakan metode penelitian yuridis normatif dan dari hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa kreditor separatis seharusnya memiliki hak untuk melakukan eksekusi secara otomatis apabila debitor tidak membayar utangnya melewati batas waktu yang diberikan sesuai dengan perjanjian. Sehingga wewenang untuk melakukan eksekusi kreditor separatis berarti muncul secara otomatis saat terjadi insolvensi yaitu saat debitor dinyatakan pailit.Kata Kunci: Kewenangan; Kreditor Separatis; Pailit; Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang; Eksekusi.
34
Welsh, Michelle, and Helen Anderson. "The Public Enforcement of Sanctions against Illegal Phoenix Activity: Scope, Rationale and Reform." Federal Law Review 44, no. 2 (June 2016): 201–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0067205x1604400202.
Full textAbstract:
The loss suffered by unsecured creditors of all insolvent companies is the non-payment in full of amounts rightfully owed to them. This loss is all the more unacceptable to creditors when a company has been illegally phoenixed by the transfer from the insolvent company of assets at undervalue. One way of increasing the pool of funds available for distribution to creditors is to issue proceedings seeking compensation against directors alleging that their ‘phoenixing’ amounted to a breach of directors’ duties or insolvent trading. Such an action may be instigated by the liquidator and by ASIC. ASIC's enforcement role can be contrasted with the recovery role of the liquidator where the latter acts primarily in the furtherance of private interests, being those of the insolvent company's creditors; ASIC's mandate, on the other hand, is to act in the public interest. The purpose of this article is to examine the enforcement roles of liquidators and ASIC where suspected illegal phoenix activity has occurred. Following consideration of the difficulties faced by liquidators acting on behalf of creditors of phoenixed companies, this article considers whether it is appropriate, from a policy perspective, for the public regulator to promote private interests by exercising its enforcement powers for the benefit of creditors. The argument in favour of a publicly funded regulator seeking compensation for creditor losses is particularly compelling in the context of illegal phoenix activity, given the inability of creditors to bring enforcement proceedings themselves and the difficulties faced by liquidators when they seek redress for creditors’ losses.
35
Pakel, Yane. "KEDUDUKAN BANK SEBAGAI KREDITOR SEPARATIS DALAM PENGURUSAN DAN PEMBERESAN HARTA PAILIT." Al-Amwal : Journal of Islamic Economic Law 3, no. 1 (March 31, 2018): 61–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.24256/alw.v3i1.200.
Full textAbstract:
There are two purpose of this research 1) to know and analyze banks role as secured creditor in executing collaterals. This is cause by the uncertainty of the execution rights as a result of the inconsistencies of regulations mention to Article 55, Article 56 and Article 59 of The Republic of Indonesia Number 37 of 2004 regarding Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment Obligation. 2) to know and examine the legal protection for secure banks in bankruptcy settlement. This research is a normative legal research that is supported by interview. Secondary data is taken from primary, secondary and tertiary legal resource. Data collection method is documentary study and library research. Data analysis is a qualitative analysis.Based on the result and discussion, bank as a secured creditor has the right to execute collateral that is pledged by debtor, as if bankruptcy does not take place (pursuant to Article 55 paragraph 1)The bankruptcy law has ruled the creditors right on the collateral, but there is uncertainty of execution right. This is caused by the inconsistency of regulations of Article 55, Article 56 and Article 59 of The Republic of Indonesia Number 37 of 2004 regarding Bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment Obligation. Article 56 and Article 59 are limit the creditors rights. The current law does not strongly enforced, thus the bank is seeking right by auction or hidden transaction
36
