Publication Search

The Cash on Delivery (COD) system is one of the payment methods frequently used in online buying and selling transactions, where consumers pay for ordered products upon receipt of the goods. Although it provides convenience, this system often causes problems, especially related to transaction cancellations by consumers after the delivery process has been carried out by business actors. This research examines how the regulation and allocation of risk for goods return in the COD system according to the Civil Code and the forms of legal protection provided to business actors against the risk of goods return in the COD system according to Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection. The method used in this research is normative, supplemented by literature study results such as legislation. The results show that the Civil Code recognizes the concept of risk as a legal consequence related to the possibility of losses on the object of the agreement, and legal protection for business actors is divided into preventive legal protection and repressive legal protection.

In this thesis, the researcher intends to find out the Default in the case of Default in the Sale and Purchase of Land. In this case, the buyer feels disadvantaged by the Seller who has committed an act in the case of default. This study uses a Sale and Purchase Agreement between the Seller and the Buyer with the object of Residential Land. The seller in this case is in the position of Land Owner. (developer). And the buyer in this case is in the position of buyer in the sale and purchase of the land. This study uses a normative juridical method, namely research using a case approach accompanied by the Law. There are three forms of default, namely carrying out what has been agreed, but not as agreed and carrying out what has been agreed, but late in carrying out something that according to the agreement should not be carried out. So in the case of the case entering into one form of default, namely carrying out what has been agreed but not as agreed. The occurrence of a non-compliance with the agreement between the seller and the buyer, namely in the land sale and purchase agreement, in which the initial agreement stated the land area was 20,000M2. If the certificate is broken, the land area exceeds what was agreed upon, the buyer is obliged to pay Rp. 5,000,000 to the buyer.

Electronic commerce (e-commerce) has become a dominant trend in modern buying and selling transactions, offering easy access and efficiency. Marketplaces like Shopee act as intermediaries between merchants and buyers, providing fast, secure, and integrated transaction facilities. However, behind this convenience, significant legal issues arise, particularly regarding unilateral transaction cancellations by buyers through the refund feature. In practice, these refund requests are generally approved by the marketplace without thorough verification of the validity of the cancellation reason or the existence of the goods already shipped by the merchant. This study aims to analyze the legality of unilateral cancellations by buyers from the perspective of Indonesian civil law, with reference to the provisions of the Civil Code (KUHPerdata) and the concept of electronic contracts as stipulated in the Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE). The study uses a normative juridical approach by examining laws and regulations, legal literature, and analyzing two case studies involving merchants BZS and HK. The results indicate that unilateral cancellations by buyers without returning the goods constitute a form of breach of contract. This action not only violates the electronic contractual agreement established during the transaction but also causes financial and reputational harm to merchants. This phenomenon indicates weak legal protection for business actors in the e-commerce ecosystem, particularly regarding the bargaining power between sellers, buyers, and marketplace platforms. Therefore, strengthening fair and transparent digital dispute resolution mechanisms is necessary, including preventive legal protection to prevent losses and repressive protection to provide redress for injured parties. This step is crucial for realizing a healthy, balanced, and equitable digital trade ecosystem for all parties involved.

People's Business Credit (KUR) is a financing program distributed by the government through banking institutions, including Bank Rakyat Indonesia (BRI), to support Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) and cooperatives. In its implementation, KUR credit is not free from various problems, one of which is non-performing loans. This study aims to determine the factors causing non-performing loans and efforts to resolve them in KUR loans at Bank BRI Karanganyar Branch, Tasikmadu Unit. The method used in this study is qualitative research, with data sources derived from primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. Data collection techniques were conducted through direct interviews with relevant parties. The results show that the main causes of non-performing loans are divided into two major factors. First, external factors, namely those originating from the customer. This problem is generally related to the customer's inability to pay installments due to business failure. Second, internal factors, such as the failure of creditworthiness analysis by bank officers, resulting in prospective debtors who are actually unworthy actually receiving loans. In resolving non-performing loans, BRI Bank's Karanganyar Branch, Tasikmadu Unit, applies five main methods: (1) changing the loan interest rate, (2) reducing fines or penalties, (3) reducing the outstanding principal, (4) extending the loan term, and (5) selling collateral. Additionally, there are also settlement methods that involve a combination of these five methods, depending on the debtor's circumstances and the agreement between the two parties.

Street Children are one of the complex social problems in big cities in Indonesia The Kupang City Government has issued a policy through Kupang City Regional Regulation No. 8 of 2013 which regulates the Handling and Empowerment of Street Children, Vagrants, and Beggars in its area. The Social Service has not been fully effective in supporting social welfare. This can be seen from the problem of Street Children in Kupang City, where there are still many underage children who are often seen wandering the streets. They are involved in various activities, such as selling newspapers, snacks, and even begging to anyone who stops. The type of research used in this study uses empirical legal research where this research method functions to see the law in a real sense and examine how the law works in the community. The results of the research and discussion show that (1) the results of the research conducted at the Kupang City Social Service are related to the Duties and Responsibilities of the Social Service in providing social welfare services for street children. This refers to the Kupang City Regional Regulation Number 8 of 2013 concerning the Handling and Empowerment of Street Children. As the implementer, the Social Service has the authority to provide guidance and control to street children. In addition, the implementing agents involved also carry out their duties and functions in accordance with their roles as regional apparatus, ensuring that the coaching process runs in accordance with the responsibilities carried out. (2) Factors that hinder the city social services in providing services in the field of social welfare for street children in Kupang City include internal factors.  

The problem of the legality of the agreement of the deed of debt and credit agreement into buying and selling requires legal certainty so that no one is harmed. Normative legal certainty is when a regulation is made and promulgated with certainty because it regulates clearly and logically. Clear in the sense that it does not cause doubt (multi-interpretation) and logical in the sense that it becomes a system of norms with other norms so that it does not clash or cause norm conflicts. Norm conflict arising from rule uncertainty can take the form of norm contestation, norm reduction or norm distortion. This research approach is descriptive analytical which describes legal events that occur as they are and conveys these conditions according to theory and legislation. The research method used in the research is empirical juridical which analyzes the Bandung District Court Decision Number: 162/PDT.G/2021/PN.BDG regarding the Legality of the Deed of Sale and Purchase Agreement as Collateral for Debt and Credit Due to Legal Defects. The results of this study show that; AJB, which should be a proof of transfer of land rights in a real sale and purchase transaction, in this case is used to guarantee debt repayment. This is a deviation from the function of the AJB, which is legally unjustified because it contradicts the principle of halal causa (Articles 1335 and 1337 of the Civil Code). Therefore, the AJB made does not meet the elements of a valid causa, and therefore can be canceled or even null and void.

Buying and selling is a legal relationship that has rights and obligations between the parties, including house buying and selling transactions through a House Sale and Purchase Agreement (PPJB) and Sale and Purchase Deed (AJB) carried out in front of a notary. The study has a goal, namely to find out and analyze the validity of buying and selling transactions of houses in the perspective of the Civil Code. Juridical-normatic is used as a research method whose approach is in the form of laws and literature studies. The result of this study is a house sale and purchase agreement, namely a special agreement whose rules are contained in Article 1457 of the Civil Code. The validity of this sale and purchase refers to Article 1320 of the Civil Code concerning the legal terms of the agreement. Buying and selling houses is carried out through various stages, namely the preparation of PPJB, payment of seller and buyer taxes and the process of transferring the name in AJB before a notary. Legitimacy can occur if the making of this agreement is not because there is a forced withdrawal from any party,, does not violate the provisions of laws and regalutions, decency and the public interest.