ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN PENGADILAN DKI JAKARTA MENGENAI PERNYATAAN LALAI DALAM GUGATAN WANPRESTASI PERJANJIAN UTANG PIUTANG

Abstract

This study analyzes the statement of negligence (summons) in a lawsuit for breach of contract of debt agreement with a case study of the DKI Jakarta High Court Decision Number 1003/Pdt/2024/PT ​​DKI. This study examines a legal conflict in breach of contract cases. The first judge ruled that the Defendant was not in default due to lack of proof of summons from the Plaintiff, while the appellate judge found the Defendant in default, citing recognition of the Plaintiff’s lawsuit based on another legal article. The urgency of this study is what is the basis for the consideration of the judge of the DKI Jakarta High Court in Decision Number 1003/Pdt/2024/PT ​​DKI and what are the legal consequences for the parties from Decision Number 1003/Pdt/2024/PT ​​DKI. This research method uses a normative legal approach. This study shows that the appeal level decision using the legal basis of Article 1925 of the Civil Code fulfills the elements of legal justice better. The legal consequence of this appeal level decision is that the Respondent is considered to have committed a breach of contract even though there is no evidence of a summons.