IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)

This research is aimed at studying the implementation of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad on the settlement of disputes in the Court of Industrial Relations, studying the basic considerations of the Judge in deciding a lawsuit of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad and studying the obstacles in the implementation of u...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI, , Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum.
Format: Thesis
Published: [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2012
Subjects:
ETD
_version_ 1797032188478226432
author , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI
, Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum.
author_facet , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI
, Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum.
author_sort , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI
collection UGM
description This research is aimed at studying the implementation of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad on the settlement of disputes in the Court of Industrial Relations, studying the basic considerations of the Judge in deciding a lawsuit of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad and studying the obstacles in the implementation of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad judgment in the Court of Industrial Relations. This research belongs to a normative-empirical research employing library research to collect secondary data and field research to collect primary data. The data collected from both the library and field research were analyzed descriptive-qualitatively. Secondary law materials in the form of legal opinion were described and classified in order to seek differences and similarities from which a conclusion could be drawn. There research employed sociology of law and political of law. The first result of the research shows that immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) in the Court of Industrial Relations has not been implemented yet. The Panel of Judges has never granted Uitvoerbaar bij voorraad petitioned by the labor force. It is caused by the difficulties found in performing restoration to original condition, since there are only two types of cassation law in the Court of Industrial Relations. The second result shows that the basic consideration of the Panel of Judges in declining the petitions of immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) is the fact that what is called uitvoerbaar bij voorraad by the judges is not the same immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) found in the Civil Procedural Law, but is the provision of the Interim Meascure. The basic considerations used by the Judges in declining a demand of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad issued by the Prosecutor in the Court of Industrial Relations are Article 96 of Act Number 2 of 2004 regarding the Settlement of Industrial Relations Disputes and Article 155 of Act Number 13 of 2003 regarding Employment. The third result shows that there is normative obstacles, that is on the legal basis utilized by the judges of the Court of Industrial Relations in objecting the demand of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad, regulations that specifically regulate are more prioritized than that of generally regulate due to the implementation of Article 96 of Act Number 2 of 2004 regarding the Settlement of Indutrial Relations Disputes and Article 155 of Act Number 13 of 2003 regarding the Employment is imperative. Consequently, it uses temporary disposal.
first_indexed 2024-03-13T22:34:49Z
format Thesis
id oai:generic.eprints.org:98036
institution Universiti Gadjah Mada
last_indexed 2024-03-13T22:34:49Z
publishDate 2012
publisher [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada
record_format dspace
spelling oai:generic.eprints.org:980362016-03-04T08:48:26Z https://repository.ugm.ac.id/98036/ IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI) , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI , Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum. ETD This research is aimed at studying the implementation of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad on the settlement of disputes in the Court of Industrial Relations, studying the basic considerations of the Judge in deciding a lawsuit of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad and studying the obstacles in the implementation of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad judgment in the Court of Industrial Relations. This research belongs to a normative-empirical research employing library research to collect secondary data and field research to collect primary data. The data collected from both the library and field research were analyzed descriptive-qualitatively. Secondary law materials in the form of legal opinion were described and classified in order to seek differences and similarities from which a conclusion could be drawn. There research employed sociology of law and political of law. The first result of the research shows that immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) in the Court of Industrial Relations has not been implemented yet. The Panel of Judges has never granted Uitvoerbaar bij voorraad petitioned by the labor force. It is caused by the difficulties found in performing restoration to original condition, since there are only two types of cassation law in the Court of Industrial Relations. The second result shows that the basic consideration of the Panel of Judges in declining the petitions of immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) is the fact that what is called uitvoerbaar bij voorraad by the judges is not the same immediately-enforceable judgment (uitvoerbaar bij voorraad) found in the Civil Procedural Law, but is the provision of the Interim Meascure. The basic considerations used by the Judges in declining a demand of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad issued by the Prosecutor in the Court of Industrial Relations are Article 96 of Act Number 2 of 2004 regarding the Settlement of Industrial Relations Disputes and Article 155 of Act Number 13 of 2003 regarding Employment. The third result shows that there is normative obstacles, that is on the legal basis utilized by the judges of the Court of Industrial Relations in objecting the demand of uitvoerbaar bij voorraad, regulations that specifically regulate are more prioritized than that of generally regulate due to the implementation of Article 96 of Act Number 2 of 2004 regarding the Settlement of Indutrial Relations Disputes and Article 155 of Act Number 13 of 2003 regarding the Employment is imperative. Consequently, it uses temporary disposal. [Yogyakarta] : Universitas Gadjah Mada 2012 Thesis NonPeerReviewed , RR KURNIA SETIAWATI and , Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum. (2012) IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI). UNSPECIFIED thesis, UNSPECIFIED. http://etd.ugm.ac.id/index.php?mod=penelitian_detail&sub=PenelitianDetail&act=view&typ=html&buku_id=54069
spellingShingle ETD
, RR KURNIA SETIAWATI
, Kunthoro Basuki, S.H.,M.Hum.
IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title_full IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title_fullStr IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title_full_unstemmed IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title_short IMPLEMENTASI TUNTUTAN UNTUK DILAKSANAKAN LEBIH DAHULU (UITVOERBAAR BIJ VOORRAAD) PADA PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL (PHI)
title_sort implementasi tuntutan untuk dilaksanakan lebih dahulu uitvoerbaar bij voorraad pada pengadilan hubungan industrial phi
topic ETD
work_keys_str_mv AT rrkurniasetiawati implementasituntutanuntukdilaksanakanlebihdahuluuitvoerbaarbijvoorraadpadapengadilanhubunganindustrialphi
AT kunthorobasukishmhum implementasituntutanuntukdilaksanakanlebihdahuluuitvoerbaarbijvoorraadpadapengadilanhubunganindustrialphi