首页> 外文OA文献 >Tinjauan Yuridis Tentang Proses Penyelesaian Perkara Wanprestasi Dalam Perjanjian Pembagian Harta Warisan (Studi Kasus Di Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta)
【2h】

Tinjauan Yuridis Tentang Proses Penyelesaian Perkara Wanprestasi Dalam Perjanjian Pembagian Harta Warisan (Studi Kasus Di Pengadilan Negeri Surakarta)

机译:财产遗留问题和解解决方案的司法审查(泗水州法院案例研究)

摘要

The objective of this study is to determine the legal responsibilities if one of the party is in default under the agreement the division of the inheritance, to know the judge decisive the proof, to know the consideration of judges in decisions on cases of default in sharing agreement inheritace. The Method uses normative approach and qualitative approach. Kind of descriptive research. Data analysis method used by the author is qualitative approach. In legal responsibilities if one party is default in the agreement sharing the inheritance with their basics in the provisions of article 1236 of the criminal code, the parties felt disadvantage by their sharing agreements inheritance because the other refused the default, then the party who feels disadvantage can demand accountability for what he’s to reimburse costs and losses. To demand legal responsibility can be filled to the district court. So in the end the judges have finished checking and verdicting that declared the defendant has made the default against the plaintiffs above sharing agreements or solving Nuriah inheritance in the form of a piece of land 2,139 m² and everything that lives on it as written in SHM no 234, located at Jalan pasar Legi, Kestalan Village, Banjarsari District, municipality of Surakarta, Central Java Province. The judge in determining the evidence and the decision on the case of default in sharing agreement inheritance that the judges had obtained legal facts which is used as a conclusion proving the point that the plaintiff was able to prove the acts of the defendant in default, while the other side of defendant couldn’t prove the rebuttal arguments.
机译:这项研究的目的是确定一方当事人在继承权分割协议下是否存在违约行为,确定法律责任,了解法官决定性的证据,了解法官在共同违约案件判决中的考虑。协议继承。该方法采用规范方法和定性方法。一种描述性研究。作者使用的数据分析方法是定性方法。在法律责任中,如果一方在《刑法》第1236条的规定中分享其继承基础的协议中的一方违约,则当事方由于他们的共享协议继承而感到不利,因为另一方拒绝违约,则感到不利的一方可以要求他偿还成本和损失的责任。要求法律责任的人可以向地方法院填补。最终,法官们完成了检查和判决,宣布被告违反了共享协议之上的原告,或者以一块2,139平方米的土地和以SHM格式写明的所有居住地形式解决了Nuriah继承问题。 234号位于中爪哇省苏拉卡尔塔市Banjarsari区Kestalan村Jalan pasar Legi。法官在确定证据以及就共有协议继承中的违约案件作出的判决中,法官已获得法律事实,以此作为结论,证明原告能够证明被告的违约行为,同时被告的另一端无法证明反驳的论点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号