Volume 07 Issue 02 February 2024
1Dwi Tatak Subagiyo, 2Indah Herlina, 3Aura Jelita, 4Pratama Alifiandi Martio, 5Ahmad Setiawan
1,4Faculty of Law, Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University
2,3,5Magister of Law, Faculty of Law, Wijaya Kusuma Surabaya University
DOI : https://doi.org/10.47191/ijsshr/v7-i02-25Google Scholar Download Pdf
ABSTRACT
Deeds in law have a very important function and role in proving to resolve legal problems, especially authentic deeds. Authentic deeds in resolving civil cases are very important for determining rights and obligations when a dispute arises from a civil legal relationship. In social life there is always a gap between practice and theory, especially regarding the rights and obligations of the parties. The existing problems are: 1. how to apply Authentic Deed Evidence in civil cases in court, 2. what is the judge's consideration (legal reasoning) in assessing authentic deeds which are argued to have dwaling (mistake), fraud (bedrog) or coercion (dwang) . Based on the analysis of normative juridical research, it will be clear that: First, the application of authentic deed evidence in civil cases in court is based on statutory regulations as stated in statutory regulations, namely Article 1866 of the Civil Code and Article 164 HIR, which consists of: a .documentary evidence, b. witness evidence, c. allegation, d. confession, and oath. Second, that the judge's consideration (legal reasoning) in assessing an authentic deed which is postulated to be dwaling (mistake), fraud (bedrog) or coercion (dwang) is and is based on the existence of general facts and specific facts in making a decision and is based on the judge's confidence in determining The quality of the decision is based on Article 1865 of the Civil Code, Article 163 HIR. According to this system, evidence must focus on the main arguments relating to rights or facts, as long as they are denied by the opposing party.
KEYWORDS:authentic deed; evidence; civil law
REFERENCES1. Abdulkadir Muhammad, 2014, Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, Citra Aditya Bakti, Bandung.
2. Alfira, 2011 Hukum Pembuktian Dalam Beracara Pidana, Perdata dan Korupsi di indonesia, Cetakan 1 Raih Asa Sukses, Jakarta.
3. Andi Hamzah, Kamus Hukum, Ghalia Indonesia, Jakarta.
4. Anshoruddin, 2004, Hukum Pembuktian Menurut Hukum Acara Islam dan Hukum Positif, Pustaka Pelajar), Surabaya.
5. Bisri ilhami, 2004, Sistem Hukum Indonesia, PT Rajagrafindo persada, Jakarta.
6. Efa Laela Fakhriah, 2013, Bukti Elektronik dalam Sistem Pembuktian Perdata. Cetakan ke-2, PT Alumni, Bandung.
7. Efa Laela Fakhriah, Sistem Pembuktian Terbuka Dalam Penyelesaian Sengketa Perdata Secara Litigasi. http://pustaka.unpad.ac.id/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/pustaka_unpad_ sistem_ pembuktian.pdf., dikutip pada 2 Maret 2019.
8. Freddy Haris, 2008. Cybercrime Dari Perspektif Akademis, www.gipi.or.id
9. http://materihukum.com/pembuktian-dalam-hukum-acara-perdata-indonesia/
10. M. Yahya Harahap, 2005, Hukum Acara Perdata (Gugatan, Persidangan, Penyitaan, Pembuktian, dan Putusan Pengadilan, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
11. Masriana Tiena Yulies, 2004, Pengantar Hukum Indonesia, Sinar Grafika, Jakarta.
12. Peter Mahmud Marzuki, 2010, Penelitian Hukum, Kencana, Jakarta.
13. Retnowulan Sutantio dan Iskandar Oeripkartawinata, 1995. Hukum Acara Perdata dalam Teori dan Praktek, Mandar Maju, Bandung.
14. Rocky Marbun, CS, 2012, Kamus Hukum Lengkap, Visimedia, Jakarta.
15. Subekti, 1982. Hukum Acara Perdata, Bina Cipta, Bandung.
16. Subekti, 1991. Hukum Pembuktian , Pradnya Paramita, Jakarta.
17. Subekti, 2003. Kamus Hukum, Pradnya Paramita, Jakarta.
18. Sudikno Mertokusumo, 2002, Hukum Acara Perdata Indonesia, Edisi enam, Liberty, Yogyakarta.
19. www.greasnews.com/berita/tips/81796-asas-pembuktian-perdata/