scholarly journals Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase oleh Pengadilan dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014

2018 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tri Ariprabowo ◽  
R. Nazriyah
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Binding Force ◽  
Arbitral Award ◽  
Legal Uncertainty ◽  
Mutual Agreement ◽  
Arbitration Award

Kewenangan pengadilan dalam proses penyelesaian sengketa melalui arbitrase antara lain, putusan arbitrase harus didaftarkan di Pengadilan Negeri. Menurut Mahkamah, Penjelasan Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa (UU AAPS) menambah norma baru dan menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum. Pasal 70 UU AAPS tersebut sudah cukup jelas (expressis verbis), yang justru menimbulkan multi tafsir adalah penjelasan pasal tersebut sehingga menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum yang adil. Mahkamah menyatakan bahwa, Penjelasan Pasal 70 UU AAPS bertentangan dengan Pasal 28 ayat (1) UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan mengikat. Dengan adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014, bagi para pihak yang tidak puas terhadap putusan arbitrase mempunyai peluang yang lebar untuk dapat pengajukan permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase tanpa harus dibuktikan terlebih dahulu di Pengadilan. Hak para pihak untuk mengajukan permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase sebagaimana diatur dalam Pasal 70 UU AAPS dapat dikesampingkan berdasarkan kesepakatan bersama para pihak. Dengan demikian putusan arbitrase yang merupakan mahkota seorang Arbiter tidak mudah “tercabik” oleh suatu kepentingan. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 15/PUU-XII/2014 harus diapresiasi dan secepatnya direspon oleh pembentuk undang-undang untuk merevisi UU No. 30 Tahun 1999 terkait dengan mekanisme pembatalan putusan arbitrase setelah adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi tersebut.The jurisdiction of the court in the process of resolving disputes through arbitration among other arbitral rulings shall be registered in the district court. According to the Court, the Explanation of Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Act AAPS) adds new norms and creates legal uncertainty. Article 70 of the AAPS Act is quite clear (expressis verbis), the thing which leads to multiple interpretations is an explanation of the article so that this rises fair legal uncertainty. It stated that, Explanation of Article 70 of AAPS Law is contrary to Article 28 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution and has no binding force. By the decision of the Constitutional CourtNumber 15/PUUXII/2014, for the parties which are not satisfied with the arbitration decision, this provides wide opportunities to pursue cancellation request of arbitral decision without having been proofed in court. The rights of the parties to apply for the cancellation of an arbitral award under Article 70 of AAPS Law may be waived by mutual agreement of the parties. Thus the arbitration award which is the crown of an arbitrator does not easily "torn apart" by an interest.Constitutional Court decision should be appreciated and quickly responded to by the legislators to revise Law No. 30, 1999 related to the cancellation mechanism arbitration decision after the decision of the Constitutional Court.

scholarly journals Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Nasional Oleh Pengadilan Negeri

2014 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Muhammad Andriansyah
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
The South ◽  
Arbitration Award

Abstract: The National Arbitration Award Cancellation By Court. Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution, stating that the award can only be canceled if it is thought to contain elements of letter/false documents, or documents found hidden by the other party, or a decision that is taken from the results of deceit trick performed by one of the parties in the dispute. To prove whether or not one of the above three elements must be proved by a court decision. If the District Court stated that the reasons are evident, then the arbitration award may be canceled, if not proven, the Court should reject the application for cancellation of the arbitration decision. But in practice, there is still the District Court received the request for cancellation of arbitration outside the context of Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 as stated in the South Jakarta District Court. Abstrak: Pembatalan Putusan Arbitrase Nasional Oleh Pengadilan Negeri. Pasal 70 Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 1999 Tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa, menyatakan bahwa putusan arbitrase hanya dapat dibatalkan jika diduga mengandung unsur-unsur surat/dokumen palsu, atau ditemukan dokumen yang disembunyikan oleh pihak lawan, atau putusan yang diambil dari hasil tipu muslihat yang dilakukan oleh salah satu pihak dalam pemeriksaan sengketa. Untuk membuktikan ada atau tidaknya salah satu dari tiga unsur diatas harus dibuktikan dengan putusan pengadilan. Apabila Pengadilan Negeri menyatakan bahwa alasan-alasan tersebut terbukti, maka putusan arbitrase dapat dibatalkan, apabila tidak terbukti, maka Pengadilan Negeri harus menolak permohonan pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Akan tetapi dalam pelaksanaannya, Pengadilan Negeri masih ada yang menerima permohonan pembatalan arbitrase di luar konteks pasal 70 Undang-Undang No 30 Tahun 1999 sebagaimana tertuang dalam putusan Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Selatan. DOI: 10.15408/jch.v1i2.1472