Celandine, Madeleine. "Hak Regres Penanggung pada Jaminan Perorangan Dalam Kepailitan." Jurist-Diction 4, no. 5 (September 1, 2021): 1815. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v4i5.29820.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe credit agreement as the principal agreement between the debtor and the creditor can acquire additional collateral providing material collateral and individual collateral. Personal collateral for individual rights, which is the agreement of a third party to bind themselves to debtors and creditors involved in credit agreements in accordance with the interests of creditors. In the event that the debtor does not have assets and is unable to repay debts to the creditor, the person responsible for paying the creditors' reserves and is obliged to pay debts to the creditor. The responsibility of the person responsible for compiling the debtor is not carried out by the creditor and the person responsible for the release of their privileges. The guarantor who has agreed to pay the debtor according to the law obtained by the right of regres, namely the right to recover from the payment owned. An interesting discussion about this Guarantee relates to the bankruptcy law regarding the enforcement of the right to regress so that it can be held accountable for receiving payments made. Keywords: Regress Rights; Personal Guarantee; Bankruptcy.AbstrakPerjanjian kredit sebagai perjanjian pokok antara debitor dengan kreditor dapat melahirkan jaminan tambahan berupa jaminan kebendaan dan jaminan perorangan. Jaminan perorangan melahirkan hak perorangan, yang merupakan persetujuan pihak ketiga untuk mengikatkan diri kepada debitor dan kreditor yang terlibat dalam perjanjian kredit demi kepentingan kreditor. Dalam hal debitor tidak memiliki harta kekayaan dan tidak mampu membayar utang kepada kreditor, maka penanggung berperan sebagai cadangan debitor dan wajib membayarkan utang kepada kreditor. Tanggung jawab penanggung lahir ketika debitor tidak melaksanakan kewajiban kepada kreditor dan penanggung telah melepaskan hak istimewa yang dimiliki. Penanggung yang telah menggantikan pembayaran debitor demi hukum memperoleh hak regres, yaitu hak untuk menuntut kembali atas pembayaran yang dimiliki. Pembahasan yang menarik mengenai jaminan ini berkaitan dengan hukum kepailitan mengenai penegakan hak regres agar dapat diakui sebagai utang untuk dapat memperoleh piutang pembayaran yang telah dilakukan. Kata Kunci: Hak Regres; Jaminan Perorangan; Kepailitan.
37
Hasudungan, Louis Alfred, Elisatris Gultom, and Nyulistiowati Suryanti. "Penentuan Utang yang Telah Jatuh Waktu pada Click-Wrap Agreement yang Tidak Mencantumkan Klausul Jatuh Waktu Utang." Jurnal Ilmiah Universitas Batanghari Jambi 22, no. 3 (November 8, 2022): 2306. http://dx.doi.org/10.33087/jiubj.v22i3.2621.
Full textAbstract:
Bankcruptcy and Suspension of Payment law is a great solution for debitor who have debt problems with their creditors. Debtors can be declared bankrupt or Suspension of Payment if the debtor is simply proven to have debts to 2 (two) or more creditors and is simply proven to have "a debts that has become due and payable”. The existence of "a debts that has become due and payable” is one of the fundamental things in bankruptcy or Suspension of Payment cases. In today's world, determining the existence of “a debts that has become due and payable” becomes difficult. The many new forms of agreements and clauses in the world of business law make new difficulties in proving the existence of “a debts that has become due and payable” in bankruptcy and Suspension of Payment cases. These difficulties can be found in the click-wrap agreement. Click-wrap agreement is an electronic agreement that uses standard clauses. The unilateral determination of clauses in click-wrap agreements often creates problems in practice. One of the problems that occur is a dispute about the determination of a debts that has become due and payable that comes from the click-wrap agreement between the debtor and the creditor. This is because click-wrap agreement makers often don't specify a debt maturity date in the agreement. Based on the explanation above, this research will examine and analyze the determination of the existence of "a debts that has become due and payable" from click-wrap agreements that do not regulate the debt maturity clause.
38
Johan, Suwinto, and Ariawan Gunadi. "Justice Aspects of Financial Service Authorities’s Competence for Bankruptcy and PKPU of Financial Service Institutions Based on Law No. 4 Year 2023." JURNAL MERCATORIA 16, no. 1 (June 25, 2023): 31–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.31289/mercatoria.v16i1.9222.
