ANALYSIS OF LEGAL DISPARITIES BETWEEN TYPES OF CREDITORS IN THE SETTLEMENT OF BANKRUPT ASSETS: A STUDY OF THE DECISION IN CASE NO. 37/PDT.SUS-PKPU/2023/PN.NIAGA SEMARANG
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.53067/ijomral.v4i5.372Keywords:
Bankruptcy, Disparity, Creditors, Concurrent, Separatist, Preferential.Abstract
In the bankruptcy process to resolve the problem of the debtor's inability to fulfill its debt obligations to creditors in full, complex dynamics arise between the interests of the creditors. Settlement through bankruptcy cannot guarantee the fulfillment of all creditors' rights and allows for inequality experienced by some creditors. This study aims to determine the factors causing inequality or disparity in legal treatment for separated, preferred. Concurrent creditors settle bankrupt assets based on court practice and choose to improve the formulation of bankruptcy law in Indonesia to ensure justice and legal certainty for all types of creditors in settling the assets of bankrupt debtors. This study uses a normative juridical research method, namely a kind of research that focuses on examining the application of rules or norms in applicable law. The results show concurrent creditors do not receive their rights as they should in bankruptcy settlement. The curator prioritizes creditors with privileged and priority rights, such as preferred and secured creditors, in settling bankruptcy assets. Furthermore, the bankruptcy law must be updated with policies to resolve debt issues that protect creditors in settling debtor obligations based on justice and legal certainty.
Downloads
References
Anisah, S. (2008). Perlindungan Kepentingan Kreditor dan Debitor dalam Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Total Media.
Astiti, S. H. (2014). Sita Jaminan Dalam Kepailitan. Yuridika, 29(1).
Ibrahim, J. (2008). Teori & Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Malang: Banyumedia.
Kusumaatmadja, M. (2006). Konsep-Konsep Hukum Dalam Pembangunan (Cet. 2). Alumni.
Krisnajadi. (1989). Bab-Bab Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Bagian I. Bandung: Sekolah Tinggi Hukum Bandung.
Lashko, O. (2006). Enhancing Creditor Recovery-Should Services Be Deemed Property for the Purpose of Fraudulent Transfer Law. Brook. L. Rev., 72, 317.
Mertokusumo, S. (1993). Bab-Bab tentang Penemuan Hukum. Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bhakti.
Nating, I. (2005). Peranan dan Tanggung Jawab Kurator dalam Pengurusan dan Pemberesan Harta Pailit. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada.
Nugroho, S. A. (2018). Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia. Jakarta: Perdana Media.
Putra, F. M. K. (2014). Eksistensi Kreditor Separatis Sebagai Pemohon Dalam Perkara Kepailitan. Perspektif, 19(1), 1-19.
Qodrunnada, S., Gultom, E., & Sudaryat. (2025). Asas Keadilan dalam Eksekusi Jaminan Kebendaan Kreditor Separatis pada Kasusu Kepailitas terhadap Batasan Waktu Eksekusi. Konstitusi: Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik, dan Ilmu Komunikasi, Vol. 2, N0. 3.
Rahardjo, S. (2000). Ilmu Hukum. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti.
Repulis. (2023). Rekonstruksi Perlindungan Hukum terhadap Hak Kreditur Konkuren dalam Pemberesan Kepailitan dan Penundaan kewajiban Pembayaran Utang yang Berasaskan Keadilan. Universitas Borobudur.
Saliman, A. R., Jalis, A., & Hermansyah (recht). (2004). Esensi Hukum Hisnis Indonesia: teori & Contoh Kasus. Jakarta: Kencana.
Shubhan, H. (2014). Hukum Kepailitan: Prinsip, Norma, dan Praktik di Pengadilan. Jakarta: Kencana.
Slamet, S. R. (2016). Perlindungan Hukum Dan Kedudukan Kreditor Separatis Dalam Hal Terjadi Kepailitan Terhadap Debitor. In Forum Ilmiah, Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 51-59.
Soekanto, S. (1986). Pengantar Penelitian Hukum. Jakarta: UI Press.
Tejaningsih, T. (2016). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Keditor Separatis Dalam Pengurusan Dan Pemberesan Harta Pailit. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press.
Yuhelson. (2019). Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia (Cet. 1). Ideas Publishing.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Asmah, Shinta N.S, Ricky Khayat Jaya L.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
