Responsibility of Notaries in The Inclusion of The Names of Instrumentary Witnesses Who Were Not Present at The Signing of Authentic Deeds (Study of The Decision of The Rantau Prapat District Court Number 26 / Pdt.G / 2020 / PN RAP)
Keywords:
Instrumental, Witness, Authentic Deed, Exception, Signing of DeedAbstract
In essence, the scope of the task of carrying out the position of a Notary is to make evidence as desired by the parties who appear to carry out a certain legal action. The case raised in this study originated from a lease agreement made before a Notary. Based on the applicable laws and regulations, the Notary is obliged to read the Deed in front of an audience in the presence of at least 2 witnesses, or 4 witnesses specifically for the making of a private will, and signed at the same time by the appearer, witness, and the Notary. However, the Notary in this case included the name of a witness in the relevant Lease Deed, even though the witness was actually not present on the day of making, reading, and signing of the deed by the parties. Therefore, one of the parties in the Lease Deed filed a lawsuit against the Notary because he felt aggrieved by the possibility that the Lease Deed would lose its proving power as an Authentic Deed because it did not meet the requirements as regulated in the laws and regulations. The main issue raised in this study is the responsibility of the Notary in including the name of the Instrumental Witness who was not present at the signing of the Authentic Deed and its implementation in the decision of the Rantau Prapat District Court Decision Number 26/Pdt.G/2020/PN RAP. This research is normative judicial research. The type of data used is secondary data obtained through literature study. To further elaborate the main issue, it is further described in the introduction, a discussion of the Instrumental Witness and the responsibilities of the Notary in relation to the inclusion of the name of the Instrumental Witness who was not present at the signing of the Authentic Deed, and closing.
Downloads
References
Adjie, H. (2009). Meneropong Khasanah Notaris dan PPAT Indonesia. Citra Aditya Bakti.
Adriano, F. C. (2015). Analisis Yuridis atas Turunnya Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Notaris menurut UUJN No. 2 Tahun 2014 tentang Jabatan Notaris. Premise Law Journal, 9, 7–8.
Ansori, A. G. (2009). Lembaga Kenotariatan Indonesia: Perspektif Hukum dan Etika. UII Press.
Effendi, E. M. S. H. K. A. H. (2006). Ilmu Sosial dan Budaya Dasar. Kencana Prenada Media Group.
G.H.S Lumban Tobing. (1999). Peraturan Jabatan Notaris (3rd ed.). Erlangga.
Undang-Undang tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 tentang Jabatan Notaris, UU No. 2 Tahun 2014, (selanjutnya UU No. 2 Tahun 2014), LN Nomor 3, Tahun 2014, TLN No. 5491, Pub. L. No. 1 (2004).
Kansil, C. S. . (1979). Pengantar Ilmu Hukum,. Balai Pustaka.
Kusumawati, L. (2006). Tanggung Jawab Jabatan Notaris. Refika Aditama.
Mertokusumo, S. (1999). Mengenal Hukum suatu Pengantar. Liberty.
Nanda, L. D. (2016). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Saksi Instrumenter Dalam Akta Notaris Yang Aktanya Menjadi Objek Perkara Pidana Di Pengadilan. Premise Law Journal, 186.
Nasir, M. (2005). Hukum Acara Perdata. Djambatan.
Notodisoerdjo, S. (1993). Hukum Notariat di Indonesia. Raja Grafindo Persada.
Samudera, T. (2004). Hukum Pembuktian Dalam Acara Perdata. Alumni.
Subekti. (2005). Hukum Perjanjian (21st ed.). Intermasa.
Subekti, R. (1992). Aspek-Aspek Hukum Perikatan Nasional (4th ed.). Citra Aditya Bakti.
Supramono, G. (2014). Perbankan dan Masalah Kredit: Suatu Tinjauan di Bidang Yuridis (1st ed.). Rineka Cipta.
Wawan Tunggal, A. (2001). Hukum Bicara Kasus-Kasus dalam Kehidupan Sehari-hari. Milenia Populer.