Full textAbstract:
The Law on the Development and Strengthening of the Financial Sector was legalized by President Joko Widodo. The Act is known as Law No. 4 of 2023 often known as the P2SK Law, which stipulates that the Financial Services Authority or Otoritas Jasa Keuangan (OJK) is the only party that has the authority to file for bankruptcy and postpone debt payment obligations for financial service institutions. This research will provide novelty, especially on the definition of justice in the financial services sector, especially related to the interests of consumers and creditors with regulatory authority.This right has eliminated the creditor rights of insolvent financial service institutions. Creditors do not have any rights or legal action against defaulting or insolvent financial institutions. This research aims to examine the authority of OJK over bankruptcy and PKPU of Financial Services Institutions and justice for other creditors dan consumers according to the OJK’S authority. This researchers employed the normative juridical method. This study concluded that the authority of the OJK must be reviewed with consideration of the authority already possessed by the OJK, practical conditions in the business world specifically for financial service institutions, and the position and rights of creditors for loans to financial service institutions. The results of the study also found that the authority of the Financial Services Authority did not reflect the value of justice for consumers and creditors
39
Kadang, Alifah Zhecarina, Ipah Farihah, and Mustolih Siradj. "Tinjauan Yuridis Kepailitan Akibat Pembatalan Homologasi Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang." JOURNAL of LEGAL RESEARCH 4, no. 3 (August 1, 2022): 815–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i3.21420.
Full textAbstract:
This study aims to evaluate the judge's legal reasoning in the judgment Number: 4/Pdt.Sus. Peace Cancellation/2019/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. Jo. Number 718K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2019, as well as how the cancellation of the homologation of the postponement of debt payment obligations led to insolvency. Analysis of the matter between PT Arpeni Pratama Ocean Line Tbk and PT CIMB Niaga in their respective roles as debtor and creditor. Due to the debtor's negligence with the homologated peace document, the creditor petitions the Commercial Court to annul the peace agreement. At the level of the Commercial Court, the court denied the demand for cancellation. The Creditors file an appeal with the Supreme Court in response to the verdict of the Commercial Court Judge. The Supreme Court judge observed in his ruling that he had approved the creditor's motion to reject the reconciliation. This study combines a descriptive-analytical research technique in conjunction with a legal research strategy consisting of a normative juridical or statutory approach and qualitative analysis methodologies. Case research for Decision Number 4/Pdt.Sus.Cancellation of Peace/2019/PN.Niaga.Jkt.Pst. Jo. Number 718K/Pdt.Sus-Pailit/2019 revealed that the judge's legal considerations at the first level were in conflict with several Civil Code articles and the principle of balance in Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Temporary Debt Payment Obligations. The judge of the Supreme Court who accepts the petition for peace annulment declares the debtor bankrupt with all legal consequences.
40
Santaló Goris, Carlos. "C-291/21, Starkinvest. Can a European Account Preservation Order be employed to secure a penalty payment?" CUADERNOS DE DERECHO TRANSNACIONAL 15, no. 2 (October 6, 2023): 1356–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.20318/cdt.2023.8111.
Full textAbstract:
In case C-291/21, Starkintest, the CJEU examined whether a judgment establishing a penalty order was a valid enforceable title to apply for an EAPO intended to secure an amount due to because of a penalty payment. When applying for an EAPO, creditors have to prove the likelihood to success on the substance of their claim or fumus boni iuris, unless they have an enforceable title. The CJEU found that the judgment establishing the penalty order was not a valid title that would prevent the creditor from satisfying the fumus boni iuris. Nonetheless, at the same time, the CJEU confirmed that the EAPO could be used to secure claims arising from a penalty payment, even if there is not a specific provision addressing it as in the Brussels I bis Regulation.