ASAS KEPASTIAN HUKUM DAN ASAS KEBEBASAN BERKONTRAK SEBAGAI PERTIMBANGAN UTAMA DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PERBANKAN SYARIAH (Kajian Yuridis Putusan MK Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012)

2018 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 69
Author(s):  
Edi Hudiata
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Contract Law ◽  
Islamic Banking ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Ideal Norm ◽  
Freedom Of Contract ◽  
Binding Force

Since the verdict of the Constitutional Court (MK) Number 93/PUU-X/2012 pronounced on Thursday, August 29, 2013, concerning the judicial review of Law No. 21 of 2008 on Islamic Banking, it is no longer dualism dispute resolution. The verdict as well as strengthen the jurisdiction of Religious Court to resolve Islamic banking disputes. In consideration of the judges, judges agreed stating that Article 55 paragraph (2) and (3) of Law No. 21 of 2008 which is an ideal norm, contains no constitutional problems. The problem is the explanation of the constitutional article 55 paragraph (2) of the Act. The emergence of the Constitutional Court verdict No. 93/PUU-X/2012 which substantially states that the explanation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law No. 21 of 2008 does not have binding force, basically does not violate the principle of freedom of contract which is common in contract law. The parties are allowed to make a dispute resolution agreement out of religious court based on provisions as Act No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Keywords: dispute resolution, legal certainty and the principle of freedom of contract

KEWENANGAN PENGADILAN DALAM PEMBATALAN PUTUSAN ARBITRASE INTERNASIONAL DI INDONESIA

2017 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Yuanita Permatasari ◽  
Pranoto ,
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
District Court ◽  
International Arbitration ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Recognition And Enforcement ◽  
Materials Used ◽  
Legal Substances ◽  
Arbitration Award

<p>Abstract<br />This article aims to find out the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration award in Indonesia, as well as the authority of the courts in annulment the international arbitration award in Indonesia. This research is a normative and prescriptive legal research. The type and source of materials used is the source of secondary legal material. The legal substances used in this study are of two kinds, namely primary legal materials and secondary legal materials. The method of collecting legal materials in this study is obtained through assessment of existing libraries, books, law journals, and court awards. Based on the result of the discussion, it can be concluded: Firstly, the international arbitration award can be recognized and enforced if the award is registered and obtain an execution from the Central Jakarta District Court. International arbitration rulings can only be recognized and enforced if they full fil the conditions in Article 66 of Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution law. Second, the international arbitration award is final and binding. However, in reality many international arbitration awards are requested for annulment to the Court in Indonesia.</p><p>Keywords: international arbitration award, annulment of international arbitration award, enforcement of international arbitration award</p><p>Abstrak<br />Artikel ini bertujuan untuk mengetahui pengakuan dan pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia, serta kewenangan pengadilan dalam membatalkan putusan arbitrase internasional di Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif bersifat preskriptif. Pendekatan yang digunakan penulis adalah pendekatan kasus. Sumber bahan hukum yang digunakan adalah bahan hukum primer dan bahan hukum sekunder, dengan teknik analisis bahan hukum menggunakan metode silogisme dan interpretasi dengan menggunakan pola berpikir deduktif. Berdasarkan hasil pembahasan dapat disimpulkan: Pertama, agar putusan arbitrase internasional dapat diakui dan dilaksanakan, maka putusan tersebut harus terlebih dahulu didaftarkan dan memperoleh exequatur dari Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat. Putusan arbitrase internasional hanya dapat diakui dan dilaksanakan apabila memenuhi syarat-syarat yang ditentukan dalam Pasal 66 Undang-Undang Nomor. 30 Tahun 1999 tentang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa. Kedua, putusan arbitrase internasional bersifat final and binding. Sehingga, putusan arbitrase internasional tidak dapat diajukan upaya pembatalan putusan arbitrase. Namun, dalam realitanya banyak putusan arbitrase internasional yang dimintakan pembatalannya kepada Pengadilan di Indonesia.</p><p>Kata Kunci: putusan arbitrase internasional, pembatalan putusan arbitrase internasional, pelaksanaan putusan arbitrase internasional</p>

scholarly journals IMPLIKASI HUKUM TERHADAP AKAD YANG MEMUAT KLAUSUL PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PERBANKAN SYARIAH MELALUI PENGADILAN NEGERI PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 93/PUU-X/2012

