Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorSembiring, Rosnidar
dc.contributor.advisorMaria, Maria
dc.contributor.authorSiahaan, Fredy Jonathan
dc.date.accessioned2024-07-17T07:58:42Z
dc.date.available2024-07-17T07:58:42Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/94498
dc.description.abstractThe commercial court is the Commercial Court which is a special court under the general court which is given the authority to examine and decide on applications for declaration of bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations. Apart from that, the commercial court also has authority over trademark disputes. However, in the case of similarities between GOTO and goto brands between PT . Terbit Financial Technology with the merger of PT. Karya Anak Bangsa and PT application. Tokopedia. The goto mark which has been submitted for registration at the Directorate General of Intellectual Property (DJKI) is claimed to contain similarities in essence to PT. Terbit Financial Technology as the owner of the GOTO brand. Lawsuit for cancellation of trademark registration and trademark infringement lawsuit filed by PT. The Financial Technology issue to the Court was rejected by the Panel of Judges because the final result of decision No. 71/Pdt.Sus HKI/brand/2021/PN. Jakarta Commerce. Pst states that the Court does not have the authority to adjudicate all lawsuits filed because this is the authority of the DJKI and not the absolute competence of the Court even though in the Trademark Law the Court has authority in their disputes. absolute commercial district court in resolving trademark disputes, and how the panel of commercial court judges considered in the decision on case no. 71/Pdt.Sus HKI/Brand/PN NIAGA Jkt. PST) in harmony with Law no. 20 of 2016 concerning brands and geographical indications. The research used is a normative juridical research method with secondary data The legal materials used are primary, secondary and tertiary legal materials. In collecting data in this research, library study data collection techniques were used which were then analyzed qualitatively. The results of the research on the Absolute Authority Competency of Commercial Courts Regarding Trademark Infringement Lawsuits explain that based on the Trademark Law, the court has absolute authority where commercial courts handle trademark disputes such as trademark cancellation and trademark infringement lawsuits, but trademark cancellation can only be carried out by the DJKI (Directorate General of Intellectual Property) as a functional official.en_US
dc.language.isoiden_US
dc.publisherUniversitas Sumatera Utaraen_US
dc.subjectCommercial Courten_US
dc.subjectAbsolute authority of the Court dan claims for Trademark Infringementen_US
dc.subjectSDGsen_US
dc.titleKompetensi Kewenangan Absolute Pengadilan Niaga Terkait dengan Gugatan Pelanggaran Merek Goto (Studi Nomor 71/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Merek/2021/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst)en_US
dc.title.alternativeCompetence of the Absolute Authority of the Commercial Court in Relation to the Goto Trademark Infringement Lawsuit (Study Number 71/Pdt.Sus-HKI/Merek/2021/PN Niaga Jkt.Pst)en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.nimNIM190200390
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0002026602
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0025126010
dc.identifier.kodeprodiKODEPRODI74201#Ilmu Hukum
dc.description.pages118 Pagesen_US
dc.description.typeSkripsi Sarjanaen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record