Announcement
Starting on July 4, 2018 the Indonesian Publication Index (IPI) has been acquired by the Ministry of Research Technology and Higher Education (RISTEKDIKTI) called GARUDA Garba Rujukan Digital (http://garuda.ristekdikti.go.id)
For further information email to portalgaruda@gmail.com

Thank you
Logo IPI  
Journal > USU LAW JOURNAL > ANALISIS PERMOHONAN PAILIT TERHADAP PERSEROAN TERBATAS OLEH TENAGA KERJA (STUDI PUTUSAN PENGADILAN DALAM PERKARA ANTARA ROHANI,DKK MELAWAN PT. INDAH PONTJAN)

 

Full Text PDF (390 kb)
USU LAW JOURNAL
Vol 2, No 3 (2014)
ANALISIS PERMOHONAN PAILIT TERHADAP PERSEROAN TERBATAS OLEH TENAGA KERJA (STUDI PUTUSAN PENGADILAN DALAM PERKARA ANTARA ROHANI,DKK MELAWAN PT. INDAH PONTJAN)
Pasaribu, Manambus ( Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara)
Nasution, Bismar ( Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara)
Sunarmi, Sunarmi ( Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara)
Siregar, Mahmul ( Program Studi Magister Ilmu Hukum Fakultas Hukum Universitas Sumatera Utara)
Article Info   ABSTRACT
Published date:
05 Jan 2015
 
ABSTRACT The result of this research show that Legally binding verdict of  Industrial Dispute Settlement Court penalized employers to pay workers basic rights / labor is debt in a broad sense. Legally binding verdict of  Industrial Dispute Settlement Court but remains unimplemented can be submitted as the basis of request for bankruptcy and it  is not a premature request as well as does not violate nebis in idem. Legal consideration of judges was appropriate based on the legal facts, definition of debt, the maturity of debt, the presence of two or more creditors and the implementation of simple evidentiary principle. Meanwhile, Supreme Court both in Cassation and the Reconsideration did not refer to the definition of debt in a broader sense, the debt has matured, the presence of two or more creditors and implementation of a simple evidence. Judges of the Supreme Court both in Cassation and Reconsideration was very subjective, tends to formality matters, as well as was not substantive  in making of verdict.
Copyrights © 2015