The Role of the Notary when Making a Canceled Purchase Agreement Deed in Court (Review of Articles 15 and 16 of the Indonesian Notary Law)

Danang Hani Prasetyo, Tri Prihatinah, S. .
{"title":"The Role of the Notary when Making a Canceled Purchase Agreement Deed in Court (Review of Articles 15 and 16 of the Indonesian Notary Law)","authors":"Danang Hani Prasetyo, Tri Prihatinah, S. .","doi":"10.21564/2414-990x.160.270276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A notary deed is an authentic deed drawn up by or before a notary according to the form and procedure stipulated in Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Office of a Notary. Article 15 of the law on the position of a notary regulates the authority of a notary, and Article 16 of the law on the position of a notary regulates the obligations of a notary. In carrying out these powers and obligations, a role is required in the form of a series of actions that are supportive in carrying out the duties of a notary in accordance with his position if the Notary does not play a role in causing the deed to be canceled, as in the Supreme Court Decision No. 535 PK/Pdt/2017 (1) the cancellation was due to an imbalance between what was written in the sale and purchase agreement deed and the facts of the parties. The decision of the Surabaya District Court (2) stated that the deed made by a notary was valid according to legal provisions. In contrast, the decision of the Surabaya High Court (3) stated that the deed was legally flawed. The decision of the Supreme Court (4) at the cassation and review level upheld the decision. This study analyzes the juridical factors that cause the deed of sale and purchase agreement made before a notary to be void based on a court decision and analyzes the role of the Notary in making a sale and purchase agreement deed. The research method used is normative juridical, using secondary data obtained from literature studies, including primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources. The juridical factor that caused the cancellation of the sale and purchases agreement deed by the Notary, according to the Supreme Court's decision upholding the high court's decision, was because the plaintiff of the convention could prove the argument for his lawsuit regarding bilyet giro not for land payment in the sale and purchase agreement deed but for the sale and purchase of scrap metal where the plaintiff (seller) is an intermediary in buying and selling scrap metal. The Notary has yet to play a role in making the sale and purchase agreement deed, which resulted in the sale and purchase agreement deed being canceled based on a court decision. The problem is caused by the Notary not carrying out roles, such as providing legal counseling in connection with doing the deed as stipulated in the notary position law Article 15 paragraph (2) letter (e), carrying out the task carefully as stipulated in Article 16 paragraph (1) letter a, Reading the deed before the parties attended by at least 2 (two) witnesses as referred to in Article 16 paragraph (1) letter (m).","PeriodicalId":417369,"journal":{"name":"Problems of Legality","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Problems of Legality","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21564/2414-990x.160.270276","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A notary deed is an authentic deed drawn up by or before a notary according to the form and procedure stipulated in Law Number 2 of 2014 concerning the Office of a Notary. Article 15 of the law on the position of a notary regulates the authority of a notary, and Article 16 of the law on the position of a notary regulates the obligations of a notary. In carrying out these powers and obligations, a role is required in the form of a series of actions that are supportive in carrying out the duties of a notary in accordance with his position if the Notary does not play a role in causing the deed to be canceled, as in the Supreme Court Decision No. 535 PK/Pdt/2017 (1) the cancellation was due to an imbalance between what was written in the sale and purchase agreement deed and the facts of the parties. The decision of the Surabaya District Court (2) stated that the deed made by a notary was valid according to legal provisions. In contrast, the decision of the Surabaya High Court (3) stated that the deed was legally flawed. The decision of the Supreme Court (4) at the cassation and review level upheld the decision. This study analyzes the juridical factors that cause the deed of sale and purchase agreement made before a notary to be void based on a court decision and analyzes the role of the Notary in making a sale and purchase agreement deed. The research method used is normative juridical, using secondary data obtained from literature studies, including primary, secondary, and tertiary legal sources. The juridical factor that caused the cancellation of the sale and purchases agreement deed by the Notary, according to the Supreme Court's decision upholding the high court's decision, was because the plaintiff of the convention could prove the argument for his lawsuit regarding bilyet giro not for land payment in the sale and purchase agreement deed but for the sale and purchase of scrap metal where the plaintiff (seller) is an intermediary in buying and selling scrap metal. The Notary has yet to play a role in making the sale and purchase agreement deed, which resulted in the sale and purchase agreement deed being canceled based on a court decision. The problem is caused by the Notary not carrying out roles, such as providing legal counseling in connection with doing the deed as stipulated in the notary position law Article 15 paragraph (2) letter (e), carrying out the task carefully as stipulated in Article 16 paragraph (1) letter a, Reading the deed before the parties attended by at least 2 (two) witnesses as referred to in Article 16 paragraph (1) letter (m).
公证员在法庭上作出被取消的购买协议契约时的作用(对《印度尼西亚公证法》第15和16条的审查)
公证书是由公证人或在公证人面前根据2014年关于公证处的第2号法律规定的格式和程序起草的真实契据。公证法第15条规定了公证员的权限,公证员职务法第16条规定了公证员的义务。开展这些权力和义务,一个角色是必需的一系列动作的形式支持开展公证的职责依照他的位置如果公证没有发挥作用导致行为被取消,在最高法院的判决535号PK / Pdt / 2017(1)取消是由于之间的不平衡是什么写在买卖合约行为和当事人的事实。泗水地方法院(2)的判决表明,根据法律规定,公证人所做的契约是有效的。相比之下,泗水高等法院(Surabaya High Court)的判决则认为该契约存在法律缺陷。最高法院(4)在上诉和复审层面的决定维持了这一决定。本研究分析了在公证人面前订立的买卖协议契据因法院判决而无效的法律因素,并分析了公证人在订立买卖协议契据中的作用。使用的研究方法是规范法律,使用从文献研究中获得的二手数据,包括初级,二级和三级法律来源。根据最高法院支持高等法院判决的判决,导致公证员撤销买卖协议契据的法律因素是,公约原告可以证明其诉讼的论据,即买卖协议契据中的bilyet giro不是用于土地支付,而是用于买卖废金属,其中原告(卖方)是买卖废金属的中介。由于公证人未能在买卖契约中发挥作用,导致买卖契约根据法院判决被撤销。问题是由公证员不履行职责引起的,例如,按照公证员职务法第15条第(2)款(e)项的规定提供与办理契约有关的法律咨询,按照第16条第(1)款(a)项的规定认真执行任务,按照第16条第(1)款(m)项的规定,在当事人面前由至少2(2)名证人出席的情况下阅读契约。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信