Juridical Review of the Transfer of Mortgage Rights Without Creditor Consent from the Perspective of the Principles of Balance and Good Faith

Rosa Benedicta Sitompul; Jur Udin Silalahi

doi:10.47268/tatohi.v6i3.3860

Authors

Rosa Benedicta Sitompul Pelita Harapan University , Indonesia
Jur Udin Silalahi Pelita Harapan University , Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47268/tatohi.v6i3.3860

Keywords:

Dependent Rights, Creditor Approval, Good Faith, Principle of Balance

Abstract

Introduction: This study is motivated by the practice of transferring mortgage objects without the consent of creditors, which has the potential to create legal issues, particularly regarding the protection of creditors and third parties.

Purposes of the Research: The purpose of this study is to analyze the legal implications of transferring mortgage objects without creditor consent and to examine the responsibility of notaries in drafting Sale and Purchase Binding Agreements and Powers of Attorney to Sell from the perspective of the principles of balance and good faith.

Methods of the Research: This research employs a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The legal materials consist of primary legal materials in the form of laws and regulations related to mortgage rights, secondary legal materials such as books and scholarly journals, and tertiary legal materials including legal dictionaries. Data collection was conducted through library research, which was then analyzed qualitatively using a descriptive-analytical method to obtain systematic conclusions.

Findings of the Research: The results indicate that the transfer of mortgage objects without creditor consent does not eliminate the security right attached to the object due to the application of the droit de suite principle, thereby ensuring that creditors retain preferential rights and execution authority. Such actions constitute a breach of contract and violate the principles of good faith and balance. Furthermore, notaries are required to act carefully, honestly, and impartially in drafting legal documents. If a notary knows or should have known that the object is still encumbered by a mortgage, administrative, civil, and even criminal liability may arise. Thus, the mortgage law system in Indonesia provides strong legal protection for creditors, while notaries are required to uphold prudence to ensure legal certainty and fairness for all parties.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Citation Metrics

References

Afifah Khairani Siregar and Aminah, “Perlindungan Hukum bagi Debitur atas Pelaksanaan Kuasa Menjual dalam Akta Pengakuan Hutang,” JIHHP: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Humaniora dan Politik 6, no. 2 (2026): 1354–1360. https://doi.org/10.38035/jihhp.v6i2.6656.

Dewi Kurnia Putri, and Amin Purnawan, "Perbedaan Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Lunas Dengan Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Tidak Lunas" Jurnal Akta 4, no. 4 (2017): 623–625. https://jurnal.unissula.ac.id/index.php/akta/article/view/2505.

Dian Rahmania, Arik Hermawan, Maghfiroh, and Mu’ariah. "Hak dan Kewajiban Dalam Jaminan Hipotik: Kajian Dalam Asas Proporsionalitas Dalam Perjanjian Kredit." Socius: Jurnal Penelitian Ilmu-Ilmu Sosial 2, no. 10 (2025)., https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.15387504.

Dimas Nur Arif Putra Suwandi, "Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Bank Pemegang Hak Tanggungan Peringkat Kedua Dalam Eksekusi Objek Hak Tanggungan." Media Juris 1, no. 3 (2018): 420-438. https://doi.org/10.20473/mi.v1i3.10183.

Elyza Z, Yuliana Risna Maengkom, and Diana R W Napitupulu. "Efektifitas Eksekusi Obyek Hak Tanggungan Menurut Hukum Positif" 6, no. 8 (2025): 2188–289. https://ojs.cahayamandalika.com/index.php/jomla/article/view/4687.

Fauzan, Nailah Nur Diana, Rizki Amelia, and A. Latif, "Jenis-Jenis Hak Jaminan Dalam Perspektif Hukum Perdata dan Hukum Islam", Studi Konseptual, 2, no. 9 (2025): 1–9, https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.15178682.

Kornelius Benuf and Muhamad Azhar, “Metodologi Penelitian Hukum sebagai Instrumen Mengurai Permasalahan Hukum Kontemporer,” Gema Keadilan 7, no. 1 (2020): 20–33, https://doi.org/10.14710/gk.2020.7504.

Riana Zakaria, Subekti, Dudik Djaja Sidarta, and Yoyok Ucuk. "Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Bagi Pelaku Tindak Pidana Penganiayaan Di Kota Surabaya: Studi Putusan Nomor 1014/PID. B/2023/PN. SBY." COURT REVIEW: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum 3, no. 06 (2023): 8-14. https://doi.org/10.69957/cr.v3i06.1513.

Rizki Kurniawan and Siti Nurcholifah. “Kewenangan Notaris Non PPAT Dalam Pembuatan Akta Yang Berkaitan Dengan Pertanahan". Jurnal Pro Hukum: Jurnal Penelitian Bidang Hukum Universitas Gresik 10, no. 1 (2021): 53–62, https://doi.org/10.55129/jph.v10i1.1436.

Rossel Ezra Johannes Tuwaidan. "Kewenangan Notaris Menurut Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan Notaris." Lex Privatum 6, no. 6 (2018): 86-93. https://ejournal.unsrat.ac.id/v3/index.php/lexprivatum/article/view/21503.

Ryno Bagas Prahardika, and Endang Sri Kawuryan. "Tanggung Gugat Notaris Atas Kelalaian Dalam Membuat Akta Perjanjian Kredit Bank." Jurnal Transparansi Hukum 1, no. 1 (2018): 37-54. https://ojs.unik-kediri.ac.id/index.php/transparansihukum/article/download/172/122.

Vivi Syafitriyeni, "Hubungan Hukum Akta Perjanjian Pengikatan Jual Beli Dengan Akta Jual Beli Tanah", Jurnal Hukum Inkracht 5, no. 3 (2025): 95-95. https://doi.org/10.37721/inkracht.5.3.95.