Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorSembiring, Rosnidar
dc.contributor.advisorSuprayitno
dc.contributor.advisorSembiring, Idha Aprilyana
dc.contributor.authorCynthia, Avriliany
dc.date.accessioned2024-09-23T08:39:23Z
dc.date.available2024-09-23T08:39:23Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.urihttps://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/97548
dc.description.abstractThe legal basis of the existence of Sale and Purchase Binding (PJB) Deed and the power of attorney to Sell are regulated under Article 1320 of the Civil Code. The legal basis provides freedom for the parties to bind themselves only to the extent agreed upon and as long as it meets the requirements. Based on the Decree of Supreme Court No. 3306 K/Pd/G/2018, the lawsuit was filed because the initial legal act in the agreement is in the form of Mortgage Right. However, since the legal act was still binding, the defendant submitted to draw up a full-paid PJB Deed and the power of attorney to Sell. Problems arise when the plaintiff stated and admitted that he had never both made a sale and purchase binding transaction and received a full payment of the mortgage object. In the State Court and High Court, the judge granted the plaintiff's lawsuit in part and declared PJB Deed and power of attorney to Sell null and void, while at the Cassation level, the judge of Supreme Court stated otherwise. The problems of this research are the validity of the full-paid PJB Deed and the Power to Sell the land bound by individual HT (mortgage right), the notarial liability toward the full-paid PJB Deed and the Power to Sell the object bound by individual mortgage right according to UUJN, analysis of judge's legal consideration in Supreme Court Decree Number 3306 K/Pd/2018 juncto Surakarta State Court Decree Number 115/Pdt.G/2017/Pn.Skt regarding the full-paid PJB deed and the power to sell the land bound by HT. The analytical descriptive research is conducted using normative juridical approach. The research employs primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The research data are collected through literature studies. Data obtained are analysed using qualitative data analysis method. The results of the research indicate that the validity of PJB deed and the Power to sell which is bound by HT is reviewed based on the provisions of Article 1320 of the Civil Code, the deed that does not meet the objective conditions is null and void, and according to Article 20 points (2) and (3) of the UUHT, PJB deed and the power of to sell that does not meet these conditions is null and void, the notarial liability is referred to the liability as regulated in articles 1365, 1366 and 1367 of the Civil Code as well as administrative liability as regulated in Article 91 A of UUJN. In addition, the analysis of the judge's consideration in the Supreme Court decree on PJB deed and power to sell the land bound by HT is that it is considered less appropriate according to Article 1320 of the Civil Code and Article 20 points (2) and (3). PJB deed and power to sell which do not meet these provisions, should the agreement be null and void.en_US
dc.language.isoiden_US
dc.publisherUniversitas Sumatera Utaraen_US
dc.subjectSale And Purchase Binding Deeden_US
dc.subjectPower of Attorney to Saleen_US
dc.subjectMortgageen_US
dc.subjectSDGsen_US
dc.titleAnalisis Yuridis Keabsahan Akta Pengikatan Jual Beli dan Kuasa Menjual Atas Tanah yang Terikat Hak Tanggungan (Studi Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 3306 K/PDT/2018)en_US
dc.title.alternativeJuridicial Analysis on The Validity of Sale and Purchase Agreement and Power to Sell Land Bound in Hypothecation (A Study on The Supreme Court Ruling No. 3306 K/PDT/2018)en_US
dc.typeThesisen_US
dc.identifier.nimNIM207011010
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0002026602
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0101056502
dc.identifier.nidnNIDN0014047609
dc.identifier.kodeprodiKODEPRODI74102#Kenotariatan
dc.description.pages133 Pagesen_US
dc.description.typeTesis Magisteren_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record