Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorKamello, Tan
dc.contributor.advisorHarianto, Dedi
dc.contributor.authorMilala, Cintia Vanessa
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-10T08:20:04Z
dc.date.available2025-07-10T08:20:04Z
dc.date.issued2025
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/105214
dc.description.abstractThrougout the years, financing agreements with fiduciary guarantees as collateral have encountered problems in their execution. One of the issues that arises is the arbitrary actions of creditors in forcibly seizing fiduciary collateral. The problem formulation in this thesis is as follows: How has the implementation of fiduciary guarantee execution changed after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019; How is the principle of good faith applied to provide legal protection for debtors in the fiduciary guarantee execution process after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019; How do judges analyze the existence of the principle of good faith in the fiduciary guarantee execution process after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 in the District Court Decision Number 57/Pdt.G/2022. The method used in this thesis is the normative juridical research method, which is a scientific research procedure to determine the truth based on the logic of legal science from its normative side related to the issues being studied; this research is descriptive in nature. The research was conducted through a legislative approach related to the legal issues presented. In addition to the legislative approach, this thesis also employs a case approach, with the data analysis method being qualitative. The research findings reveal that Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 alters the procedural order in the execution of fiduciary guarantees, meaning that the fiduciary right holder or creditor cannot immediately execute on their own (parate execution) but must submit an execution fiat to the District Court if there are issues regarding default and the debtor is unwilling to voluntarily surrender. The principle of good faith is very important to ensure that the creditor does not act arbitrarily, and the debtor receives appropriate legal protection. The PN Decision No. 57/Pdt.G/2022/PN Bls is in line with the MK Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019, which places the principle of good faith as a fundamental principle in the execution of fiduciary guarantees.en_US
dc.language.isoiden_US
dc.publisherUniversitas Sumatera Utaraen_US
dc.subjectGood Faith Principleen_US
dc.subjectExecutionen_US
dc.subjectFiduciary Guaranteeen_US
dc.titleAsas Itikad Baik dalam Proses Eksekusi Jaminan Fidusia Pasca Putusan MK No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 (Studi Putusan Nomor 57/PDT.G/2022/PN Bls)en_US
dc.title.alternativeThe Good Faith Principle in the Fiduciary Guarantee Execution Process After Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU-XVII/2019 (An Analysis of Decision Number 57/PDT.G/2022/PN Bls)en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.nimNIM200200165
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0021046206
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0020086905
dc.identifier.kodeprodiKODEPRODI74201#Ilmu Hukum
dc.description.pages182 Pagesen_US
dc.description.typeSkripsi Sarjanaen_US
dc.subject.sdgsSDGs 16. Peace, Justice And Strong Institutionsen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record