Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Akibat Penitipan Uang untuk Kerjasama Bisnis Properti yang Tidak Terealisasi atas Kesepakatan secara Lisan (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3449 K/Pdt/2018)

Abstract

The development of property business in Indonesia is increasingly rapid, however, this business practice is often fraught with agreements made orally, particularly regarding money deposits for property projects. Problems arise when business cooperation does not proceed as planned and disputes occur regarding the obligation to return funds. Supreme Court Decision Number 3449 K/Pdt/2018 serves as an important precedent in determining the criteria for tort liability concerning money deposits for unrealized property business cooperation based on oral agreements. This research employs a normative juridical method with a case analysis approach to examine judges' legal considerations in determining the criteria for tort liability and forms of legal accountability. Research data were obtained from primary legal materials including court decisions and legislation, as well as secondary legal materials comprising relevant literature. The research findings reveal inaccuracies in the legal qualification applied by the Supreme Court in Decision No. 3449 K/Pdt/2018. Although the court determined that the failure to return the entrusted funds of Rp 10 billion constitutes a tortious act under Article 1365 of the Civil Code, this case should have been categorized as breach of contract under Article 1238 of the Civil Code since a contractual relationship had been established through the business cooperation agreement that created specific rights and obligations between the parties. The imposition of 6% interest per year for 7 years is also problematic as it is disproportionate and contradicts judicial practice that generally limits interest charges to avoid injustice. Furthermore, the judge's overly formalistic approach in evaluating the receipt evidence without analyzing the substance that the receipt was signed in blank demonstrates weaknesses in the evidentiary methodology. This research recommends the need for judicial caution in qualifying the legal relationship between parties, proportionate application of sanctions, and a more comprehensive evidentiary approach to achieve true justice.