Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute

Fransiskus Kandunmas(1email), Rieta Lieke Lontoh(2), Primus Aryesam(3)


(1) Faculty of Law De La Salle Catholic University, Manado, Indonesia
(2) Faculty of Law De La Salle Catholic University, Manado, Indonesia
(3) Faculty of Law De La Salle Catholic University, Manado
email Corresponding Author
CrossMark

Abstract


In 2005, the trial of land grant dispute was held between the Diocese of Amboina as the plaintiff against MR et al. as a defendant in the District Court Tual Southeast Moluccas. This trial was won by the Diocese of Amboina. The defendant then filed an appeal, Cassation and judicial review up to the level of the Supreme Court. Based on the Supreme Court decision no. 166/Pk / year 2010, the panel of judges ruled that the Diocese of Amboina as the legal owner of the land and sentenced the defendant to pay a fine and return the object of dispute without any conditions. Since the issuance of the decision until now, the Diocese of Amboina has not executed the land object, because the Diocese of Amboina has not submitted an application for execution to the District Court in accordance with the provisions of Article 196 HIR due to normative juridical considerations of the church; humanitarian reasons and the urgency of utilizing the object of dispute.. The purpose of this research is to understand the application of Supreme Court decision No. 166/Pk/Pdt / 2010 in dispute over land grant Diocese of Amboina. The author uses normative juridical methods and also through interviews to obtain information as a support in writing this thesis. The result of the research found that decision has permanent force and for the realization of justice and legal certainty for the parties, especially the Diocese of Amboina, the execution action must be carried out immediately in cooperation with the local district court.

Keywords


Execution; Judge’s Ruled; Legal Binding


DOI


10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082

Published


2022-08-31

How To Cite


APA: Kandunmas, F., Lontoh, R.L., & Aryesam, P. (2022). Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute. Batulis Civil Law Review, 3(2), 208-216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082.
IEEE: F. Kandunmas, R.L. Lontoh, and P. Aryesam, "Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute", Batulis Civ. Law Rev., vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 208-216, Aug. 2022. Accessed on: Jul. 23, 2024. [Online]. Available DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082
Harvard: Kandunmas, F., Lontoh, R.L., and Aryesam, P., (2022). "Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute". Batulis Civil Law Review, Volume 3(2), pp. 208-216. [Online]. Available DOI: https://doi.org/10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082 (Accessed on: 23 July 2024)
Chicago: Kandunmas, Fransiskus, Rieta Lieke Lontoh, and Primus Aryesam. "Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute." Batulis Civil Law Review 3, no. 2 (August 26, 2022): 208-216. Accessed July 23, 2024. doi:10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082
Vancouver: Kandunmas F, Lontoh RL, Aryesam P. Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute. Batulis Civ. Law Rev. [Internet]. 2022 Aug 31 [cited 2024 Jul 23];3(2):208-216. Available from: https://doi.org/10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082
MLA 8th: Kandunmas, Fransiskus, Rieta Lieke Lontoh, and Primus Aryesam. "Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute." Batulis Civil Law Review, vol. 3, no. 2, 26 Aug. 2022, pp. 208-216, doi:10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082. Accessed 23 Jul. 2024.
BibTeX:
@article{BALLREV1082,
		author = {Fransiskus Kandunmas and Rieta Lontoh and Primus Aryesam},
		title = {Application of A Judge's Ruled In A Civil Dispute},
		journal = {Batulis Civil Law Review},
		volume = {3},
		number = {2},
		year = {2022},
		keywords = {Execution; Judge’s Ruled; Legal Binding},
		abstract = {In 2005, the trial of land grant dispute was held between the Diocese of Amboina as the plaintiff against MR et al. as a defendant in the District Court Tual Southeast Moluccas. This trial was won by the Diocese of Amboina. The defendant then filed an appeal, Cassation and judicial review up to the level of the Supreme Court. Based on the Supreme Court decision no. 166/Pk / year 2010, the panel of judges ruled that the Diocese of Amboina as the legal owner of the land and sentenced the defendant to pay a fine and return the object of dispute without any conditions. Since the issuance of the decision until now, the Diocese of Amboina has not executed the land object, because the Diocese of Amboina has not submitted an application for execution to the District Court in accordance with the provisions of Article 196 HIR due to normative juridical considerations of the church; humanitarian reasons and the urgency of utilizing the object of dispute.. The purpose of this research is to understand the application of Supreme Court decision No. 166/Pk/Pdt / 2010 in dispute over land grant Diocese of Amboina. The author uses normative juridical methods and also through interviews to obtain information as a support in writing this thesis. The result of the research found that decision has permanent force and for the realization of justice and legal certainty for the parties, especially the Diocese of Amboina, the execution action must be carried out immediately in cooperation with the local district court.},
				issn = {2746-8151},		pages = {208--216}			doi = {10.47268/ballrev.v3i2.1082},
				url = {https://fhukum.unpatti.ac.id/jurnal/ballrev/article/view/1082}
		}
		
RefWorks:

   

Full Text: PDF

Article Metrics

Abstract View grafik : 403 times
PDF icon PDF Download : 393 times



Copyright (c) 2022 Fransiskus Kandunmas, Rieta Lieke Lontoh, Primus Aryesam

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.