41
Afni, Nur. "Perlindungan Hak Pekerja Atas Harta Pailit Yang Berupa Jaminan Pihak Ketiga (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 37/PDT.SUS.GLL/2019/PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST)." Jurist-Diction 5, no. 1 (January 31, 2022): 283. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jd.v5i1.32728.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractA bankruptcy decision on a company can result in termination of employment. In bankruptcy, there are three types of creditors, namely preferred creditors, separatist creditors and concurrent creditors. Workers as preferred creditors in the law shall prioritize the distribution of wages owed. However, the position of workers is often ignored and gives priority to payment to separatist creditors. This is because separatist creditors can execute collateral objects and the proceeds are not shared with preferred creditors. Moreover, if the bankruptcy estate is in the form of collateral belong to a third party, the holder of the guarantee is the creditor. Other creditors do not receive a share because they are not entitled to collateral that belongs to a third party, which is not included in the debtor's bankruptcy estate. Workers are not entitled to third party guarantees, but workers get their rights from the board of directors. The Board of Directors is responsible for the company's debt that has not been paid by placing the money in bankrupt assets. It is the board of directors responsibility for negligence in controlling the company which resulted in bankruptcy.Keywords: Bankruptcy; Workers; Collateral; Third Parties.AbstrakPutusan pailit pada perusahaan dapat berakibat adanya pemutusan hubungan kerja. Dalam kepailitan terdapat tiga jenis kreditor yakni kreditor preferen, kreditor separatis dan kreditor konkuren. Pekerja sebagai kreditor preferen dalam Undang-Undang pembagiannya diadahulukan atas upah terutang. Akan tetapi kedudukan pekerja sering dihiraukan dan lebih mengutamakan pembayaran pada kreditor separatis. Karena kreditor separatis dapat melakukan eksekusi benda jaminan dan hasilnya tidak dibagikan kepada kreditor preferen. Terlebih lagi jika harta pailit tersebut berebentuk jaminan milik pihak ketiga maka yang menguasai atas jaminan tersebut yakni kreditor pemegang. Untuk kreditor lainnya tidak mendapat pembagian karena tidak berhak atas jaminan milik pihak ketiga, yang mana bukan termasuk dari harta pailit debitor. Pekerja tidak berhak atas jaminan milik pihak ketiga tetapi pekerja mendapatkan haknya dari direksi. Direksi bertanggung jawab atas utang perusahaan yang belum dibayarkan dengan memasukkan uangnya ke harta pailit. Sebagai tanggung jawab direksi atas kelalaiannya dalam pengendalian perusahaan sampai mengakibatkan pailit.Kata Kunci: Kepailitan; Pekerja; Jaminan; Pihak Ketiga.
42
Yitawati, Krista, Pujiyono, and Adi Sulistiyono. "Constitutional Court Decision Number 23/PUU-XIX/2021: Analysis of Judges' Considerations Is It Permissible to Take Cassation Against Decisions to Postpone Debt Payment Obligations?" Jurnal Jurisprudence 12, no. 1 (October 31, 2022): 18–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.23917/jurisprudence.v12i1.1039.
Full textAbstract:
Purpose: This study aims to analyze the impact of the Constitutional Court's Decision Number 23/PUU-XIX/2021 regarding the permissibility of cassation in the Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU).
Methodology: The research method that the researcher uses is a normative research method by reviewing statutory regulations and related legal materials.
Results: The judge's consideration in the Constitutional Court's Decision Number 23/PUU-XIX/2021, is the permitting of a cassation legal action against the decision on Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations submitted by the creditor and the rejection of the offer of reconciliation from the debtor so that the court's decision on the PKPU application submitted by the creditor can be corrected as part of the mechanism. control over court decisions at lower levels. However, with this decision, it is necessary to immediately issue implementing regulations regarding the mechanism for submitting PKPU and it is necessary to control the good faith of creditors so that they do not actually injure. This is because the existence of debtors is also part of business actors who play a role in maintaining economic stability so that business continuity is maintained and it is not misused. That way, the legal certainty of the PKPU instrument can really be realized in accordance with the spirit of Law 37/2004, which is to provide legal protection for business actors.
