ANALISIS YURIDIS KEWENANGAN RELATIF DALAM SENGKETA KERJA SAMA USAHA BERDASARKAN PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NOMOR 2581 K/Pdt/2025

Abstract

This article examines the legal reasoning used to determine relative jurisdiction in a civil dispute arising from business cooperation, capital management, the use of business assets, and allegations of unlawful conduct in Supreme Court Decision Number 2581 K/Pdt/2025. The case is important because the dispute was initially halted at the stage of relative jurisdiction, even though the substance of the claim concerned the return of capital, accountability for asset use, and compensation. This study uses a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The analysis shows that the Supreme Court placed the core allegations of the claim as the basis for determining the competent court and therefore affirmed the authority of the Surabaya District Court under Article 118 paragraph 1 HIR. Through H.L.A. Hart’s theory, this decision may be understood as a correction of the improper use of secondary rules, especially the rule of recognition and the rule of adjudication. The ruling confirms that procedural law must open access to substantive examination and may not be applied in a way that prematurely closes the path to justice.