The Use of Receivables as Collateral in Business Practices in Indonesia

Yuridika Pub Date : 2021-05-01 DOI:10.20473/YDK.V36I2.25372
Rio Christiawan
{"title":"The Use of Receivables as Collateral in Business Practices in Indonesia","authors":"Rio Christiawan","doi":"10.20473/YDK.V36I2.25372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThis article discusses the enforceability of Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee that allows the use of receivables as debt collateral in business practices in Indonesia. Receivables bound by fiduciary collateral is deemed as a special collateral— in the context of civil law, a special collateral will be prioritized in case the debtor does not voluntarily make when due. In business practices, long-term receivables will be established following an agreement between a debtor and a third party, and the receivables that the debtor is entitled to receive from the third party will be provided as collateral to secure the debtor’s obligations under his loan agreement with the creditor. The issue discussed in this paper is the fact that although theoretically special collateral in the form of receivables should be able to increase the creditor’s assurance of getting repaid, in practice long-term receivables put higher risk on the creditor instead. As comparison, this paper uses the accounts receivables fiduciary in the United Kingdom. The Writing Method used in this paper is the normative juridical approach with a focus on conducting juridical studies regarding the creditors' risk in the use of receivables, specifically long-term debt collateral. This paper shows that receivables that are used as collateral in fiduciary agreements actually put the greatest risk on the creditor; especially if the agreement between the debtor and the third party stipulates that in case the debtor fails to fulfil his obligations, all receivables that he is supposed to receive from the third party will be aborted and become non-existent. ","PeriodicalId":31372,"journal":{"name":"Yuridika","volume":"36 1","pages":"427"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yuridika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20473/YDK.V36I2.25372","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

AbstractThis article discusses the enforceability of Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 1999 on Fiduciary Guarantee that allows the use of receivables as debt collateral in business practices in Indonesia. Receivables bound by fiduciary collateral is deemed as a special collateral— in the context of civil law, a special collateral will be prioritized in case the debtor does not voluntarily make when due. In business practices, long-term receivables will be established following an agreement between a debtor and a third party, and the receivables that the debtor is entitled to receive from the third party will be provided as collateral to secure the debtor’s obligations under his loan agreement with the creditor. The issue discussed in this paper is the fact that although theoretically special collateral in the form of receivables should be able to increase the creditor’s assurance of getting repaid, in practice long-term receivables put higher risk on the creditor instead. As comparison, this paper uses the accounts receivables fiduciary in the United Kingdom. The Writing Method used in this paper is the normative juridical approach with a focus on conducting juridical studies regarding the creditors' risk in the use of receivables, specifically long-term debt collateral. This paper shows that receivables that are used as collateral in fiduciary agreements actually put the greatest risk on the creditor; especially if the agreement between the debtor and the third party stipulates that in case the debtor fails to fulfil his obligations, all receivables that he is supposed to receive from the third party will be aborted and become non-existent. 
在印度尼西亚的商业实践中使用应收账款作为抵押品
摘要本文讨论了印度尼西亚1999年第42号法律关于信托担保的第9条的可执行性,该法律允许在商业实践中使用应收账款作为债务抵押品。受信义质押约束的应收账款被视为一种特殊质押——在民法中,如果债务人在到期时不自愿作出担保,则优先考虑特殊质押。在商业实践中,长期应收账款将在债务人与第三方达成协议后建立,债务人有权从第三方获得的应收账款将作为抵押品提供给债务人,以确保债务人在与债权人的贷款协议下的义务。本文讨论的问题是,虽然理论上应收款形式的特殊抵押品应该能够增加债权人获得偿还的保证,但在实践中,长期应收款反而给债权人带来了更高的风险。作为比较,本文采用了英国的应收账款信托制度。本文使用的写作方法是规范的法律方法,重点是对债权人使用应收账款,特别是长期债务抵押品的风险进行法律研究。本文表明,在信义协议中作为抵押品的应收账款实际上给债权人带来了最大的风险;特别是债务人与第三人之间的协议规定,如果债务人不履行其义务,他本应从第三人处获得的所有应收账款将被终止并不复存在。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
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