KONSEKUENSI BAGI DEBITOR YANG TIDAK MENGAJUKAN RENCANA PERDAMAIAN DALAM PROSES PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG

Jurnal Hukum to-ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur dan Melindungi Masyarakat Pub Date : 2023-12-21 DOI:10.55809/tora.v9i3.277

Hukum Untuk Mengatur, dan Melindungi Masyarakat, Aidhya Diory, Amamie Marpaung, Akhmad Budi Cahyono, Akhmad Budi, Konsekuensi Bagi, Debitor Yang, Tidak Mengajukan, Rencana Perdamaian, Dalam Proses, Penundaan Kewajiban, Pembayaran Utang

{"title":"KONSEKUENSI BAGI DEBITOR YANG TIDAK MENGAJUKAN RENCANA PERDAMAIAN DALAM PROSES PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG","authors":"Hukum Untuk Mengatur, dan Melindungi Masyarakat, Aidhya Diory, Amamie Marpaung, Akhmad Budi Cahyono, Akhmad Budi, Konsekuensi Bagi, Debitor Yang, Tidak Mengajukan, Rencana Perdamaian, Dalam Proses, Penundaan Kewajiban, Pembayaran Utang","doi":"10.55809/tora.v9i3.277","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A settlement offer in the process of suspension of debt payment obligation is in principle given to convince creditors that the debtor has the desire to settle their debts. When the debtor is in an unstable condition and feels unable to pay his debts, the law provides the debtor with the opportunity for the debt payment obligation to be suspended and provide a settlement offer for their creditors, which is regulated in Article 222 paragraph (2) of the Law No. 37 of 2004. However, in practice, it turns out some debtors do not use this opportunity to provide a settlement offer, in which case the Law No. 37 of 2004 does not explicitly regulate the legal consequences. This is the focus of this research by reviewing and discussing several jurisprudence/judge decisions with different legal considerations to see what the legal consequences are if the Debtor does not submit a settlement offer.","PeriodicalId":355257,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Hukum to-ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur dan Melindungi Masyarakat","volume":"88 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Hukum to-ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur dan Melindungi Masyarakat","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55809/tora.v9i3.277","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 settlement offer in the process of suspension of debt payment obligation is in principle given to convince creditors that the debtor has the desire to settle their debts. When the debtor is in an unstable condition and feels unable to pay his debts, the law provides the debtor with the opportunity for the debt payment obligation to be suspended and provide a settlement offer for their creditors, which is regulated in Article 222 paragraph (2) of the Law No. 37 of 2004. However, in practice, it turns out some debtors do not use this opportunity to provide a settlement offer, in which case the Law No. 37 of 2004 does not explicitly regulate the legal consequences. This is the focus of this research by reviewing and discussing several jurisprudence/judge decisions with different legal considerations to see what the legal consequences are if the Debtor does not submit a settlement offer.

查看原文本刊更多论文

在推迟偿债义务程序中不提交和平计划的债务人的后果

原则上，在中止偿债义务的过程中提出和解要约是为了让债权人相信债务人有清偿债务的意愿。2004 年第 37 号法律第 222 条第(2)款规定，当债务人处于不稳定状态，感到无力偿还债务时，法律规定债务人有机会中止偿债义务，并向债权人提出和解要约。然而，在实践中，一些债务人并没有利用这一机会提出和解建议，在这种情况下，2004 年第 37 号法律并没有明确规定其法律后果。这就是本研究的重点所在，我们将通过审查和讨论几个具有不同法律考虑因素的判例/法官判决，来了解如果债务人不提交和解要约会产生什么法律后果。

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

Jurnal Hukum to-ra : Hukum Untuk Mengatur dan Melindungi Masyarakat

自引率

0.00%

发文量