Applications of the study: It is hoped that the legal certainty of the PKPU instrument can actually be realized in accordance with the spirit of Law Number 37 of 2004, which is to provide balanced legal protection between debtors and creditors.
Novelty/ Orginalty of this study : This research is only because the decision of the Constitutional Court Number 23/PUU-XIX/2021 has just been issued and the author analyzes the impact of the issuance of the decision on creditors and debtors.
43
Wiwik Yuni Hastuti, M. I., Tedi Sudrajat, Sri Hartini, Sanyoto a, Haedah Faradz, Suyadi b, Krisnhoe Kartika, Budiyono c, Maria Muti Wulandari, and Anggitariani Rayi Larasati Siswanta. "HIERARCHY OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF BANKRUPTCY PROPERTY IN SYNDICATED LOAN FACILITY AGREEMENT FOR THE BANKRUPT DEBTOR." International Journal of Advanced Research 11, no. 01 (January 31, 2023): 868–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.21474/ijar01/16091.
Full textAbstract:
The position of individual creditors over the collateral in syndicated loan is represented by security agent as the recipient of collateral and the holder of material collateral. It is the legal consequence of agency relation as regulated in Syndicated Loan Facility Agreement. Therefore, the security agent in this syndicated loan, for the sake of law, serves as preference creditor to other syndication participation. This research aims to answer the problems related to the implementation of pari passu pro rata parte principles in determining the hierarchy of creditor in syndicated loan facility agreement to the bankrupt debtor. Firstly, it is intended to find out the position of individual creditors to the collateral in syndicated loan in bankruptcy position and secondly, it is intended to the hierarchy of bankruptcy property payment to the debtor of syndicated loan in bankruptcy position. The research method employed in this research was a normative research. It used juridical normative research type aiming to find the truth based on the legal science logic from its normative side. Data source used in this research was secondary data including laws, court verdicts, books, journals, articles, materials from internet, and dictionaries.
44
Ogoke, Sampson Ikenna, and A. B. C. Akujuobi. "External Debt and Macroeconomic Indicators: Time Series Evidence from Nigeria." WORLD JOURNAL OF FINANCE AND INVESTMENT RESEARCH 6, no. 1 (August 24, 2023): 137–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.56201/wjfir.v6.no1.2022.pg137.156.
Full textAbstract:
This study investigated the relationship between external debt and macroeconomic indicators in Nigeria. The objective was to investigate the effect of external debt on Nigerian macroeconomic indicators. The study used of time series data sourced from Central Bank of Nigerian statistical bulletin. Data were analysed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences. Macroeconomic indicators were proxy by real gross domestic product, inflation rate, unemployment rate and balance of payment while external debt was proxy by Nigerian external debt to London club of creditors, multilateral club of creditors, Paris club of creditors, promissory notes and external debt servicing. Ordinary least square method with the aid of statistical package for social sciences was used as data analysis method. The study found 71.3 percent while the R-square is 66.3 percent. External debt variables explained 68.6 percent variation on the dependent variable which is balance of payment. However, the beta coefficient of the variables found that all the independent variables have positive but insignificant effect on the dependent variable which is balance of payment, the study found that external debt explained 77.1 percent variation on Nigerian unemployment rate the beta coefficient of the variable shows that all the independent variables have positive relationship except Nigerian external debt with London club of creditors and found that 78.4 percent variation on Nigerian inflation rate while the coefficient shows that external debt with multilateral club, Paris club and Promissory note have negative relationship with Nigerian inflation rate while debt servicing and Nigerian external debt with London club of creditors have positive effect on Nigerian inflation rate. The study concludes that external debt has significant effect with Nigerian macroeconomic indicators. We recommend that external debt in Nigeria should be well utilized for better macroeconomic indicators.
