ANALISIS YURIDIS PERTIMBANGAN HAKIM TERHADAP KEBERADAAN PERJANJIAN KUASA PENGELOLAAN CV ANTARA WARGA NEGARA INDONESIA DAN WARGA NEGARA ASING (Studi Putusan Nomor 1184/Pdt.G/2020/PN Dps)

Penulis

  • Nayla Afina Yasmine Universitas Riau
  • Rahmad Hendra Universitas Riau
  • Ulfia Hasanah Universitas Riau

Kata Kunci:

Pertimbangan Hakim, Perjanjian Kuasa, Warga Negara Asing

Abstrak

Penelitian ini dilatarbelakangi oleh pertemuan asas kebebasan berkontrak dengan norma ketertiban umum dalam Putusan Nomor 1184/Pdt.G/2020/PN Dps tentang kuasa pengelolaan CV kepada Warga Negara Asing. Dengan metode penelitian hukum normatif melalui pendekatan studi kasus, penelitian ini menganalisis pertimbangan hakim dan pemenuhan asas kepastian hukum. Hasilnya menunjukkan bahwa hakim dominan berfokus pada keabsahan formal perjanjian berdasarkan kesepakatan para pihak (Pasal 1338 KUHPerdata), sehingga tidak menguji mendalam syarat “sebab yang halal” (Pasal 1337 KUHPerdata), kepatuhan pada UU Penanaman Modal, status kuasa pasca pencabutan, dan itikad baik. Simpulannya, putusan hanya memenuhi kepastian hukum formal antar pihak, belum mencapai kepastian hukum materiil yang selaras dengan sistem norma publik.

This research is motivated by the intersection between the principle of freedom of contract and public order norms in Decision Number 1184/Pdt.G/2020/PN Dps concerning a power of attorney for managing a CV (Limited Partnership) granted to a Foreign National. Using a normative legal research method with a case study approach, this study analyzes the judge's considerations and the fulfillment of the principle of legal certainty. The results show that the judge dominantly focused on the formal validity of the agreement based on the undisputed consensus of the parties (Article 1338 of the Indonesian Civil Code), consequently failing to examine in depth the requirement of a "lawful cause" (Article 1337 of the Indonesian Civil Code), compliance with the Investment Law, the status of the power of attorney after its revocation, and the principle of good faith. The conclusion is that the decision only fulfills formal legal certainty between the parties, but has not achieved substantive legal certainty aligned with the system of public norms.

Unduhan

Diterbitkan

2025-12-30