The The Urgency of Arrangement Regarding Immaterial Compensation in Civil Law in Indonesia

Abstract

Abstrak Tulisan ini bertujuan menganalisis lingkup ganti rugi immateriil dalam putusan pengadilan serta perbandingan ganti rugi dalam KUHPerdata dan NBW. Metode penelitian yang digunakan yaitu metode yuridis normatif, yang bersifat analitis preskriptif, denganpendekatan undang-undang, kasus, dan perbandingan hukum. Tulisan ini tidak hanya membahas ganti rugi immateriil menurut KUHPerdata atas dasar tanggung jawab perbuatan melawan hukum saja, tetapi juga akan dibahas ganti rugi immateriil atas dasartanggung jawab kontraktual, serta perbandingannya dengan ketentuan dalam NBW. Berdasarkan putusan yang dianalisis, lingkup ganti rugi immateriil adalah adanya rasa trauma, terciderainya psikologis, tercemarnya nama baik. Lingkup lainnya menurut Arrest Hooge Raad dan yurisprudensi yaitu kehilangan kenikmatan atas suatu ketenangan yang disebabkan tetangganya atau berkurangnyakenikmatan orang atas hak-haknya atas kekayaannya, penderitaan akibat kecelakaan dan hilangnya kebahagiaan hidup. Perbandingan terkait ganti rugi dalam KUHPerdata dan NBW yaitu, mengenai persamaan, bahwa sifat pengaturan ganti rugi yang merupakan hukum pelengkap, prinsip ganti rugi mengembalikan keadaan seakan tidak terjadi wanprestasi/PMH, adanya hubungan kausal antara kerugian dan kesalahan/ wanprestasi, serta adanya kebebasan hakim dalam menilai besaran ganti rugi. Perbedaanya, bahwa NBW mengaturganti rugi secara umum yang dapat diterapkan terhadap jenis pertanggungjawaban dalam NBW, ganti rugi dalam NBW terdiri dari materiil dan immateriil (termasuk penjelasan lingkupnya), NBW mengatur bentuk ganti rugi, adanya wewenang hakim dalam menilainominal ganti rugi yang disepakati para pihak, kerugian yang mungkin timbul dikemudian hari termasuk jika ada klaim asuransi, pihak ketiga yang ikut dirugikan, serta pihak yang dapat mengajukan ganti rugi. Kata kunci: ganti rugi; immateriil; pengaturan Abstract This paper aims to analyze the scope of immaterial compensation in court decisions as well as a comparison of compensation in the Civil Code and NBW. The research method used is normative juridical method, prescriptive analytical, with statutory, case and comparative law approaches. This paper does not only discuss immaterial compensation according to the Civil Code based on unlawful actsresponsibility, but also discusses immaterial compensation based on contractual responsibility, as well as its comparison with the provisions in the NBW. Based on the court decisions analyzed, the scope of immaterial compensation is the existence of trauma, psychological injury, and defamation of reputation. Another scope according to Arrest Hooge Raad and jurisprudence is losing the enjoyment of a peace caused by neighbors or reduced enjoyment of people over their rights of their wealth, suffering due to accidents and loss of happiness in life. Comparisons related to compensation in the Civil Code and NBW are, regarding similarities, that the nature of compensation arrangements is a complementary law, the principle of compensation is to return the situation as if there was no default/tort, there is a causal relationship between losses and mistakes/defaults, and the freedom of judges in assess the amount of compensation. The difference are that NBW regulates compensation in general that can be applied to types of responsibility in NBW, compensation in NBW consists ofmaterial and immaterial (including an explanation of the scope), NBW regulates the form of compensation, there is the authority of the judge to assess the nominal compensation agreed by the parties, possible losses that may arise in the future including if there is insurance claim, third parties who are also harmed, and parties who can apply for compensation. Keywords: arrangement; compensation; immaterial