SASI ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 286
Author(s):  
Rahman Hasima
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Research Method ◽  
The State ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Islamic Banking ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Legal Implications ◽  
Descriptive Qualitative

This research aims to determine the legal implications of the agreement on which the sharia banking dispute resolution clause was submitted through the state court's post-decision of the Constitutional Court No. 93/PUU-X/2012. The research method used normative research with a statute approach and a conceptual approach and analyzed descriptive qualitative. The results of the study show that the contract that contains the clause for the settlement of Islamic banking disputes through the District Court after the Constitutional Court decision has the implication of being null and void because it contradicts the contract or causa that is lawful, so that the parties make an addendum so that no future disputes occur.

scholarly journals UPAYA HUKUM BAGI PIHAK YANG MENOLAK PUTUSAN ARBITRASE AD-HOC

Solusi ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 247-257
Author(s):  
Farrah Rizky Amelia Mirza
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Ad Hoc ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Requirements ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Arbitration Award

Dispute resolution through alternative channels is arbitration known since the conflict with Law Number 30 of 1999 concerning Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution. Arbitration is a method of civil approval outside the general court made based on an arbitration agreement made by the parties to the dispute. Ad-hoc arbitration is an arbitration specifically designed to resolve or reduce certain disputes, or in other words, ad-hoc arbitration is incidental. Arbitration decisions can be returned if it is agreed to contain no-no in Article 70 letter (a), (b), (c) Law Number 30 Year 1999. Can be proven by one of the disadvantaged parties, it can be asked. Cancellation to the Chair of the District Court and being received by the Chair of the Supreme Court requesting an examination of the cancellation of the arbitration award at the first and last level. The Judicial Review (PK) can also be used in arbitration disputes that have permanent legal requirements, asking PK to be asked to the Supreme Court, which is submitted requesting PK to approve the arbitration decision, will be the decision of the Chair of the District Court to support the cancellation of the award.

scholarly journals Pelaksanaan Klausul Penyelesaian Sengketa Dalam Akad Perbankan Syariah Pasca Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Pada Bank Syariah Mandiri KCP Indramayu

Jurnal Akta ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 147
Author(s):  
Mahpudin Mahpudin ◽  
Akhmad Khisni
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Dispute Settlement ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Choice Of Law ◽  
Legal Uncertainty ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Dispute Resolution Mechanism

ABSTRAKPutusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Tanggal 29 Agustus 2013 telah membatalkan Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 21 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perbankan Syariah adalah soal kepastian hukum. Hal ini dikarenakan dalam Penjelasan pasal 55 ayat (2) menimbulkan ketidakpastian hukum antara pilihan hukum dalam lingkup peradilan umum dengan pilihan hukum dalam lingkup peradilan agama. Kepastian hukum secara normatif adalah ketika suatu peraturan dibuat dan diundangkan secara pasti karena dapat memberikan pengaturan secara jelas dan logis. Jelas dalam arti tidak menimbulkan keragu-raguan atau multi tafsir, dan logis dalam arti hukum tersebut menjadi suatu sistem norma dengan norma lain sehingga tidak berbenturan atau menimbulkan konflik norma ataupun adanya kekaburan dan kekosongan norma. Asas ini dapat dipergunakan untuk dapat mengatasi persoalan dalam hal konsep mekanisme dan pilihan hukum dalam penyelesaian sengketa perbankan syariah;Pilihan forum penyelesaian sengketa Perbankan Syariah berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia Nomor : 93/PUU-X/2012 Tanggal 29 Agustus 2013 yang membatalkan Penjelasan Pasal 55 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 21 Tahun 2008 Tentang Perbankan Syariah harus dinyatakan secara tegas menyatakan dan menyepakati apakah memilih forum Arbitrase Syariah atau menentukan pilihan forum Pengadilan Agama dalam rumusan klausula Penyelesaian Perselisihan atau Sengketa dalam Akad Perbankan Syariahnya. Artinya memilih atau menentukan salah satu forum mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa syariah yaitu forum BASYARNAS atau Pengadilan Agama, bukan menggabungkan keduanya dalam satu rangkaian rumusan klausula penyelesaian sengketa.Kata kunci : klausul penyelesaian sengketa, akad perbankan syariah, putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi ABSTRACTDecision of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 93 / PUU-X / 2012 dated August 29, 2013 has annulled the Elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 21 Year 2008 concerning Sharia Banking is a matter of legal certainty. This is because in the Elucidation of article 55 paragraph (2) raises legal uncertainty between the choice of law within the scope of general justice with the choice of law within the scope of religious court. Normative legal certainty is when a rule is created and enacted as it can provide clear and logical arrangements. Clearly in the sense that there is no doubt or multi-interpretation, and logical in the sense that the law becomes a system of norms with other norms so as not to clash or cause conflict of norms or the existence of vagueness and void norms. This principle can be used to solve the problem in terms of the concept of mechanism and choice of law in solving the dispute of sharia banking;The choice of dispute resolution forum of Sharia Banking pursuant to Decision of Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 93 / PUU-X / 2012 dated August 29, 2013 which annul the Elucidation of Article 55 paragraph (2) of Law of Republic of Indonesia Number 21 Year 2008 concerning Sharia Banking must be stated expressly declare and agree on whether to vote for a Shari'ah Arbitration Forum or to determine the choice of Religious Court forums in the formulation of a Clause or Dispute Settlement clause in its Sharia Banking Agreement. It means choosing or determining one of the forums of dispute resolution mechanism of sharia namely BASYARNAS or Religious Court, not merging the two in a series of dispute settlement clause formulas.Keywords: clause of dispute settlement, syariah banking contract, Constitutional Court decision

