ANALYSIS OF THE PLAINTIFF'S LAWSUIT FOR THE DEFENDANT'S UNLAWFUL ACT TO CONTROL THE RIGHTS TO LAND OWNED BY ANOTHER PERSON WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE ROKAN HILIR STATE COURT (NIET ONVANKELIJK VERKLAARD) FOR NE BIS IN IDEM REASONS BASED ON MAY RULING NUMBER: 4348 K/PDT/2022) (STUDY DECISION NUMBER. 42/PDT.G/2023/PN RHL)

JHONNI SIMANJUNTAK, NPM 2102400128 (2025) ANALYSIS OF THE PLAINTIFF'S LAWSUIT FOR THE DEFENDANT'S UNLAWFUL ACT TO CONTROL THE RIGHTS TO LAND OWNED BY ANOTHER PERSON WHICH WAS REJECTED BY THE ROKAN HILIR STATE COURT (NIET ONVANKELIJK VERKLAARD) FOR NE BIS IN IDEM REASONS BASED ON MAY RULING NUMBER: 4348 K/PDT/2022) (STUDY DECISION NUMBER. 42/PDT.G/2023/PN RHL). Tugas_Akhir(Artikel) International Journal Of Humanities Education And Social Sciences (IJHESS), 4 (5). pp. 2263-2277. ISSN 2808-1765 (e-ISSN)

[img] Text
COVER.pdf
Download (2MB)
[img] Text
ARTIKEL B.INGGRIS.pdf
Download (376kB)
[img] Text
ARTIKEL B. INDONESIA.pdf
Download (486kB)

Abstract

This study aims to examine the application of the Defendant's Unlawful Acts in the Plaintiff's Land Rights Dispute Rejected by the Rokan Hilir District Court (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard) Due to NeBis In Idem Reasons based on Supreme Court Decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 and Decision Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl). The type of research used is normative legal research. Discussion Results: the lawsuit dated September 22, 2023 which was received and registered at the Rokan Hilir District Court Clerk's Office on September 25, 2023 with Registration Number 42/Pdt.G/2023/PN Rhl, cannot be accepted (niet ontvankelijke verklaard) by the judge for several reasons, including: the plaintiff's lawsuit against the Defendants in the same object has occurred in the Rokan Hilir District Court with Decision Number 34/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Rhl to the Cassation level at the Supreme Court, so that in accordance with the MARI decision Number: 4348 K/Pdt/2022 dated December 13, 2022, the case has been decided and has permanent legal force. This is in accordance with the provisions of Article 1917 of the Civil Code, which reads "The power of a Judge's decision that has obtained absolute force is not broader than just regarding the matter of the decision. This means that a case that has been decided by a previous judge and has obtained permanent legal force cannot be sued again with the same subject and object in the future. That the MARI decision Number: 647/K/sip/1973 which states: "The existence or absence of the principle of ne bis in idem is not solely determined by the parties, but especially that the object of the dispute has been given a certain status by a previous Court decision and has permanent legal force". So the judge has the right to reject or not accept the lawsuit from the plaintiff to the plaintiff for a lawsuit whose subject and object are the same Keywords: Lawsuit, Plaintiff, Unlawful Act, Defendant Land Rights, Rejected (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard), Ne Bis In Idem

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: Lawsuit, Plaintiff, Unlawful Act, Defendant Land Rights, Rejected (Niet Onvankelijk Verklaard), Ne Bis In Idem
Subjects: K Law > K Law (General)
Divisions: Fakultas Hukum > Hukum
Depositing User: Unnamed user with email repository@ulb.ac.id
Date Deposited: 16 Sep 2025 04:47
Last Modified: 16 Sep 2025 04:47
URI: http://repository.ulb.ac.id/id/eprint/1700

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
ulb is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.