ANALISIS YURIDIS TERHADAP PERKARA WANPRESTASI DALAM PINJAMAN KREDIT (Studi Putusan No. 4/PDT.G.S/2024/PN Grt)

Abstract

An agreement is a mutual consensus between parties that gives rise to certain rights and obligations that must be fulfilled. The contractual relationship between the two parties should ideally ensure a balance in fulfilling the rights and obligations of both the creditor and the debtor. If the debtor fails to fulfill their promises, they are said to be in default (wanprestasi). This means they are negligent, "careless," or have breached the agreement by either failing to act as required or by performing actions that are prohibited. Default (wanprestasi) refers to a situation where the debtor fails to perform their obligations and can be held accountable. If the debtor is proven to be negligent, they are obligated to fulfill their duties, including compensating for damages or paying interest due to the default. The research method used in this study is the normative juridical method, employing a legislative approach, examining the norms contained in regulations regarding agreements, and a case study approach. The objective of this research is to understand, describe, and explain the legal provisions concerning default (wanprestasi) and how judges consider their decisions in cases of default in credit loans, as seen in Decision No. 4/PDT.G.S/2024/PN Grt. The findings of this research indicate that the legal considerations provided by the panel of judges were appropriate and in accordance with the prevailing laws and regulations. Furthermore, the Defendants, namely Uus Susanto and Imas Komalasari, have admitted to the Plaintiff, PT Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Garut Branch Office, that they indeed defaulted on the credit loan by failing to fulfill their obligations. Consequently, the panel of judges ordered the Defendants to fully repay the remaining credit loan to the Plaintiff.