Legal Review of the Validity of a Power of Attorney to Sell as an Executorial Guarantee in a Breach of Performance Case
Case Study of Batang District Court Number 64/Pdt.G.S/2022/PN.Btg
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56442/ijble.v6i2.1170Keywords:
to Sell, Executorial Guarantee, DefaultAbstract
The power of attorney to sell is frequently employed as an alternative form of security in debt agreements outside of formal collateral mechanisms. Nonetheless, in practical application, such powers of attorney are often misused and treated as executorial guarantees, leading to legal complications when execution is attempted. This study seeks to assess the legal validity of a power of attorney to sell when used as an executorial guarantee in cases of default, and to evaluate the legal reasoning employed by the judges of the Batang District Court in Decision Number 64/Pdt.G.S/2022/PN.Btg. A normative juridical method was utilized, incorporating a statutory and case-based approach. Data were collected through literature reviews and judicial decision analyses and were examined using qualitative methods. The findings demonstrate that a power of attorney to sell cannot be equated with executorial collateral instruments such as mortgage or fiduciary security, as this contravenes the foundational principles of collateral law in Indonesia. The Batang District Court adjudicated that the said power of attorney lacked executorial force and thus required a civil lawsuit mechanism to execute the sale of the collateral. This judgment aligns with the principles of legal prudence and debtor protection, preventing potential abuse of legal authority. Accordingly, the use of a power of attorney to sell must be contextualized within its proper legal function and should not be construed as a substitute for executorial guarantees.
References
Adawiyah, Rodiatun, et al. (2023). Analisis Yuridis Tentang Pembuktian Kebenaran Dasar Terhadap Penguasaan Tanah. Jurnal Darma Agung, 31(3), 103–111.
Abdulkadir Muhammad. (1992). Hukum Perikatan. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Abdulkadir Muhammad. (2004). Hukum dan Penelitian Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya.
Ahmadi Miru. (2007). Hukum Kontrak Perancangan Kontrak. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Ahmadi Miru & Sakka Pati. (2012). Hukum Perikatan: Penjelasan dan Makna Pasal 1233 BW sampai 1456 BW. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Budiono, Herlien. (2010). Ajaran Umum Hukum Perjanjian dan Penerapannya di Bidang Kenotariatan. Bandung: Citra Aditya Abadi.
Djaja S. Meliala. (1982). Pemberian Kuasa Menurut Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Bandung: Tarsito.
Heriyanti. (2016). Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Notaris yang Terindikasi Tindak Pidana Pembuatan Akta Otentik. Yustisia, 5, 26.
Herlien Budiono. (2008). Asas Keseimbangan Bagi Hukum Perjanjian Indonesia. Jakarta: Citra Aditya.
Herowati Poesoko. (2007). Parate Executie Obyek Hak Tanggungan. Yogyakarta: Laksbang Pressindo.
HS., Salim. (2005). Perkembangan Hukum Jaminan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
H. Salim. (2004). Hukum Jaminan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Isnainul, O. K. (2018). Analisa Hukum Eksistensi Jaminan Fidusia Pada Perjanjian Pembiayaan (Finance) Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 42 Tahun 1999 Tentang Jaminan Fidusia. Kalam Keadilan, 6(1).
Lubis, Ikhsan. (2018). Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Direksi yang Diberhentikan tanpa melalui Rapat Umum Pemegang Saham (Studi pada PT. Sumber Andalan Mandiri (Sam)). UNES Law Review, 1(2), 172–183.
Malohing. (2018). Kedudukan Perjanjian Baku Kaitannya dengan Asas Kebebasan Berkontrak. Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sam Ratulangi.
Mariam Darus Badrulzaman. (1994). Aneka Hukum Bisnis. Bandung: Alumni.
Mukti Fajar & Yulianto. (2017). Dualisme Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
Noor, Tajuddin, & Suhaila Zulkifli. (2021). Wanprestasi yang dilakukan oleh pengelola (Bandar) pada perjanjian arisan online (Studi Putusan Nomor 99/Pdt. G. 2017/PN. Bjm). Jurnal Hukum Al-Hikmah: Media Komunikasi dan Informasi Hukum dan Masyarakat, 2(3), 543–556.
Pakpahan, Elvira Fitriyani, et al. (2020). Peran dan Kewenangan Profesi Penunjang Pasar Modal (Notaris) dalam Menghadapi Era Globalisasi. JCH (Jurnal Cendekia Hukum), 5(2), 323–332.
Pakpahan, Marlina Elisabeth, Suhaila Zulkifli, & Atika Sunarto. (2022). Perlindungan Hukum Pemberian Kredit Secara Digitalisasi Kepada Debitur Masa Perkembangan Financial Technology (Fintech). Jurnal RECTUM: Tinjauan Yuridis Penanganan Tindak Pidana, 5(1), 120–137.
Peter Mahmud Marzuki. (2005). Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Prenada Media Grup.
Prasetyo, Muhammad Arif, et al. (2024). Analisis Yuridis Putusan Nomor 811 K/Pdt. Sus-Hki/2021 Tentang Sengketa Merek Yang Memiliki Persamaan Pada Pokoknya. Unram Law Review, 8(1).
R. Setiawan. (1979). Pokok-pokok Hukum Perikatan. Bandung: Bina Cipta.
R. Subekti. (1963). Hukum Perjanjian. Jakarta: PT. Intermasa.
R. Wiryono Prododikoro. (1987). Asas-asas Hukum Perjanjian. Bandung: Sumur.
Soerjono Soekanto. (1986). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: Universitas Indonesia Press.
Syifa Septiariani. (2021). Tanah Sebagai Jaminan Hutang Berdasarkan Surat Kuasa Menjual Studi Putusan-Putusan Pengadilan. Indonesian Notary, 3.
Tanjaya, Willy, et al. (2023). Tinjauan Yuridis Perbuatan Melawan Hukum atas Suatu Perjanjian Kredit dengan Jaminan Suatu Kepemilikan Tanah yang Belum Terpisah dari Sertifikat Induk Tanah (Studi Putusan Nomor 388 Pk/Pdt/2020). JPPI (Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan Indonesia), 9(2), 1048–1056.
Tommy Leonard. (2018). Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Pembeli Tanah Bersertifikat Ganda dengan Cara Iktikad Baik dengan Kepastian Hukum. Assets: Jurnal UNPRIMDN, 5(2), 10.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