45
GUPTA, ANKEETA. "Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016: A Paradigm Shift within Insolvency Laws in India." Copenhagen Journal of Asian Studies 36, no. 2 (February 15, 2019): 75–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.22439/cjas.v36i2.5650.
Full textAbstract:
delivery and availability in India in light of the changes brought about by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. The introduction of the Code is purported to resolve the issues within the credit ecosystem by identifying correctly all the stakeholders, most importantly the creditors and the debtors, resolving and settling non-performing assets, creating a robust mechanism for settling credit-related disputes, reducing creditor distrust and ensuring continuance of functioning of companies rather than being wound up for non-payment of debts.While the Code promises to be a game changer, there exist various challenges that need to be addressed as the success of the Code is dependent on the manner in which its provisions are implemented, especially those pertaining to the strict timelines with parties seeking excessive discretionary indulgence from the adjudicatory authorities. Further, the challenges include impact of differential treatment meted out to the creditors, the committee of creditors being ordained with considerable powers over the fate of the corporate debtor, and the insolvency professionals being allowed to run the entities without much accountability and capability has resulted in an increased number of disputes. The legal, logical and procedural hurdles thus mentioned will need to be addressed in the most amicable manner within the foreseeable future.
46
Sianturi, Timotius Patrick Sianturi Patrick. "Legal Position of Syndicated Creditors in Submitting Claims on Debtors in the Application Process for Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) and the Legal Impact." JISIP (Jurnal Ilmu Sosial dan Pendidikan) 8, no. 1 (January 2, 2024): 476. http://dx.doi.org/10.58258/jisip.v8i1.6301.
Full textAbstract:
The arrangement of parties who can file claims in the process of suspension debt payment obligations has been regulated in Article 270 of Law number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations. The arrangement of parties who can file bills in the suspension of debt payment process still causes several problems in its implementation. This occurs in the suspension of debt payment process against debtors in syndicated loans which still creates uncertainty in its implementation because the suspension of debt payment Law does not specifically regulate it but only provides an explanation, so it is important to raise the issue regarding the party authorized to file claims against debtors in credit. Syndication. Meanwhile, the method used in this research is normative juridical research by examining library materials, namely the Civil Code and the suspension of debt payment Law. The suspension of debt payment Law has definitively determined the parties who can file claims, but to file claims in syndicated loans still creates dualism that arises due to the distinctive characteristics of syndicated loans, namely that there are agents who act as attorneys for syndicated participants to represent their interests. In principle, there is only one creditor in a syndicated credit agreement, namely a credit syndicate represented by an agent. Because the agent represents the interests of the syndicated participants, the agent has strong authority to take legal actions including submitting and registering claims to the Management in suspention of debt payment with the approval of the majority creditors.
47
Wowerka, Arkadiusz. "The Law Applicable to a Payment Made by a Third Party in Performance of a Contractual Payment Obligation Contested in Insolvency Proceedings as an Act Detrimental to All Creditors." Gdańskie Studia Prawnicze, no. 2(54)/2022 (July 11, 2022): 133–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.26881/gsp.2022.2.11.
Full textAbstract:
In the commentary, the author discusses the judgment of the Court of Justice of 22 April 2020 in Case C-73/20, ZM, as receiver in the bankruptcy of Oeltrans Befrachtungsgesellschaft mbH, v. E. A. Frerichs. This judgment concerns a payment made by a third party in performance of a contractual obligation and challenged in bankruptcy proceedings as an act done to the detriment of the bankruptcy creditors. The Court rightly held that art. 13 of Regulation No 1346/2000 must be interpreted as meaning that the law applicable to the contract also applies to a payment made by a third party in performance of a contractual obligation to pay incumbent on one of the parties to the contract, where, in the context of insolvency proceedings, that payment is challenged as an act done to the detriment of all creditors. The author approves of the Court’s decision both as to the thesis and reasoning.
