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

ABSTRAKPenelitian ini menganalisis Putusan Peninjauan Kembali Mahkamah Agung Nomor 521 PK/Pdt/2017, dalam perkara gugatan uang jasa pengabdian dan penghargaan oleh direksi melawan perusahaannya. Pada putusan peninjauan kembali, Mahkamah Agung berpendapat bahwa perkara ini merupakan yurisdiksi dari pengadilan hubungan industrial, bukan pengadilan negeri. Pokok permasalahan dalam penelitian ini ialah mengenai apakah pengadilan hubungan industrial mempunyai yurisdiksi atas perkara a quo sebagaimana dikemukakan Mahkamah Agung. Penelitian ini bersifat normatif untuk menelaah prinsip-prinsip yang berkaitan dengan permasalahan secara mendalam. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pengadilan hubungan industrial tidak berwenang mengadili perkara ini. Direksi di perusahaan berkedudukan sebagai perwakilan pengusaha, bukan pekerja, sehingga perselisihan antara direksi dengan perusahaan bukanlah termasuk perselisihan hubungan industrial sebagaimana diatur dalam Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2004. Oleh karena itu, perkara ini adalah sengketa keperdataan biasa yang merupakan yurisdiksi dari pengadilan negeri.Kata kunci: kewenangan mengadili, direksi, pengadilan hubungan industrial, pengadilan negeri. ABSTRACT This research aims to analyze the Supreme Court's civil request Decision Number 521 PK/Pdt/2017, in the case of honorarium devotion lawsuit and reward of the directors against his company. In this decision, the Supreme Court believes that this case is in the jurisdiction of the industrial relations court, not in the district court. The main issue in this research is whether the industrial relations court has jurisdiction over the case as stated by the Supreme Court. This normative research is to examine deeply about the principles that relate to the problem. The author concludes that the industrial relations court theoretically has no jurisdiction to handle this case. In any companies, directors are the representatives, not their workers, so that the dispute between the company and its directors is not an industrial relations dispute as stipulated in Law Number 2 of 2004. Therefore, the case is just a regular civil law dispute under which the district court has jurisdiction. Keywords: jurisdiction, director, industrial relations court, district court.

KEWENANGAN MENGADILI PENGADILAN HUBUNGAN INDUSTRIAL DALAM PERKARA DIREKSI MELAWAN PERUSAHAAN