AKIBAT HUKUM TERHADAP KREDITUR DALAM PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG

The Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) filed by a creditor is a legal mechanism that allows a creditor to file a PKPU petition against a debtor suspected of experiencing financial difficulties and failing to meet their debt payment obligations on time. The purpose of this study is to examine the legal consequences for creditors in the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations based on Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations and the judges’ considerations in deciding on the PKPU petition. This study employs a normative legal research method. The data sources are derived from secondary data, categorized into three types: primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. The data collection technique used is documentary study or literature review. The conclusion of this research indicates that the legal consequences of a judge rejecting a PKPU petition include: First, the rejection of the petition means that no Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) is granted to the debtor. Second, if a creditor wishes to sue the debtor again regarding debt fulfillment, the creditor can file a civil lawsuit for default. The judge’s considerations in rejecting the PKPU petition are based on the fact that the debtor does not have more than one creditor because other creditors lack valid power of attorney. Furthermore, in cases where the amount of debt is insignificant and insufficient to trigger bankruptcy if the peace plan under the PKPU fails to materialize, this also influences the court’s decision. The study recommends that there should be clearer regulations concerning the position of other creditors and the minimum debt amount in the Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations Law. Legal considerations should also adopt a dimension of fairness, strict legal protection, and substantive legal breakthroughs to ensure the enforcement of law that is beneficial for human needs.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Yustitia
Published
2025-04-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.31943/yustitia.v11i1.320
Primary Topic
Legal Studies and Policies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

AKIBAT HUKUM TERHADAP KREDITUR DALAM PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG

Indra Afrita, Rezki Saputra, Jas Yeni Triana
Yustitia
Legal Studies and Policies
article

AKIBAT HUKUM TERHADAP KREDITUR DALAM PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 37 TAHUN 2004 TENTANG KEPAILITAN DAN PENUNDAAN KEWAJIBAN PEMBAYARAN UTANG

Indra Afrita, Rezki Saputra, Jas Yeni Triana
article en

Abstract

The Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) filed by a creditor is a legal mechanism that allows a creditor to file a PKPU petition against a debtor suspected of experiencing financial difficulties and failing to meet their debt payment obligations on time. The purpose of this study is to examine the legal consequences for creditors in the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations based on Law Number 37 of 2004 on Bankruptcy and the Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations and the judges’ considerations in deciding on the PKPU petition. This study employs a normative legal research method. The data sources are derived from secondary data, categorized into three types: primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, and tertiary legal materials. The data collection technique used is documentary study or literature review. The conclusion of this research indicates that the legal consequences of a judge rejecting a PKPU petition include: First, the rejection of the petition means that no Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU) is granted to the debtor. Second, if a creditor wishes to sue the debtor again regarding debt fulfillment, the creditor can file a civil lawsuit for default. The judge’s considerations in rejecting the PKPU petition are based on the fact that the debtor does not have more than one creditor because other creditors lack valid power of attorney. Furthermore, in cases where the amount of debt is insignificant and insufficient to trigger bankruptcy if the peace plan under the PKPU fails to materialize, this also influences the court’s decision. The study recommends that there should be clearer regulations concerning the position of other creditors and the minimum debt amount in the Bankruptcy and Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations Law. Legal considerations should also adopt a dimension of fairness, strict legal protection, and substantive legal breakthroughs to ensure the enforcement of law that is beneficial for human needs.

YustitiaVol. 11(1)
Universitas Lancang Kuning (ID)
Openalex Percentile: Top 88%
Legal Studies and Policies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.