48
Prajogo, Timotius William. "PENYALAHGUNAAN INSTRUMEN KEPAILITAN ATAU PKPU OLEH DEBITOR SETELAH MEMPEROLEH FASILITAS KREDIT DARI LEMBAGA KEUANGAN." JURNAL MEDIA HUKUM DAN PERADILAN 4, no. 2 (October 30, 2018): 183–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.29062/jmhp.v4i2.12.
Full textAbstract:
The 5C principles are important for creditors to give loan to debtors. However, nowadays especially collateral cannot be the guarantee for debtor’s debt if the debtor is breaching the contract, because many of the financial institutions are dare to take a risk by giving higher loan than its collateral’s worth. This condition can bring a risk if there were bankruptcy happened to debtor; therefore, it is not rare that there is clause in loan agreement to protect creditors, by not allowing debtor voluntary asked self-bankruptcy petition, although this kind of clause is contradicts with the nature of bankruptcy law. The concept in Law number 37 years 2004, categorize as simple to be granted by commercial court. Unfortunately, the bankruptcy’s instrument often misused by parties who have bad faith and also for the suspension of payment. Moreover, the creditors will get impact from the parties that have a bad faith. As the legal protection, it can do some legal efforts such: suspension of debt’s payment, lawsuit, cassation, judicial review and criminal indictment.
49
Eaton, Jonathan. "Debt Relief and the International Enforcement of Loan Contracts." Journal of Economic Perspectives 4, no. 1 (February 1, 1990): 43–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/jep.4.1.43.
Full textAbstract:
It is now apparent that the governments of many developing countries will not repay their debts as initially contracted. Creditors and creditor governments must now adjust to the realization that full repayment is either infeasible or that enforcing full payment is undesirable from the point of view of creditor countries as a whole. The question now is what to do with these debts. The Baker and Brady plans have increased U.S. government involvement in the debt crisis and have allocated public money toward its resolution. The Kenen plan, discussed in this issue, proposes still more public involvement and, in all likelihood, more public money. Each of these plans is an ad hoc response to the impasse that has arisen between some highly indebted countries and their private creditors, and aspects of each plan may help resolve this impasse. But none of these plans confronts the features of international capital markets that led to the crisis in the first place. My argument here is that the debt crisis that began in 1983 arose from defects in how international capital markets operated the previous decade. A goal of any redesign of the institutions involved in these markets should be not only to resolve the current crisis, but to keep it from happening again.
50
Tri Reni Novita and M. Faisal Husna. "Perlindungan Hukum Kreditor Preferent Pada Perusahaan Asuransi Yang Pailit." Jurnal Smart Hukum (JSH) 1, no. 3 (May 21, 2023): 402–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.55299/jsh.v1i3.397.
Full textAbstract:
Legal protection for policyholders, insured or insurance participants, in relation to insurance company bankruptcy, Indonesian positive law has actually provided a way out with several alternative options, namely based on the provisions of the Civil Code, the Bankruptcy Law, and the provisions of the Indonesian Civil Code. Law No.40 of 2014 stipulates explicitly that the rights of the policyholder/insured or insurance participant for the distribution of the assets of an insurance company bankrupt by court or liquidation have a higher (primary) position than the rights of other creditors. Article 52 paragraph (1) states “In the event that an insurance company, sharia insurance company, reinsurance company or sharia reinsurance company is bankrupt or liquidated, the rights of the policyholder, the insured or participants for the distribution of their assets have a higher position than the rights of other parties”. The meaning of this sentence is thar the policyholder has a position as a preferred creditor, namely a creditor whose position takes precedence over other creditors in the distribution of bankruptcy assets of an insurance company. In the distribution of bankruptcy assets, the policyholder has the right to demand priority payment of his rights in accordance with the previously agreed agreement.