Transcript DEWAN SENGKETA (ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSTRUKSI) berdasarkan UU 18 Tahun 1999 tentang Jasa Konstruksi UU 30 Tahun 1999 tetang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa Sarwono.

DEWAN SENGKETA
(ALTERNATIF PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA KONSTRUKSI)
berdasarkan
UU 18 Tahun 1999 tentang Jasa Konstruksi
UU 30 Tahun 1999 tetang Arbitrase dan Alternatif Penyelesaian Sengketa
Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Dr, Ir, MSC (Civ), MSBA (Bus), MH (Law), MDBF (ADR), ACIArb (Arb), ACPE(Eng).
FIDIC Affiliate Member , FIDIC Accredited Trainer, FIDIC Adjudicator
DRBF Country Representative for Indonesia
Vice Chairman, Indonesia National Board for Construction Services Development
[email protected] & [email protected]
www.sarwonohm.com
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
KONTRAK
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
Chow (2006) “Contract is a legally binding agreement formed
when one party accepts an offer made by another and which
fulfills the conditions”
(Chow Kok Fong (2006):
” Construction Contracts Dictionary”, Sweet & Maxwell Asia)
“Construction Contract is the agreement between parties on
construction of premises or combination which have close
dependency one to another or dependent each other in planning,
technology and function or main purpose objective.”
Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia No 24/2005
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
[email protected] & [email protected]
www.sarwonohm.com
Garner (2004) “Contract is an agreement between two or more
parties creating obligations that are enforceable or otherwise
recognizable at law”
(Bryan A.Garner (2004):
“Black’s Law Dictionary”, Thomson West)
Martin and Law (2006) “Contract is a legally binding agreement.
Agreement arises as a result of “offer and acceptance”, but a number of
other requirements must be satisfied for an agreement to be legally binding”.
Elizabeth A Martin and Jonathan Law (2006): “Oxford Dictionary of Law”, Oxford
University Press
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
[email protected] & [email protected]
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
www.sarwonohm.com
Charles L. Knapp et al, menyatakan bahwa contract is an agreement
between two or more person not merely a shared brief, but common
understanding as to something that is to be done in the future by one or
both of them.
Salim HS. (2009).
Perkembangan Hukum Kontrak Innominaat di Indonesia
John Adriaanse (2010) said that “A variety of factors makes a
construction contract different from most other types of contracts.
These include the length of the project, its complexity, its size and
the fact that the price agreed and the amount of work done may
change as it proceeds
John Adriaanse (2010):
“Construction Contract Law : The Essential s“
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
KUH Perdata 1266
•Syarat batal dianggap selalu dicantumkan dalam persetujuan yang timbal balik,
andaikata salah satu pihak tidak memenuhi kewajibannya. Dalam hal demikian
persetujuan tidak batal demi hukum, tetapi pembatalan harus dimintakan
kepada Pengadilan.
•Permintaan ini juga harus dilakukan, meskipun syarat batal mengenai tidak
dipenuhinya kewajiban dinyatakan di dalam persetujuan.
•Jika syarat batal tidak dinyatakan dalam persetujuan, maka Hakim dengan
melihat keadaan, atas permintaan tergugat, leluasa memberikan suatu jangka
waktu untuk memenuhi kewajiban, tetapi jangka waktu itu tidak boleh lebih dan
satu bulan.
KUH Perdata 1267
Pihak yang terhadapnya perikatan tidak dipenuhi, dapat memilih;
memaksa pihak yang lain untuk memenuhi persetujuan, jika hal itu
masih dapat dilakukan, atau menuntut pembatalan persetujuan,
dengan penggantian biaya, kerugian dan bunga.
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Jakarta, 9
September 2014
[email protected] & [email protected]
www.sarwonohm.com
In a judgement by Lord Wensleydale in 1861 said—
“The question is not what the parties to a deed or other documents may
have intended to do by entering into that deed, but what is the meaning of
the words used in that deed: a most important distinction in all cases of
construction and disregard of which often leads to erroneous conclusions”.
It was even more strongly put in the judgement by Sir Gorell Barnes in
1907 when he said—
“What a man intends and the expression of his intention are two
different things. He is bound and those who take after him are bound by
his expressed intention. If that expressed intention is unfortunately
different from what he really desires, so much the worse for those who
wish the actual intention to prevail.”
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Jakarta, 9
September 2014
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
HIRARKI
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
FIDIC General Conditions of Contract, Multilateral
Development Bank, Edisi Bahasa Indonesia, 2008 [1] menyatakan
urutan hirarki dokumen haruslah sebagai berikut:
(a) Perjanjian Kontrak
(b) Surat Penunjukan
(c) Surat Penawaran
(d) Persyaratan Khusus – Bagian A
(e) Persyaratan Khusus – Bagian B
(f) Persyaratan Umum
(g) Spesifikasi
(h) Gambar-Gambar, dan
(i) Daftar-Daftar dan dokumen lain yang menjadi bagian dari Kontrak..
