Email this article 
PEMBUKTIAN PERJANJIAN LISAN DALAM SENGKETA HUTANG PIUTANG: STUDI PUTUSAN PN BALIKPAPAN NO. 146/PDT.G/2021
Abstract
Oral agreements are still commonly used in civil law practice, particularly in legal relationships based on mutual trust. This study examines the evidentiary strength of oral debt agreements through an analysis of Decision Number 146/Pdt.G/2021/PN BPP. The research employs a normative juridical method using statutory, case, and conceptual approaches. Research data were obtained through library research on primary legal materials, including the Indonesian Civil Code and relevant court decisions, as well as secondary legal materials in the form of books and scholarly journal articles. The findings indicate that oral agreements are legally recognized as long as they fulfill the validity requirements of contracts as stipulated in Article 1320 of the Indonesian Civil Code. In the case examined, the Panel of Judges established the existence of a legal relationship between the creditor and the debtor based on evidence such as fund transfer records, correspondence, and witness testimony, thereby confirming that the oral agreement possessed sufficient evidentiary value. However, the request for the seizure of shares as security was rejected because it conflicted with Supreme Court guidelines and involved public interests in the electricity sector. This study has both theoretical and practical significance, as it clarifies the legal standing of oral agreements in civil evidentiary law and provides guidance for judges and litigants in assessing evidence in debt-related disputes. Nevertheless, the study recommends that agreements be documented in written form to ensure legal certainty and facilitate proof in judicial proceedings.
Keywords: oral agreement; evidence; debt; breach of contract
Full Text:
PDF (Bahasa Indonesia)References
Buku
Az, L. S. Aspek Hukum Perjanjian: Kajian Komprehensif Teori dan Perkembangannya. Yogyakarta: Penebar Media Pustaka, 2019.
Setiawan, I. K. Hukum Perikatan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2015.
Setiawan, R. Pokok-Pokok Hukum Perikatan. Bandung: Bina Cipta, 2007.
Sriwidodo, J., and Kristiawanto. Memahami Hukum Perikatan. Yogyakarta: Kepel Press, 2021.
Subekti, R. Hukum Perjanjian. Jakarta: PT Intermasa, 2022
Peraturan Perundang – undangan
Indonesia. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata (Burgerlijk Wetboek), Staatsblad 1847 No. 23.
Indonesia. Herzien Inlandsch Reglement (HIR), Staatsblad 1941 No. 44.
Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2009 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2009 Nomor 157, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 5076.
Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 40 Tahun 2007 tentang Perseroan Terbatas. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2007 Nomor 106, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 4756.
Indonesia. Undang-Undang Nomor 11 Tahun 2008 tentang Informasi dan Transaksi Elektronik sebagaimana telah diubah dengan Undang-Undang Nomor 19 Tahun 2016. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2016 Nomor 251, Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 5952.
Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia. Buku II Pedoman Pelaksanaan Tugas dan Administrasi Pengadilan dalam Empat Lingkungan Peradilan. Jakarta: Mahkamah Agung RI, edisi terakhir.
Jurnal
Bukido, R. “Urgensi Perjanjian dalam Lalu Lintas Hubungan Hukum Perdata.” Jurnal Ilmiah Al-Syir’ah 6, no. 1 (2016): 1–15. https://doi.org/10.30984/as.v6i1.242.
Dewi, K., and S. M. Badriyah. “Akibat Hukum Hutang Piutang Menggunakan Perjanjian di Bawah Tangan dalam Hal Terjadi Wanprestasi.” Notarius 11, no. 2 (2018): 283–291. https://doi.org/10.14710/nts.v11i2.31102
Harefa, B. D., and Tuhana. “Kekuatan Hukum Perjanjian Lisan Apabila Terjadi Wanprestasi (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Yogyakarta Nomor 44/Pdt.G/2015/PN.Yyk).” Privat Law 4, no. 2 (2016): 113–122.
Ibrahim, N., P. Eddy, and D. Mulyadi. “Kajian Hukum Pidana terhadap Notaris yang Membuat Perjanjian Pengikatan tanpa Disertai Surat-Surat Bukti Kepemilikan (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 1362/Pid.B/2019/PN Jkt.Utr).” Jurnal Ilmiah Advokasi 9, no. 1 (2021): 31–41. https://doi.org/10.36987/jiad.v9i1.2012
Naafilah, N. “Kedudukan dan Akibat Hukum dari Perjanjian Antar Pemegang Saham (Studi Kasus Putusan Nomor 2035 K/Pdt/2018).” Indonesian Notary 2, no. 3 (2020).
Sinaga, N. A. “Implementasi Hak dan Kewajiban Para Pihak dalam Hukum Perjanjian.” Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara 10, no. 1 (2019): 1–20. https://doi.org/10.35968/jh.v10i1.400
Sriono, S. “Tanggung Jawab Pemberi Fidusia terhadap Benda Jaminan Fidusia dalam Perjanjian Kredit.” Jurnal Ilmiah Advokasi 7, no. 2 (2019): 149–159. https://doi.org/10.36987/jiad.v7i2.1563
Sulati, I. Akibat Hukum Perjanjian Hutang Piutang terhadap Jaminan Hak Milik Pihak Ketiga (Studi Putusan Nomor: 1555 K/Pdt/2013). Undergraduate thesis, Universitas Negeri Jember, 2017.
Tiodor, P. C., M. Tjahyani, and Asmaniar. “Pembuktian Wanprestasi Perjanjian Utang Piutang Secara Lisan.” Krisna Law: Jurnal Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Krisnadwipayana 5, no. 1 (2023): 27–39. https://doi.org/10.37893/krisnalaw.v5i1.208
Putusan Pengadilan
Putusan Nomor 146/Pdt.G/2021/PN BPP Pengadilan Negeri Kota Balikpapan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36987/jiad.v13i4.7574
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
<
