{"id":30753,"date":"2021-11-23T10:36:05","date_gmt":"2021-11-23T03:36:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/?p=30753"},"modified":"2023-04-26T14:27:32","modified_gmt":"2023-04-26T07:27:32","slug":"pencerahan-hukum-hari-ini-selasa-23-november-2021","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/pencerahan-hukum-hari-ini-selasa-23-november-2021\/","title":{"rendered":"Pencerahan Hukum Hari Ini (Selasa, 23 November 2021)"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Pencerahan Hukum Hari Ini (Selasa, 23 November 2021) &#8211;<\/strong> <strong>HAKIM DIBENARKAN MEMBERIKAN PUTUSAN YANG MELEBIHI DARI YANG DIGUGAT SEPANJANG SESUAI DENGAN KEJADIAN MATERIIL DARI PERKARA TERSEBUT<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Pasal 178 (3) HIR melarang Hakim memberikan putusan atas hal-hal yang tidak dituntut Penggugat atau melebihi <em>petitum<\/em> Penggugat (<em>ultra petita<\/em>). Namun menurut Putusan Mahkamah Agung No.499 K\/Sip\/1970 jo. No.556 K\/Sip\/1971 Hakim dibenarkan memberikan Putusan yang melebihi dari yang digugat sepanjang sesuai dengan kejadian materiil dari perkara tersebut. Pasal 178 (3) HIR diterobos oleh kedua Putusan Mahkamah Agung tersebut atau DALAM PETITUM PENGGUGAT DICANTUMKAN TUNTUTAN SUBSIDAIR berupa: mohon Putusan lain sesuai dengan hukum dan keadilan (<em>ex aequo et bono<\/em>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\"><li>Putusan Mahkamah Agung No.3714 K\/Pdt\/1992, tanggal 22 Februari 1994.<\/li><\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Salam Pancasila,<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Fredrik J. Pinakunary<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-embed is-type-video is-provider-youtube wp-block-embed-youtube wp-embed-aspect-16-9 wp-has-aspect-ratio\"><div class=\"wp-block-embed__wrapper\">\n<iframe loading=\"lazy\" title=\"PENGACARA LITIGASI YANG BERINTEGRASI\" width=\"1080\" height=\"608\" src=\"https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/embed\/xAjEwJ1syBQ?start=8&#038;feature=oembed\" frameborder=\"0\" allow=\"accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture\" allowfullscreen><\/iframe>\n<\/div><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">( Baca juga : <a rel=\"noreferrer noopener\" href=\"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/uji-materil-penjelasan-pasal-70-undang-undang-nomor-30-tahun-1999-tentang-arbitrase-dan-alternatif-penyelesaian-sengketa\/\" data-type=\"URL\" data-id=\"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/uji-materil-penjelasan-pasal-70-undang-undang-nomor-30-tahun-1999-tentang-arbitrase-dan-alternatif-penyelesaian-sengketa\/\" target=\"_blank\">https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/uji-materil-penjelasan-pasal-70-undang-undang-nomor-30-tahun-1999-tentang-arbitrase-dan-alternatif-penyelesaian-sengketa\/<\/a> )<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Pencerahan Hukum Hari Ini (Selasa, 23 November 2021) &#8211; HAKIM DIBENARKAN MEMBERIKAN PUTUSAN YANG MELEBIHI DARI YANG DIGUGAT SEPANJANG SESUAI DENGAN KEJADIAN MATERIIL DARI PERKARA TERSEBUT Pasal 178 (3) HIR melarang Hakim memberikan putusan atas hal-hal yang tidak dituntut Penggugat atau melebihi petitum Penggugat (ultra petita). Namun menurut Putusan Mahkamah Agung No.499 K\/Sip\/1970 jo. No.556 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[320],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30753","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pencerahan-hukum-hari-ini"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30753","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30753"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30753\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":30754,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30753\/revisions\/30754"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30753"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30753"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fjp-law.com\/id\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30753"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}