Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Akta Hak Tanggungan Atas Harta Bersama Yang Belum Dibagi Paska Perceraian Tanpa Persetujuan Mantan Suami/Istri

IF 0.4 Q4 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Janthy Prisilya Karundeng, Jelly Nasseri, Felicitas Sri Marniati
{"title":"Kepastian Hukum Terhadap Akta Hak Tanggungan Atas Harta Bersama Yang Belum Dibagi Paska Perceraian Tanpa Persetujuan Mantan Suami/Istri","authors":"Janthy Prisilya Karundeng, Jelly Nasseri, Felicitas Sri Marniati","doi":"10.15408/jlr.v4i4.28059","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the banking industry, it is a well-known fact that there are frequently issues with joint assets that have not been divided after a divorce and that are used as collateral for mortgage rights. The case of court decision number 177/Pdt. G/2019/PN Bks is illustrative. In this study, the problem to be addressed is the legal consequences of the deed of mortgage on shared assets that have not been divided post-divorce without the ex-husband/consent wife's and the legal certainty of the deed of mortgage on shared assets that have not been divided post-divorce without the ex-husband/consent, wife's using Soeroso's theory of legal consequences and Jan Michelle Otto's Legal Certainty theory. In this work, the author employs a normative legal methodology supported by an empirical methodology. The results of the study indicate that the legal consequences of the mortgage deed on joint assets that have not been divided after the divorce without the consent of the ex-husband or ex-wife can result in the mortgage being made and a cancellation lawsuit being filed because it violates the ex-rights. spouse's Based on Jan Michel Otto's legal certainty theory, a mortgage deed formed on joint assets that have not been divided after divorce without the approval of the ex-husband/wife has no legal certainty value because the mortgage is made without the consent of the ex-husband/wife.","PeriodicalId":40374,"journal":{"name":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ATA Journal of Legal Tax Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15408/jlr.v4i4.28059","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the banking industry, it is a well-known fact that there are frequently issues with joint assets that have not been divided after a divorce and that are used as collateral for mortgage rights. The case of court decision number 177/Pdt. G/2019/PN Bks is illustrative. In this study, the problem to be addressed is the legal consequences of the deed of mortgage on shared assets that have not been divided post-divorce without the ex-husband/consent wife's and the legal certainty of the deed of mortgage on shared assets that have not been divided post-divorce without the ex-husband/consent, wife's using Soeroso's theory of legal consequences and Jan Michelle Otto's Legal Certainty theory. In this work, the author employs a normative legal methodology supported by an empirical methodology. The results of the study indicate that the legal consequences of the mortgage deed on joint assets that have not been divided after the divorce without the consent of the ex-husband or ex-wife can result in the mortgage being made and a cancellation lawsuit being filed because it violates the ex-rights. spouse's Based on Jan Michel Otto's legal certainty theory, a mortgage deed formed on joint assets that have not been divided after divorce without the approval of the ex-husband/wife has no legal certainty value because the mortgage is made without the consent of the ex-husband/wife.
在没有前夫或妻子同意的情况下,对同居财产的共同所有权的法律保证
在银行业,一个众所周知的事实是,离婚后未分割的共同资产经常出现问题,这些资产被用作抵押权利的抵押品。第177/Pdt号法院判决案。G/2019/PN Bks是说明性的。在本研究中,要解决的问题是离婚后未经前夫/妻子同意未分割的共享资产抵押契据的法律后果,以及离婚后未经前夫/妻子同意未分割的共享资产抵押契据的法律确定性,妻子使用Soeroso的法律后果理论和Jan Michelle Otto的法律确定性理论。在这项工作中,作者采用了一种由实证方法支持的规范性法律方法。研究结果表明,未经前夫或前妻同意,离婚后未分割的共同财产的抵押契据的法律后果可能导致抵押的产生,并因侵犯前妻权利而提起撤销诉讼。根据Jan Michel Otto的法律确定性理论,在离婚后未经前夫/妻子同意的情况下,对未分割的共同财产形成的抵押契据不具有法律确定性价值,因为抵押是在未经前夫/妻子同意的情况下进行的。
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
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
2
×
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