[1]
FIDIC (2006), General Condirtions of Contract for Construction, Terjemahan Sarwono Hardjomuljadi et al dengan lisensi dari FIDIC, 2008
[email protected] & [email protected]
www.sarwonohm.com
Hirarki standar dokumen kontrrak PT Jasa
Marga (Persero)
Pasal 3, Dasar Pelaksanaan Pekerjaan
1. Instruksi kepada penawar
2. Kontrak Pengadaan Jasa pemborongan
3. Ketentuan Umum Kontrak (Volume I)
4. Spesifikasi Umum (Volume II)
5. Spesifikasi Khusus (Volume III)
6. Daftar Kuantitas dan Harga (Volume IV)
7. Gambar Rencana (Volume V)
8. Jadwal Rencana Kerja Terinci (Volume VI)
9. Addendum Dokumen Pengadaan (bila ada)
[email protected] & [email protected]
www.sarwonohm.com
Pada Peraturan Presiden Nomor 54 Tahun 2010 yang diubah dengan
Peraturan Presiden No 70 Tahun 2012 [dokumen pengadaan terdiri atas::
a. Umum
b. Pengumuman Pelelangan;
c. Instruksi Kepada Peserta;
d. Lembar Data Pemilihan;
e. Bentuk Dokumen Penawaran:
1) Surat Penawaran;
2) Bentuk surat kuasa;
3) Bentuk Surat perjanjian Kemitraan/Kerja Sama Operasi (KSO);
4) Dokumen Penawaran Teknis;
5) Formulir Rekapitulasi Perhitungan TKDN;
6) Jaminan Penawaran;
f. Bentuk Surat Perjanjian;
g. Syarat-Syarat Umum Kontrak;
h. Syarat-Syarat Khusus Kontrak;
i. Spesifikasi Teknis dan Gambar;
j. [Daftar Kuantitas dan Harga, apabila dipersyaratkan];
KLAIM KONSTRUKSI
FAKTOR PENYEBAB FISIK
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
ASPEK LEGAL DAN ADMINISTRASI KONTRAK
Kontrak
Konstruksi
Administrasi
Kontrak
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
Klaim
Konstruksi
EMPLOYER
RESPONDENT: 42, VARIABLE: 59
(ANALYSIS BY RELATIVE IMPORTANCE INDEX)
Faktor
CHANGES IN DESIGN (A05)
RII
A5
0.785714
D05
0.781746
A6
0.765873
A7
0.746032
D06
0.742063
C10
0.742063
A18
0.738095
A12
0.738095
B05
0.734127
A11
0.734127
D02
0.722222
D03
0.718254
D01
0.718254
C07
0.706349
A14
0.706349
DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT DOC.(D05)
CHANGES IN SCOPE OF WORKS (A06)
CONTRACTOR’S LATE COMPLETION (A07)
VARIATION ORDER (D06)
SLOW DECISION MAKING INVOLVING ALL PARTIES (C10)
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
[email protected] & [email protected]
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
www.sarwonohm.com
September 15-18, 2013
ENGINEER RESPONDENT: 27, VARIABLE: 59
(ANALYSIS BY RELATIVE IMPORTANCE INDEX)
DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT DOC.(D05)
Factor
RII
D05
0.740741
B03
0.728395
A19
0.722222
A12
0.722222
D04
0.716049
A5
0.716049
A20
0.709877
A11
0.709877
A16
0.703704
SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS OF GEOLOGY (B03)
POSSESSION OF SITE AND AVAILABILITY (A19)
DESIGN ERROR AND OMMISSION (A12)
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
[email protected] & [email protected]
September 15-18, 2013
www.sarwonohm.com
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Factor
A19
RII
0.829167
A5
0.825
D04
0.8125
D02
0.808333
C07
0.804167
A6
0.8
B05
0.8
A18
0.795833
E05
0.7875
D05
0.783333
C10
0.779167
A16
0.775
D06
0.770833
A14
0.766667
B03
0.7625
D03
0.758333
D01
0.758333
A12
0.754167
C02
0.725
A17
0.716667
C03
0.7125
E06
0.708333
A15
0.704167
CONTRACTOR
RESPONDENT: 40, VARIABLE: 59
(ANALYSIS BY RELATIVE IMPORTANCE INDEX)
POSSESSION OF SITE AND AVAILABILITY (A19)
CHANGES IN DESIGN (A05)
DELAYED PAYMENT ON CONTRACT AND EXTRAS (D04)
CONSTRUCTIVE CHANGE ORDER (D02)
POOR MANAGEMENT AND SUPERVISION (C07)
CHANGES IN SCOPE OF WORKS (A06)
UNFORESEEABLE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS (B05)
PROJECT PLANNING AND INTERFACING (A18)
GOVERNMENT POLICIES (E05)
DIFFERENT INTERPRETATION OF CONTRACT DOC.(D05)
SLOW DECISION MAKING INVOLVING ALL PARTIES (C10)
ORAL CHANGES ORDER BY EMPLOYER (A16)
© Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Faktor 1.1 Constructive
Change Order
Faktor 2.1 Oral Change Order
by Employer
Faktor 1.2 Variation Order
Faktor 2. 2 Possession of Site
and Availability
Faktor 1.3 : Inadequate site
investigation
KLAIM
Faktor 3.1 Changes in
Design
Faktor 3.2 Subsurface conditions of
geology
Faktor 3.3 Other Contractors
Interference and Delay
Faktor 3.4 Inefficiency and
Disruption
Suatu Persyaratan Umum Kontrak yang adil dan berimbang , mempunyai arti
sangat penting tidak hanya bagi kontraktor, tetapi juga bagi pengguna jasa.