scholarly journals Implikasi Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 93/PUU-X/2012 Bagi Penyelesaian Sengketa Bisnis dan Keuangan Syariah

2016 ◽  
Vol 12 (4) ◽  
pp. 691
Author(s):  
Khotibul Umam
Keyword(s):  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Judicial Review ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Constitutional Court ◽  
Legal Certainty ◽  
Strong Statement ◽  
Potential Impact ◽  
Legal Uncertainty

The Decision of Constitutional Court No. 93/PUU-X/2012 regarding Judicial Review of Law No. 21/2008 regarding Sharia Banking with the Indonesian Constitution 1945 was giving a strong statement that the explanation of this a quolawhas a potential impact to arise legal uncertainty and legal confuse, meanwhile Article 55 in the whole still conform with the Constitution. The juridical implication from this a quodecision, i.e. The tribunal of District Court have to state if they have no authority to settle the case in sharia banking, althought it has been agreed in an akad (agreement). It has been stressed with the nature of Constitutional Court Decision “final and binding” and also bind all of citizens (erga omnes). Then, the opportunity to implement of its decision to sharia businees and financial institutions exist based on analogy, esp argumentum a fortiory. The expectation, it will give legal certainty in the context of Judicial that has an authority to settle the potential dispute between customer and sharia business and financial institutions.

scholarly journals MEKANISME PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PELANGGARAN HAK CIPTA MELALUI ARBITRASE

Acta Comitas ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 161
Author(s):  
I Made Dwi Dimas Mahendrayana
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Final Stage ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Copyright Infringement ◽  
District Court ◽  
Copyright Holder ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
Copyright Violation ◽  
Initial Stage ◽  
Arbitration Award

A copyright violation occurs when someone makes an announcement or reproduction of a work without permission from the creator or copyright holder. If this happens, the creator or copyright holder can bring his dispute to be resolved through alternative dispute resolution or arbitration. However, the Law No. 28 of 2014 concerning Copyright does not regulate the mechanism for resolving copyright disputes through arbitration. The purpose of this study is to determine the mechanism for resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration and the mechanism for canceling decisions on resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration. This research uses normative legal research. From the results of the study, the initial stage of the mechanism of resolving disputes over copyright infringement through arbitration begins with the submission of the request for arbitration. Furthermore, the applicant makes a claim letter and proceed with the selection and appointment of the arbitrator. Then the arbitration examination. The final stage of the trial in arbitration is the submission of the award to the parties, and continued with the implementation of the arbitration award. An arbitration award can be requested to be canceled. The mechanism for cancellation of a national arbitration award begins by registering an arbitration award for cancellation at the Registrar's Office of the District Court. Then the court will examine the facts about whether or not the reasons stated by the applicant to cancel the arbitration award. If no, the application is rejected, but if the facts are found, the court is only authorized to cancel part of the arbitration award.

PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KOMPETENSI ABSOLUT ANTARA ARBITRASE DAN PENGADILAN

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 115
Author(s):  
Cut Memi
Keyword(s):  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Research Methods ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
The Other ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Research ◽  
National Board ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
Case Based

ABSTRAKPasal 3 Undang-Undang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa menyatakan bahwa pengadilan negeri tidak berwenang untuk mengadili sengketa para pihak yang telah terikat dengan perjanjian arbitrase, akan tetapi sampai saat ini masih saja terdapat pertentangan kompetensi absolut antara arbitrase dan pengadilan. Sebagai contoh dan sekaligus fokus dalam pembahasan tulisan ini adalah dalam hal penanganan perkara antara PT B melawan PT CTPI. Metode yang digunakan dalam kajian ini adalah metode penelitian hukum normatif. Berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 10/PDT.G/2010/PN.JKT.PST, perkara ini telah diputus oleh pengadilan dengan menyatakan bahwa Pengadilan Negeri Jakarta Pusat berwenang mengadili perkara bahkan putusan ini kemudian dikuatkan sampai tingkat peninjauan kembali di Mahkamah Agung berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 238 PK/PDT/2014. Sementara di pihak lain perkara ini juga diputus oleh Badan Arbitrase Nasional Indonesia (BANI) dengan Putusan Nomor 547/XI/ARB-BANI/2013 yang menyatakan bahwa BANI berwenang dalam mengadili perkara yang sama. Pertentangan kompetensi absolut antara dua lembaga tersebut tentu perlu diselesaikan dengan menentukan lembaga mana yang sebenarnya berwenang dalam menangani perkara bersangkutan. Berdasarkan kajian yang dilakukan dalam tulisan ini, diperoleh jawaban bahwa yang berwenang dalam mengadili perkara PT B melawan PT CTPI adalah BANI bukan pengadilan.Kata kunci: kompetensi absolut, arbitrase, pengadilan. ABSTRACTArticle 3 of Law on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution states that the district court is unlawful to decide dispute of parties bound by arbitration agreements, but to date, such absolute competence dispute between arbitration tribunal and court of law is still occurring. As an example, as well as the focus of discussion in this analysis is the case between PT B against PT CTPI. This study uses normative legal research methods. Based on Court Decision Number 10/PDT.G/2010/PN.JKT.PST, it was decided that the District Court of Central Jakarta has the authority to adjudicate the case. In fact, this decision is subsequently filed for an extraordinary request for review in the Supreme Court based on Court Decision Number 238 PK/PDT/2014. On the other hand, the case is also arbitrated by Indonesia National Board of Arbitration (BANI) by Arbitral Award Number 547/XI/ARB-BANI/2013 confirming its authority to adjudicate the same case. The absolute competence dispute between the two parties need to be resolved by determining which party is actually authorized in settling the case. Based on the analysis in this paper, it can be concluded that the case between PT B against PT CTPI is the authority of arbitration tribunal (BANI) to arbitrate, not court of law. Keywords: absolute competence, arbitration tribunal, court of law.

scholarly journals INTERPRETASI MAHKAMAH AGUNG TERHADAP ALASAN PEMBATALAN PUTUSAN ARBITRASE DALAM PASAL 70 UU NO. 30/1999

Yuridika ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ilhami Ginang Pratidina
Keyword(s):  
Supreme Court ◽  
Dispute Resolution ◽  
Alternative Dispute Resolution ◽  
Court Decision ◽  
Conceptual Approach ◽  
Universal Principles ◽  
The Supreme Court ◽  
The Law ◽  
Arbitration Award

Article 70 of Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Law No. 30/1999) establish three basic reasons limitedly as cancellation of the arbitration decision. In the case of PT.Comarindo Express Tama Tour against Yemen Airways, the Supreme Court considers the court decision based on the elucidation and cancels the arbitration award on the grounds out of Article 70 of Law No. 30/1999. This paper seeks to elaborate on the interpretation of the Supreme Court against the cancellation reason arbitration award in terms of universal principles in the practice of modern arbitration and the legislation laws to use the statute approach, conceptual approach and case approach and suggests some court decision both Indonesian court and foreign court. The Supreme Court in this case misapplied the law due to the fact that consideration of the elucidation is in contrast to the universal principles in the practice of arbitration.Keywords: arbitration, the reason for the cancellation decision.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document