Urgensi Penerapan Tes Insolvensi Atas Perusahaan Yang Akan Diputus Pailit

Authors

  • Andriyanto Adhi Nugroho Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
  • Guna Gerhat Sinaga Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
  • Muhammad Fikri Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
  • Azareel Sulistiyanto Jusuf Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
  • Natasya Fhadyah Azzahra Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta
  • Adira Mutiara Jasmine Universitas Pembangunan Nasional “Veteran” Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59581/deposisi.v1i4.1810

Keywords:

Insolvency Test, Bankruptcy Requirements, law

Abstract

In the law embodied in Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, there isn't a requirement stipulating that a debtor must be declared unable (insolvent) to pay their debts through an insolvency test as a condition to determine their bankruptcy status or not. Instead, the debtor's bankruptcy status is established by proving that the debtor has a minimum of 2 (two) creditors, has failed to pay at least 1 (one) due and collectible debt. The absence of insolvency testing as a bankruptcy criterion in Indonesia could lead to companies that are actually capable of fulfilling their obligations being considered bankrupt because they meet the bankruptcy requirements in Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations regulates the requirements for bankruptcy. This has the potential for significant impact, even reducing the confidence of foreign investors to invest in Indonesia. This research employs a normative legal approach. The data source utilized in this study comprises secondary data obtained through the analysis of existing literature or documents. The results of insolvency testing, determining whether a company is categorized as insolvent or not, provide an opportunity for solvent debtors to prove that they have sufficient assets to settle debts to multiple creditors. This gives debtors the chance to rebuild their businesses. Therefore, the implementation of insolvency test in a company plays a role in saving solvent debtors from bankruptcy petitions filed by creditors.

References

Peraturan Perundang-undangan

Undang-Undang Republik Indonesia Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan Dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang dengan Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2004 Nomor 131

Bankruptcy act BE 2483

Buku

Asyhadie, Z. (2011). Hukum Bisnis: Prinsip dan Pelaksanaannya di Indonesia.

Gatot Supramono, S. H. (2014). Perjanjian utang piutang. Kencana.

Sjahdeini, SR. (2018). Sejarah, Asas, dan Teori Hukum Kepailitan, Memahami Undang-Undang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang, Cet. ke-2. Jakarta: Prenadamedia Group.

Sutan Remy Sjahdeini, S. H. (2016). Sejarah, Asas, dan Teori Hukum Kepailitan (Memahami undang-undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran). Kencana.

Jurnal

E. Blaney, Karen (1992). What Do You Mean My Partnership Has Been Petitioned into Bankruptcy?. 19 Fordham Urban Law Journal 833, 840.

Hakim, L. & Saputra, N. D. (2023). Politik Hukum Insolvency Test Dalam Pembaharuan Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Madani: Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin, 1(8), 305-311.

Pratama, B. (2014). Kepailitan dalam Putusan Hakim Ditinjau dari Perspektif Hukum Formil dan Materil. Jurnal Yudisial, 7(2), 157-172.

Peterman, Nancy A, & Sherry Morrisette. (2004). Directors Duties in the Zone of Insolvency: The Quandary of the Non-Profit Corp. 23 American Bankruptcy Institute Journal 12, 12-15.

Reed, S. F., Lajoux, A. R., & Nesvold, H. P. (2007). The art of M & A: A merger acquisition buyout guide. New York: McGraw Hill.

Wijayanta, T. (2014). Asas kepastian hukum, keadilan dan kemanfaatan dalam kaitannya dengan putusan kepailitan pengadilan niaga. Jurnal Dinamika Hukum, 14(2), 216-226.

Zulaeha, M. (2015). Mengevaluasi pembuktian sederhana dalam kepailitan sebagai perlindungan terhadap dunia usaha di Indonesia. ADHAPER: Jurnal Hukum Acara Perdata, 1(2), 171-187.

Internet

CNBCIndonesia.com. (2023, 19 Oktober). Gawat! Pailit RI Meningkat, ada 17 Saham Bisa Gulung Tikar. Diakses pada 19 November 2023, dari https://www.cnbcindonesia.com/research/20231019103510-128-481873/gawat-pailit-ri-meningkat-ada-17-saham-bisa-gulung-tikar

Debt.org. (2020, June 10). What Is Insolvency. Diakses pada 18 November 2023, dari Insolvency - Differences Between Bankruptcy (debt.org)

Hukumonline.com. (2023, 31 Mei). Perbedaan antara Perikatan dan Perjanjian. Diakses pada 19 November 2023, dari https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/perbedaan-perikatan-dan-perjanjian-lt4e3b8693275c3/

Hukumonline.com (2018, 18 April). Perbedaan Kepailitan dengan Insolvensi. Diakses pada 19 November 2023, dari https://www.hukumonline.com/klinik/a/perbedaan-kepailitan-dengan-insolvensi-lt5ad55778bf98f/

Hukumonline.com (2021, 19 November) Mengurai Relevansi Insolvency Test di Indonesia. Diakses pada 18 November 2023, dari https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/mengurai-relevansi-insolvency-test-di-indonesia-lt61976ba7caa3f/

Persekutuan Perdata Doni Budiono & Rekan. (2023, 7 Februari). Urgensi Insolvency Test Dalam Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Diakses pada 18 November 2023, dari https://pdb-lawfirm.id/urgensi-insolvency-test-dalam-hukum-kepailitan-di-indonesia/

Downloads

Published

2023-11-22

How to Cite

Andriyanto Adhi Nugroho, Guna Gerhat Sinaga, Muhammad Fikri, Azareel Sulistiyanto Jusuf, Natasya Fhadyah Azzahra, & Adira Mutiara Jasmine. (2023). Urgensi Penerapan Tes Insolvensi Atas Perusahaan Yang Akan Diputus Pailit. Deposisi: Jurnal Publikasi Ilmu Hukum, 1(4), 231–246. https://doi.org/10.59581/deposisi.v1i4.1810

Similar Articles

<< < 7 8 9 10 11 12 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.