1999年第8条关于消费者保护的规定,反映了消费者安全问题

Diva Yohana Margaretha Marbun, Aam Suryamah, Agus Suwandono
{"title":"1999年第8条关于消费者保护的规定,反映了消费者安全问题","authors":"Diva Yohana Margaretha Marbun, Aam Suryamah, Agus Suwandono","doi":"10.55606/concept.v2i2.312","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The position of business actors and consumers often becomes unequal. Consumers are often the object of business activity to get the maximum profit by business actors and in the end the consumer becomes the aggrieved party. Cases of business actors harming consumers are found in BPSK Garut Regency Decision Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 regarding the sale of expired vegetable cheese wafers at the Asia Garut Department Store. In this case, there were legal issues regarding BPSK's authority and the judge's considerations in deciding compensation. The research objective is to determine whether BPSK has the authority to decide this case; and analyzing the judges' considerations in the BPSK Decision of Garut Regency Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 in deciding compensation. This study uses research methods with a normative juridical approach based on applicable legal concepts and theories. Based on the research results, it can be concluded 2 (two) things. First, the settlement process in this case has not provided legal certainty because the choice of dispute resolution method is directly determined by the Garut Regency BPSK Assembly and not based on the agreement of the parties to the dispute and this case should have been tried at the District Court after mediation failed. Second, the Garut Regency BSPK Assembly has not been right in deciding on compensation because the Assembly has confused the duties and responsibilities of producers and supermarkets and does not understand the intent of Article 52 letter (k) of the Consumer Protection Act.","PeriodicalId":372808,"journal":{"name":"Concept: Journal of Social Humanities and Education","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen Mengenai Penjualan Wafer Cheese Nabati Kadaluwarsa Di Toserba Asia Garut Ditinjau Dari Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen\",\"authors\":\"Diva Yohana Margaretha Marbun, Aam Suryamah, Agus Suwandono\",\"doi\":\"10.55606/concept.v2i2.312\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The position of business actors and consumers often becomes unequal. Consumers are often the object of business activity to get the maximum profit by business actors and in the end the consumer becomes the aggrieved party. Cases of business actors harming consumers are found in BPSK Garut Regency Decision Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 regarding the sale of expired vegetable cheese wafers at the Asia Garut Department Store. In this case, there were legal issues regarding BPSK's authority and the judge's considerations in deciding compensation. The research objective is to determine whether BPSK has the authority to decide this case; and analyzing the judges' considerations in the BPSK Decision of Garut Regency Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 in deciding compensation. This study uses research methods with a normative juridical approach based on applicable legal concepts and theories. Based on the research results, it can be concluded 2 (two) things. First, the settlement process in this case has not provided legal certainty because the choice of dispute resolution method is directly determined by the Garut Regency BPSK Assembly and not based on the agreement of the parties to the dispute and this case should have been tried at the District Court after mediation failed. Second, the Garut Regency BSPK Assembly has not been right in deciding on compensation because the Assembly has confused the duties and responsibilities of producers and supermarkets and does not understand the intent of Article 52 letter (k) of the Consumer Protection Act.\",\"PeriodicalId\":372808,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Concept: Journal of Social Humanities and Education\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Concept: Journal of Social Humanities and Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.55606/concept.v2i2.312\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Concept: Journal of Social Humanities and Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.55606/concept.v2i2.312","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

业务参与者和消费者的地位经常变得不平等。消费者往往是商业行为者获得最大利润的商业活动的对象,最终消费者成为受损害的一方。商业行为者伤害消费者的案例见于BPSK Garut regent第18/Pdt号决定。S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020关于在亚洲Garut百货公司销售过期蔬菜奶酪薄饼的规定。在本案中,存在有关BPSK的权力和法官在决定赔偿时考虑的法律问题。研究的目的是确定BPSK是否有权决定这个案件;并分析了Garut Regency第18/Pdt号BPSK判决中法官的考虑。S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020决定补偿。本研究以适用的法律概念和理论为基础,采用规范的司法方法进行研究。根据研究结果,可以得出两点结论。首先,本案的解决程序没有提供法律上的确定性,因为纠纷解决方法的选择是由Garut Regency BPSK Assembly直接决定的,而不是基于争议各方的协议,而且本案本应在调解失败后由地方法院审理。第二,Garut Regency BSPK议会在赔偿问题上的决定是不正确的,因为议会混淆了生产者和超市的义务和责任,而且没有理解《消费者保护法》第52条第(k)项的意图。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen Mengenai Penjualan Wafer Cheese Nabati Kadaluwarsa Di Toserba Asia Garut Ditinjau Dari Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 1999 Tentang Perlindungan Konsumen
The position of business actors and consumers often becomes unequal. Consumers are often the object of business activity to get the maximum profit by business actors and in the end the consumer becomes the aggrieved party. Cases of business actors harming consumers are found in BPSK Garut Regency Decision Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 regarding the sale of expired vegetable cheese wafers at the Asia Garut Department Store. In this case, there were legal issues regarding BPSK's authority and the judge's considerations in deciding compensation. The research objective is to determine whether BPSK has the authority to decide this case; and analyzing the judges' considerations in the BPSK Decision of Garut Regency Number 18/Pdt.S-Brg/BPSK-GRT/IX/2020 in deciding compensation. This study uses research methods with a normative juridical approach based on applicable legal concepts and theories. Based on the research results, it can be concluded 2 (two) things. First, the settlement process in this case has not provided legal certainty because the choice of dispute resolution method is directly determined by the Garut Regency BPSK Assembly and not based on the agreement of the parties to the dispute and this case should have been tried at the District Court after mediation failed. Second, the Garut Regency BSPK Assembly has not been right in deciding on compensation because the Assembly has confused the duties and responsibilities of producers and supermarkets and does not understand the intent of Article 52 letter (k) of the Consumer Protection Act.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
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