Abstrak :
This research was motivated by the problem that the Defendant as the
debtor did not carry out the payment obligations in the loan agreement so that
the plaintiff as the creditor filed a lawsuit on the basis of default. The purpose of
this study is to analyze the debtor's responsibility for her debt and to analyze the
judge's legal considerations in case Number 7/Pdt.G.S/2021/PN Wtp.The method
used in this research is normative juridical with deskriptif analitis
specifications.The data comes from secondary data consisting of primary,
secondary, and tertiary. The method of data collection was carried out by means
of an literature study, with method of analysis using qualitative normatif
methods.
Based on the results of the analysis, it can be concluded that first, the
debtor's responsibility for her debt is to provide all of his property as a means of
repayment if the debtor defaults, this is in accordance with the provisions of
Article 1131 of the Civil Code, in order to protect the interests of the creditor in
fulfilling the responsibility of the debtor, In order to implement the provisions of
Article 1131 of the Civil Code, it can be done by demanding collateral
confiscation when making a lawsuit to court.. Second, that in the judge's
consideration regarding default, compensation, and dwangson, namely it does
not mention what regulatory provisions are used in deciding cases, consideration
of confiscation of guarantees is correct.
Keywords: Loan Agreement, Default, Compensation.
|
