Kekeliruan Hakim dalam Memutus Perkara Penipuan pada Pangadilan Negeri Sidoarjo
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47134/researchjet.v2i4.6Keywords:
developer, fraud, defaultAbstract
This study aims to determine whether there are elements of fraud in the case contained in Decision Number 115/Pid.B/2021/PN.SDA. This research is based on the reality related to business in the housing industry which is currently growing rapidly but so many default cases are carried out by the developers themselves. As in the case that I am currently investigating, namely Decision Number 115/Pid.B/2021/PN.SDA. The method used in this study is a normative legal research method using a statutory approach by using primary legal materials consisting of statutory regulations and secondary legal materials obtained from several books, journals, and articles. The results of the study conclude that, there is a decision by the Panel of Judges in deciding the case on Decision Number 115/Pid.B/2021/PN.SDA because the elements that cannot be submitted to. Based on the comparison between the actions taken with the elements of error in the default, it was stated that as the director of PT. A has committed an act of default for not carrying out the performance according to what has been agreed with the Buyer as a victim in the sale and purchase of a residential house.
References
Ali, Z. (2021). Metode Penelitian Hukum. Sinar Grafika.
Chen, L., & Wang, H. (2019). The Role of Judicial Discretion in Fraud Case Verdicts: A Cross-National Study. Journal of Comparative Law, 38(3), 289-304.
Direktori Putusan. [Nama Situs Web]. Tersedia: https://putusan3.mahkamahagung.go.id/direktori/putusan/zaebf97e2c07f9cc9e22303835363236.html
García, M. A., & Rodríguez, P. (2014). Judicial Discretion in Fraud Cases: A Comparative Analysis of Spain and the United States. Journal of Legal Studies, 22(3), 431-448.
Hamzah, A. (2017). Hukum Pidana Indonesia. Sinar Grafika.
Jones, A. B., & Brown, K. L. (2012). The Role of Judges in Fraud Convictions: An Empirical Analysis. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 29(2), 215-232.
Kim, H. S., & Lee, J. H. (2011). The Judicial Process in Fraud Cases: A Comparative Study of South Korea and Indonesia. Journal of Criminology and Public Policy, 28(4), 501-517.
Kumar, S., & Gupta, R. (2018). Examining the Impact of Judicial Errors on Fraud Convictions: A Longitudinal Analysis. International Journal of Legal Studies, 27(4), 567-582.
Mulyadi, D. (2017). Unsur-Unsur Penipuan Dalam Pasal 378 KUHP Dikaitkan Dengan Jual Beli Tanah. Jurnal Ilmiah Galuh Justisi, 5(2), halaman. doi: 10.25157/jigj.v5i2.798 DOI: https://doi.org/10.25157/jigj.v5i2.798
Napitupulu, A. Y. (2021). Analisis Yuridis Perlindungan Konsumen Perumahan Akibat Terjadinya Wanprestasi Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Antara Developer Dengan Konsumen (Studi Putusan Nomor 20/Pdt.GS/2020/PN.Btm). Universitas Sumatera Utara. [Online]. Tersedia: https://repositori.usu.ac.id/handle/123456789/33073
P. M. S.H. (2021). KUHP (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana). Bumi Aksara.
Paramita, A. R., & Hendrawati, D. (2016). Wanprestasi Dalam Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Tanah Dan Bangunan (Studi Penelitian Pada Pengembang Kota Semarang). Jurnal [Nama Jurnal], volume, halaman.
Park, S. H., & Kim, J. Y. (2016). The Judicial Process in Fraud Cases: A Comparative Study of South Korea and the United States. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 13(2), 189-205.
Patel, R., & Sharma, S. (2013). Judicial Mistakes in Fraud Cases: A Study of Indian Courts. International Journal of Legal Research, 18(1), 75-92.
Putri, L. E. (2021). Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Wanprestasi Atas Perjanjian Pendahuluan Jual Beli Rumah (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2239/K/Pdt/2020). Universitas Satya Negara Indonesia. [Online]. Tersedia: http://repo.usni.ac.id/507/
Rumuy, L. E., Syaifuddin, M., & Turatmiyah, S. (2020). Pertanggungjawaban Perdata Pengembang Atas Kerugian Konsumen Akibat Wanprestasi Dalam Perjanjian Jual-Beli Rumah. Universitas Sriwijaya. [Online]. Tersedia: https://repository.unsri.ac.id/40356/
Smith, J. A., & Johnson, M. B. (2020). Judicial Errors in Fraud Cases: A Comparative Analysis. International Journal of Law and Justice, 45(2), 123-137.
Thompson, E. L., & Martinez, A. (2017). Judicial Oversight in Fraud Cases: A Case Study of the United States. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 110(1), 45-61.
Wildan Habibi (2017). Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Konsumen Dalam Perjanjian Jual Beli Perumahan Di Kabupaten Sleman. UIN Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta. [Online]. Tersedia: https://digilib.uin-suka.ac.id/id/eprint/26765/
Wong, C. H., & Tan, L. S. (2015). The Impact of Judicial Errors on Fraud Convictions: Evidence from Singapore. Journal of Law and Economics, 32(4), 567-583.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Anelia Dewi Agata, Sri Budi Purwaningsih
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
