GUGATAN TIM KURATOR ATAS PELAKSANAAN EKSEKUSI OBYEK JAMINAN FIDUCIA MILIK DEBITUR PAILIT LEH KREDITUR SEPARATIS. DITINJAU DARI PERSPEKTIF HUKUM (STUDI KASUS: PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 306 K/Pdt.Sus/2010 TANGGAL 11 MEI 2010

• Main Authors: , Rusli Effendi, SH, , Prof. Dr. Nindyo Pramono, S.H., M.S.
• Format: Theses and Dissertations NonPeerReviewed
• Published: [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2012
• Subjects: ETD
• Online Access: https://repository.ugm.ac.id/99924/; http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=55696
• Institution: Universitas Gadjah Mada

Theoretically, in general debitor owning the problem of ability to fulfill its obligation pay for debt can go through various solution alternative. In the case of debitor don't have asset or finance which enough as as a last resort is all creditor go through resolving through regulation of bankrupt, by apply statement of bankrupt to Justice of Commercial in its territory of jurisdiction. In practice by dozens emerge problems after debitor fallen by bankrupt decision. One of the example of is problems between curator with creditor, specially separatist creditor. In general problems between curator with separatist creditor is to centre around execution execute guarantee object of fiducia property of bankrupt debitor. Target of writer perform a this research is to know and analyse in perpectively of law of execution execute guarantee object of fidusia property of bankrupt debitor by separatist creditor of P.T. Bank Mega Tbk. Research method the used is method of juridical-normative by using three approach, that is approach of law, approach of case, and concept intention. Specification of research the used is analytical descriptive. Source of data weared by is data of secondary, covering materials punish primary, materials punish secondary, and tertiary law materials. Pursuant to result of research, hence can be concluded as follows. 1. With base at Section 55 sentence (1) and Clarification of Section 31 sentence (1) Code of No. 37 Year 2004 and also Section 27 Code of No. 42 Year 1999 following its clarification, hence can be concluded, that execution execute guarantee object of fiducia property of bankrupt debitor conducted by KPKNL Port Float pursuant to stipulating of District Court Of Tanjungkarang on request separatist creditor of P.T. Bank Mega Tbk. is do not illegal, lawful for the reason. 2. Action Sued by I and action Sued by II cannot is categorized as deed contempt of court as arranged in Section 1365 civil code. 3. In perpective of factie judex in dropping its decision is to base at rule of Section 34 Code of No. 34 Year 2004, while is in perspective of juris judex in dropping its decision is to base at rule of Section 55 sentence (1) and Clarification of Section 31 sentence (1) Code of No. 37 year 2004, and also Section 27 Code of No. 42 Year 1999.