TINJAUAN YURIDIS SITA JAMINAN ATAS PESAWAT TERBANG, MESIN DAN KOMPONENNYA DALAM HAL KEPAILITAN MASKAPAI PENERBANGAN UNTUK PERLINDUNGAN KEPENTINGAN PERUSAHAAN MAINTENANCE, REPAIR & OVERHAUL SEBAGAI KREDITOR (STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NOMOR 77/PAILIT/2012 PN.NIAGA.JKT.PST DAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 2923K/PDT/2010/PN.JKT.PST JO NOMOR 335/PDT.G/2008/PN.JKT.PST.)

• Main Authors: , ENIASWURI ANDAJANI, , Dr. Tata Wijayanta, SH, M.Hum
• Format: Theses and Dissertations NonPeerReviewed
• Published: [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2014
• Subjects: ETD
• Online Access: https://repository.ugm.ac.id/128852/; http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=69225
• Institution: Universitas Gadjah Mada

This study aimed to assess the aircraft object under control by Maintenance Repair & Overhaul (MRO) company as a debt repayment and to assess solution alternatives in reducing the risk as a result of unable to make security seizure of aircraft, engine and component in case of airline bankruptcy. This study is an empirical normative study of law using secondary data through literature study and primary data through field research. Secondary data derived from primary legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. Location of study to obtain primary data was conducted at PT Garuda Maintenance Facility Aero Asia (GMF), Central Jakarta District Court, Receiver�s office and Law office of Adnan Buyung Nasution & Partners with sourceperson of GM Corporate Legal, Secretarial Clerk, Receiver and legal team. Secondary data collection was conducted by method and means of documentation and study of documents, while the primary data were collected by means of interview and interview guidance. The collected data were analyzed qualitatively. The results showed that the freedom principle of control and controlling applied to aircraft as an object of security seizure has caused the problem in the execution, as on the date of execution the seized aircraft is not in the specified location of execution and is being operated outside the venue of execution. According to Article 31 of Act No. 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligation, then the execution process for seized airfcraft executed by court decision that has a permanent legal force for debt repayment of Batavia airline as debtor to GMF becomes void by law and must be invalidated. According to the results of the study it can be concluded that aircraft objects that are controlled by MRO company can not be used to guarantee repayment of the debt, due to the function of aircraft as a means of rapid transport moves from one venue to another, but can not be encumbered with the security rights as contemplated in Article 71 of Act No. 1 of 2009 concerning Aviation (Aviation Act) and MRO company can apply Article 81 of Aviation Law to aircrafts owned by lessor that are under control of GMF because currently undergoing maintenance and/or repair to provide added value to the aircraft object. Therefore, it is suggested the need for a more comprehensive arrangement in the execution of aircraft security seizure dan application of the requirements that must be complied with by the owner, lessor, Receiver in order to ensure the cost of aircraft maintenance or repair that becomes insolvent boedel payable.