Pertanggungjawaban Holding Company Sebagai Penjamin/Corporate Guarantee Terhadap Perusahaan Anak Yang Dinyatakan Pailit

Tobing, William Kevin (2022) Pertanggungjawaban Holding Company Sebagai Penjamin/Corporate Guarantee Terhadap Perusahaan Anak Yang Dinyatakan Pailit. S1 thesis, Universitas Kristen Indonesia.

This is the latest version of this item.

	Text (Hal_Judul_Daftar_Isi_Abstrak) HalJudulDaftarIsiDaftarGambarLampiranAbstrak.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (1MB)
	Text (BAB_I) BabI.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (225kB)
	Text (BAB_II) BabII.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (551kB)
	Text (BAB_III) BabIII.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (234kB)
	Text (BAB_IV) BabIV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (305kB)
	Text (BAB_V) BabV.pdf Restricted to Registered users only Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (64kB)
	Text (Daftar_Pustaka) DaftarPustaka.pdf Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike. Download (141kB)

Abstract

Undang-Undang Nomor 40 tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas masing mempertahankan pengakuan yuridis terhadap status badan hukum induk perusahaan dengan perusahaan anak sebagai subjek hukum mandiri, sehingga secara yuridis badan hukum induk perusahaan dan perusahaan anak tetap diakui dan berhak melakukan perbuatan hukum sendiri. Perusahaan anak yang bertindak sebagai subjek hukum yang mandiri dapat melakukan perikatan dengan pihak lain. Untuk menghindari cidera janji perusahaan anak, kehadiran penjamin sangat berperan sebagai penjmain bahwa jikalau debitor wanprestasi, penjamin akan bertanggung jawab atas utang-utang debitor. Dalam praktik bisnis, seringkali terjadi perusahaan anak melakukan perjanjian kredit dengan kreditor, indu perusahaan bertindak sebagai penjamin. Berkaitan dengan hal tersebut, seringkali penjamin menjadi pihak yang dirugikan debitor, terutama dalam hal debitor pailit, yang ternyata mempunyai konsekuensi hukum terhadap penjamin. Rumusan masalah dalam skripsi ini adalah bagaimana hubungan hukum holding company sebagai penjamin/corporate guarantee terhadap perusahaan anak dan bagaimana pertanggungjawaban holding company sebagai penjamin/corporate guarantee terhadap perusahaan anak yang dinyatakan pailit. Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif dengan pendekatan konseptual atau conseptual approach. Jenis data yang digunakan dalam skripsi ini adalah data sekunder yang terdiri dari bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder, bahan hukum tersier serta menggunakan Teknik pengumpulan data, Teknik pengolahan data dan metode analisis data. v Universitas Kristen Indonesia Dari penelitian ini dapat disimpulkan bahwa perjanjian penjaminan suatu hubungan kontraktual dimana pihak ketiga demi kepentingan kreditor, mengikatkan dirinya untuk memenuhi perikatan debitor. Akibat hukum dari perjanjian penjaminan, penjamin diberikan hak istimewa oleh undang-undang. Namun, apabila penjamin telah mengesampingkan hak-hak istimewanya , maka kedudukan penjamin sama dengan debitor dan oleh karena itu penjamin dapat dimintakan pertanggungjawaban oleh kreditor atas utang-utang debitor. Kemudian, apabila holding company dalam suatu perjanjian penjaminan (corporate guarantee) tidak melepaskan hak istimewanya sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 1831 KUHPerdata, maka holding company bertanggung jawab sebagai cadangan manakala debitor utama (perusahaan anak) cidera janji, bila seluruh harta kekayaan debitor utama telah disita dan dijual terlebih dahulu dan ternyata tidak tercukupi pembayaran utang-utangnya, maka holding company sebagai penjamin bertanggung jawab utang-utangnya kepada kreditor. Apabila holding company dalam suatu perjanjian penjaminan (corporate guarantee) telah mengesampingkan hak-hak istimewanya, maka holding company berkedudukan sama dengan debitor. Oleh sebab itu, kreditor dapat langsung menuntut kepada penjamin untuk melaksanakan kewajibannya melunasi utang-utang (perusahaan anak) sesuai dengan perjanjian penjaminan sebagaimana dimaksud dalam Pasal 1832. Kata Kunci : Holding Company, Penjamin, Perusahaan Anak, Pailit./ Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies each maintains a juridical acknowledgment of the legal entity status of the parent company and the subsidiary company as an independent legal subject, so that legally juridical legal entities of the parent company and subsidiary companies are still recognized and have the right to carry out their own legal actions. Subsidiary companies that act as independent legal subjects can enter into engagements with other parties. To avoid breach of contract of the subsidiary company, the presence of the guarantor plays a very important role as a guarantor that if the debtor defaults, the guarantor will be responsible for the debtor's debts. In business practice, it is often the case that subsidiary companies enter into credit agreements with creditors, the parent company acting as guarantor. In this regard, the guarantor is often the party that is harmed by the debtor, especially in the case of the debtor going bankrupt, which turns out to have legal consequences for the guarantor. The formulation of the problem in this thesis is how the legal relationship of the holding company as a guarantor/corporate guarantee to the subsidiary company and how the responsibility of the holding company as the guarantor/corporate guarantee to the subsidiary company which is declared bankrupt. vii Universitas Kristen Indonesia This research is a normative juridical research with a conceptual approach. The type of data used in this thesis is secondary data consisting of primary legal materials, secondary legal materials, tertiary legal materials and using data collection techniques, data processing techniques and data analysis methods. From this study, it can be concluded that the guarantee agreement is a contractual relationship in which a third party, for the benefit of the creditor, binds himself to fulfill the debtor's engagement. As a legal consequence of the guarantee agreement, the guarantor is given special rights by law. However, if the guarantor has set aside his special rights, then the position of the guarantor is the same as the debtor and therefore the guarantor can be held accountable by the creditor for the debtor's debts. Then, if holding company in a guarantee agreement (corporate guarantee) does not relinquish its special rights as referred to in Article 1831 of the Civil Code, the holding company is responsible as a reserve when the main debtor (subsidiary company) defaults, if all the assets of the main debtor have been confiscated and sold first and it turns out that the payment of its debts is not sufficient, then the holding company as guarantor is responsible for its debts to creditors. If holding company in a corporate guarantee has set aside its special rights, then the holding company has the same position as the debtor. Therefore, the creditor can directly demand the guarantor to carry out his obligation to pay off the debts (subsidiary company) in accordance with the guarantee agreement as referred to in Article 1832. Keywords : Holding Company, Guarantor, Subsidiary Company, Bankruptcy

Item Type:

Thesis (S1)

Contributors: