Degradation of Executorial Rights and Execution Parate Institutions on Fiduciary Security After the Decision of the Konstitution Court Number 18/Puu-Xvii/2019

Yeni Triana, Yelia Nathassa Winstar
{"title":"Degradation of Executorial Rights and Execution Parate Institutions on Fiduciary Security After the Decision of the Konstitution Court Number 18/Puu-Xvii/2019","authors":"Yeni Triana, Yelia Nathassa Winstar","doi":"10.31941/pj.v22i1.2333","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><em>Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 degrades the existence of executorial rights and execution parate institutions in the UUJF. Melements of the substance of the law in rangka this execution resulted in the purpose of the law can not be met. PeneThis research is a normative juridical research that will answer several questions. First, what is the essence of the position of eksekutorial rights, execution parate, promise injury clause in fiduciary security rules. Second, how the juridical analysis of the Constitutional konstitusi tersebutCourt decision. This study produced several results, first the decision of the Constitutional Court contradicts the essence of the existence of executorial rights and the institution of Parate execution. executorial rights and execution parate institutions arise from the existence of special guarantees granted privileges through executorial rights institutions and execution parate institutions. The article of promise injury in the main agreement essentially serves as clause naturalia. The naturalia clause means that althoughthis clause is not expressly stated, theinjury clause promises to remain. The nature pelaksanaanof execution is because there is no voluntary act of implementing a decision that has permanent legal force. Thus, establishing the validity of the executorial right when there is a voluntary surrender is contrary to the nature of the execution itself. Second, in making a decision, the judge should put forward the principle of legal mind, namely legal certainty, justice and usefulness. In the Constitutional Court ruling amar judge's decision does not reflect the certainty, justice and kemanfaatn</em></p>","PeriodicalId":471669,"journal":{"name":"Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum (edisi elektronik)","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pena Justisia: Media Komunikasi dan Kajian Hukum (edisi elektronik)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31941/pj.v22i1.2333","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

Constitutional Court decision Number 18/PUU-XVII/2019 degrades the existence of executorial rights and execution parate institutions in the UUJF. Melements of the substance of the law in rangka this execution resulted in the purpose of the law can not be met. PeneThis research is a normative juridical research that will answer several questions. First, what is the essence of the position of eksekutorial rights, execution parate, promise injury clause in fiduciary security rules. Second, how the juridical analysis of the Constitutional konstitusi tersebutCourt decision. This study produced several results, first the decision of the Constitutional Court contradicts the essence of the existence of executorial rights and the institution of Parate execution. executorial rights and execution parate institutions arise from the existence of special guarantees granted privileges through executorial rights institutions and execution parate institutions. The article of promise injury in the main agreement essentially serves as clause naturalia. The naturalia clause means that althoughthis clause is not expressly stated, theinjury clause promises to remain. The nature pelaksanaanof execution is because there is no voluntary act of implementing a decision that has permanent legal force. Thus, establishing the validity of the executorial right when there is a voluntary surrender is contrary to the nature of the execution itself. Second, in making a decision, the judge should put forward the principle of legal mind, namely legal certainty, justice and usefulness. In the Constitutional Court ruling amar judge's decision does not reflect the certainty, justice and kemanfaatn

宪法法院第18/Puu-Xvii/2019号判决后受托担保执行权和执行辅助机构的退化
宪法法院第18/PUU-XVII/2019号判决贬低了联合联合基金中执行权和执行独立机构的存在。法律的实质要件在让卡这一执行中造成了法律的目的不能满足。本研究是一项规范性的法律研究,将回答几个问题。首先,信托担保规则中受益权条款、执行分割条款、承诺损害条款的地位本质是什么。第二,宪法的司法分析如何影响法院的判决。这项研究产生了几个结果,首先,宪法法院的决定与执行权存在的本质和平行执行制度相矛盾。执行权和执行配套机构产生于通过执行权机构和执行配套机构给予特权的特殊保障。主协议中的承诺损害条款本质上起着自然条款的作用。自然条款的意思是,虽然这一条款没有明确规定,但伤害条款承诺保留。执行的性质是不存在执行具有永久法律效力的决定的自愿行为。因此,在存在自愿放弃的情况下确立执行权的效力,违背了执行权本身的性质。其次,法官在作出判决时应提出法律思维原则,即法律的确定性、正义性和实用性。在宪法法院的判决中,法官的判决没有体现确定性、正义性和公正性。
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