English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aims to find and determine the validity of the recognition of claims belonging to shareholder creditors and the legal protection of minority creditors. This study uses a normative juridical method with descriptive analysis specifications as well as a statute approach and a conceptual approach to determine the validity of the recognition of receivables belonging to shareholders and legal protection owned by minority creditors. The results obtained from this study are: First, Indonesian law has not regulated the position of shareholder creditors in PKPU so that their existence is still considered valid, resulting in a conflict of interest resulting in injustice experienced by minority creditors because of the large rights owned by shareholder creditors in the PKPU process. Second, the legal protection mechanism for minority creditors in the KPKPU Law is in the form of rejection of the peace plan by judges based on Article 285 of the KPKPU Law and objections to claims based on Article 279 jo. 280 The KPKPU Law has not been able to run effectively because it still depends on the discretion and judgment of the judge.Keywords: Suspension of Payment; Legal Protection; Minority Creditors; Shareholder Creditors.AbstrakPenelitian ini bertujuan untuk menemukan dan mengetahui keabsahan diakuinya piutang milik Kreditor Pemegang Saham dan perlindungan hukum yang dimiliki Kreditor Minoritas. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode yuridis normatif dengan spesifikasi deskriptif analisis serta pendekatan perundang-undang dan pendekatan konseptual guna mengetahui keabsahan diakuinya piutang milik pemegang saham dan perlindungan hukum yang dimiliki oleh Kreditor Minoritas. Hasil yang diperoleh dari penelitian ini adalah: Pertama, hukum Indonesia belum mengatur mengenai kedudukan Kreditor Pemegang Saham dalam PKPU sehingga keberadaannya masih dianggap sah, sehingga terjadi benturan kepentingan yang mengakibatkan ketidakadilan dialami oleh Kreditor Minoritas karena besarnya hak yang dimiliki oleh Kreditor Pemegang Saham dalam proses PKPU. Kedua, mekanisme perlindungan hukum Kreditor Minoritas yang ada dalam UU KPKPU berupa penolakan rencana perdamaian oleh hakim berdasarkan Pasal 285 UU KPKPU dan bantahan piutang berdasarkan Pasal 279 jo. 280 UU KPKPU belum dapat berjalan efektif karena masih bergantung terhadap kebijaksanaan dan penilaian hakim.Kata Kunci: Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang; Perlindungan Hukum; Kreditor Minoritas; Kreditor Pemegang Saham.

Kedudukan Kreditor Minoritas Dibandingkan Dengan Kreditor Sekaligus Pemegang Saham Dalam Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran Utang