Legal Consequences of Not Applying the Prudential Principle in the Sale and Purchase Agreement by the Land Deed Official

Fira Fairima Fiorentina

Abstract


The Land Deed Official as the official authorized to issue the Authentic Deed is obliged to examine the truth of the documents that are a requirement in the issuance of the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement. In practice, there are  Land Deed Officials who ignore the obligation to examine the documents brought by the parties as in the case of Muslims in Decision Number 538/Pid.B/2019/ PN.Pdg where there is a forgery of signatures by the parties in the agreement to make a Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement, the testimony of the reporting witness which was later corroborated by the results of the criminalistics laboratory examination showed that the signature in the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement was declared non-identical to the actual signature, as a result, the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement caused losses to other parties. Notarial Sale and Purchase AgreementNotarial Sale and Purchase Agreement Based on these problems, it raises the question of what are the legal consequences of not applying the prudential principle in the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement by the Land Deed Official and what are the legal consequences of the validity of the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement which is proven to have forged signatures in the deed. The research method used is normative juridical research using a statutory approach and a case approach using data collection methods through documentation studies and literature studies of court decisions. The result of the research is that a Land Deed Official who does not apply the principle of prudence can be subject to administrative sanctions following the mistakes made, as for the validity of the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement which is proven to have a forged signature, the Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement is declared null and void. A Land Deed Official in making an authentic deed must pay attention to the prudential principle, one of which is by requiring the parties to be present in person and checking the authenticity of the parties' identities to prevent identity forgery in making a Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement. prudentialNotarial Sale and Purchase AgreementNotarial Sale and Purchase Agreement

 

Keywords: Prudential Principle; Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement; Land Deed Official; Forgery of Signature.Notarial Sale and Purchase Agreement


Full Text:

PDF

References


Arimbi, S. (2022). “Analisis Yuridis Permasalahan Pembuatan Akta Otentik Oleh Notaris/PPAT”. Tarius. 15. (1).

Benuf, Kornelius, and Muhamad Azhar. (2020). "Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Sebagai Instrumen Mengurai Permasalahan Hukum Kontemporer". Gema Keadilan. 7. (1). 23.

Cahyadi, Febriana. (2013). Penerapan Prinsip Kehati-Hatian Dalam Pemberian Fasilitas Kredit Dikaitkan Dengan Akta Jual Beli Yang Tidak Sah (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Depok Nomor 72/PDT.G/2009/PN.DPK). Depok: Tesis Magister Universitas Indonesia.

Domini, V.A. (2019). “Tanggung Jawab Notaris/Ppat Terhadap Keabsahan Tanda Tangan Dan Identitas Penghadap Dalam Akta Jual Beli (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Daerah Khusus Ibukota Jakarta Nomor: 10/PID/2018/PT.DKI)”. Indonesian Notary. 4. (3).

Salim H.S., Nurbaini, E.S. (2013). Penerapan Teori Hukum Pada Penelitian Tesis Dan Disertasi. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.

Ishaq. (2017). Metode Penelitian Hukum Dan Penulisan Skripsi, Tesis, Serta Disertasi. Bandung: Alfabeta.

Lumban Gao, S. (2019). “Kedudukan Dan Kekuatan Akta Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah Dalam Sistem Pembuktian Berdasarkan Hukum Tanah Nasional”. Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Dirgantara. 10. (1).

Meitinah. (2016). “Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta di bawah tangan yang telah meperoleh legalisasi dari Notaris”. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan. 4. 457.

Moeljatno. (2001). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana. Jakarta: PT. Bumi Aksara.

Putri, S.R. (2019). “Pembatalan Akta Jual Beli Oleh Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah Yang Mengetahui Adanya Cacat Hukum”. Indonesian Notary. 1. (2).

Subekti, R., Tjitrosudibio. (2006). Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata. Jakarta: Pradnya Paramita.

Sjaifurrachman. (2011). Aspek Pertanggung Jawaban Notaris dalam Pembuatan Akta. Bandung: Mandar Maju.

Sulastini, llise T. Wahyu, A. (2011). Pertanggungjawaban Notaris Terhadap Akta yang Berindikasi Pidana. Bandung: Refika Aditama.

Sonata, Depri Liber. (2014). Metode Penelitian Hukum Normatif dan Empiris. Lampung: Fakultas Hukum dan Universitas Lampung.

Tobing, G.H.S. Lumban. (1980). Peraturan Jabatan Notaris. Jakarta: Erlangga.

Utomo, H.I.W. and Wanda, H.D. (2018). “Prinsip Kehati-Hatian Pejabat Pembuat Akta Tanah dalam Peralihan Tanah yang Belum Bersertifikat”. Jurnal Hukum IUS QUIA IUSTUM. 24. (3).




DOI: https://doi.org/10.20884/1.atc.2022.5.2.314

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

Indexed By:

 


Authentica: Privat Law Journal
Faculty of Law, Universitas Jenderal Soedirman
Yustisia IV Building, Law Journal Center
Purwokerto, Central Java, Indonesia, 53122
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.