| Summary: | The purpose of this research is to find out and describe the status of dead
of peace drawn up before a notary as proof of evidence in dispute resolution in
appeal proceeding, and to find out and describe causes of the deed of peace drawn
up before a notary was not submitted as proof of evidence in appeal proceeding in
the case of Judgement of High Court of Yogyakarta Number 07/PDT/2010/PTY.
This research is of legal normative and empiric type, which examines
research�s problems out of the existing statutes and their implementation with
regard to deed of peace drawn up before a notary and dispute resolution in appeal
proceeding. Data gathering method is by library research and field research using
document study and semi-structured interview guideline. Current research uses
qualitative analysis, which is an analysis based on reality found in the society.
Result of this research showed that a deed of peace drawn up before a
notary as a form of peace efforts outside the court might serve as perfect proof of
evidence provided meet formal and material requirements of authentic deed
drawing up as stipulated in Article 1868 KUHPerdata (Indonesian Civil Code)
and Articles 15-19 and 38-65 Act Number 30/2004 in conjunction with Act
Number 2/2014. In the case in question the deed of peace was not submitted as
proof of evidence since one party of the deed of peace is unqualified to be a legal
entity according to Act Number 16/2001 in conjunction with Act Number 28/2004
so that the deed did not meet one formal requirement according to Article 1320 in
conjunction with Article 1330 in conjunction with Article 1852 KUHPerdata. In
this case studied, although the deed of peace drawn up before a notary met formal
requirements of authentic acte drawing up according to Article 1 KUHPerdata,
Articles 15-19 and Articles 38-65 Act Number 30/2004 in conjunction with Act
Number 2/2014, but material of the deed (which is the peace agreement) has a
formal flaw.
|
|---|