{"title":"DOKTRIN PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL: KETENTUAN DAN PENERAPANNYA DI INGGRIS, AUSTRALIA DAN INDONESIA","authors":"Y. Y. Rissy","doi":"10.24246/jrh.2019.v4.i1.p1-20","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses about provisions and application of the Piercing The Corporate Veil (PVC) doctrine in the United Kingdom, Australia and Indonesia. The main issue is when and how the courts apply the PVC doctrine, also whether the doctrine can be applied outside the courts or not. In some states such as the United Kingdom and Australia which exercise common law tradition, the courts may apply the PVC doctrine on share holders and directors when there is an exceptional circumstance which requires to apply the doctrine. Similar to both states, Indonesia, through the Indonesian Supreme Court, has already applied the doctrine long before the law on Limited Liability Company was enacted. In 1998, a unique legal case about the Liquidity Aid of Bank Indonesia shows a phenomenon that was beyond the normal understanding of the Law. In that time, the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency applied an out-of-court settlement model to hold shareholders' liability. Finally, this article recommends that a legal and economic study should be considered to examine the effectiveness of this approach.","PeriodicalId":202448,"journal":{"name":"Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Refleksi Hukum: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24246/jrh.2019.v4.i1.p1-20","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
摘要
本文讨论了英国、澳大利亚和印度尼西亚“揭公司面纱”原则的规定和适用情况。主要问题是法院何时以及如何适用PVC原则,以及该原则是否可以在法院之外适用。在一些行使普通法传统的国家,如英国和澳大利亚,当有特殊情况需要适用聚氯乙烯原则时,法院可对股东和董事适用聚氯乙烯原则。与这两个国家类似,印度尼西亚早在有限责任公司法颁布之前就已经通过印度尼西亚最高法院应用了这一原则。1998年,一个关于印尼银行流动性援助的独特法律案例显示了一种超出法律正常理解的现象。当时,印尼银行重组机构(Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency)采用庭外和解模式来承担股东的责任。最后,本文建议应考虑进行法律和经济研究,以检验这种方法的有效性。
DOKTRIN PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL: KETENTUAN DAN PENERAPANNYA DI INGGRIS, AUSTRALIA DAN INDONESIA
This article discusses about provisions and application of the Piercing The Corporate Veil (PVC) doctrine in the United Kingdom, Australia and Indonesia. The main issue is when and how the courts apply the PVC doctrine, also whether the doctrine can be applied outside the courts or not. In some states such as the United Kingdom and Australia which exercise common law tradition, the courts may apply the PVC doctrine on share holders and directors when there is an exceptional circumstance which requires to apply the doctrine. Similar to both states, Indonesia, through the Indonesian Supreme Court, has already applied the doctrine long before the law on Limited Liability Company was enacted. In 1998, a unique legal case about the Liquidity Aid of Bank Indonesia shows a phenomenon that was beyond the normal understanding of the Law. In that time, the Indonesian Bank Restructuring Agency applied an out-of-court settlement model to hold shareholders' liability. Finally, this article recommends that a legal and economic study should be considered to examine the effectiveness of this approach.