Persyaratan Umum Kontrak yang tidak adil dan berimbang (unilateral contract)
dapat menyebabkan terjadinya sengketa antara pengguna jasa dan kontraktor,
yang mengakibatkan “pengguna jasa di pihak yang dirugikan (employer is the
looser).
Jika kontraktor menang, pengguna jasa harus mengeluarkan biaya ganti rugi
kepada kontraktor, sbaliknya jika pengguna jasa yang menang maka
pengguna jasa tetap harus membayar “biaya” dari sengketa yang terjadi,
karena terjadinya kemungkinan “kualitas yang jelak” dan/atau terjadinya
keterlambatan penyelesaian pekerjaan yang pada akhirnya mengakibatkan
terlambatnya “revenue” yang diharapkan dari pengoperasian asset tersebut.I
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
So I can only venture to guess that DRBs were never adopted
in Singapore either due to the ignorance of its benefits or its
was in the “Bad-ol’-days” when the Supervising Officer
assumed the deified position of someone who knew everything,
could never be wrong and could not be contradicted, in short,
“He-who-must-be-obeyed” personified.
But we must also remember in those days it was common place
to have employers squeezing main contractors, main
contractors squeezing subcontractors and suppliers and so on
down the line.
Justice of Supreme Court Quentin Loh, Singapore
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
KLAIM KONSTRUKSI
PASAL PASAL “BENDERA MERAH”
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
The questionnaires distributed to 20 employer staffs, 20 contractor
staffs, who engaged with the construction project using FIDIC
Conditions of Contract MDB Harmonised Edition 2010 in Indonesia,
resulted that the most frequent clauses used by contractor as the
base of their claim submission are as follows (Hardjomuljadi et al,
2012):
Sub-Clause 4.2 Unforeseeable physical conditions
Sub-Clause 2.1. Right of Access to the Site
Sub-Clause 1.9. Delayed Drawings or Instructions.
Sub-Clause 13.7 Adjustment for changes in legislation
Sub-Clause 8.1. Commencement of the Works
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
© Dr.Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Sub-Clause 4.12 Unforeseeable Physical Conditions
This is the Contractor’s favourite clause and it is more the gateway of
claim than the causal factor of claim itself.
Not all unforeseeable conditions is claimable
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
Based on the Contract: material
in the tunnel excavation is rock
type A
Actual condition: material in
the tunnel excavation is rock
type B
Rock type B is harder than A
Question:
Could it be considered as an Unforeseeable Physical Condition ?
May the contractor submit a claim for this condition?
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
© Dr. Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Sub-Clause 2.1 Right of Access to the Site
…………………………..
The Employer shall give the Contractor right of access to, and possession of, all parts of the
Site within the time (or times) stated in the Contract Data
If no such time is stated in the Contract Data, the Employer shall give the Contractor right of
access to, and possession of, the Site within such times as required to enable the Contractor to
proceed without disruption in accordance with the programme submitted under Sub-Clause 8.3
[Programme]. This Sub-Clause 2.1. is the most often Sub-Clause used by the contractor as the
basis of their claims.
“The Employer shall give the Contractor right of access to, and possession of, all parts of the
Site within the time (or times) stated in the Contract Data”, should be carefully interpreted
because it may be interpreted as “the whole Site within a specific time mentioned in the contract
data and/or in the tender proposal”.
The second paragraph of Sub-Clause 8.3 mentions about the” time” and “disruption” and also
that “The Contractor shall submit a detailed time programme to the Engineer within 28 days after
receiving the notice under Sub-Clause 8.1 [Commencement of Works]”. It means that the action
in the Sub-Clause 8.3. is done after the Sub-Clause 8.1. has been fulfilled. There are four
precedent conditions to be fulfilled before the issuance of the instruction on Commencement of
Works.
Sub-Clause 1.9 Delayed Drawings or Instructions
The Contractor shall give notice to the Engineer whenever the Works are
likely to be delayed or disrupted if any necessary drawing or instruction is
not issued to the Contractor within a particular time, which shall be
reasonable
If the Engineer fails to issue the Drawings within a particular time according to the
Contractor’s schedule, the Employer should be responsible to give compensation to
the Contractor, providing that the Contractor has followed the procedure and
fulfilled the requirements by giving notice to the Engineer and within the time
frame stipulated in the Contract. This Sub-Clause only mentions “within a time
which is reasonable”. Both parties should pay attention to this sentence as this
might cause different interpretation lead to dispute.
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
Sub-Clause 13.7 Adjustments for Changes in Legislation
The Contract Price shall be adjusted to take account of any increase or decrease
in Cost resulting from a change in the Laws of the Country (including the
introduction of new Laws and the repeal or modification of existing Laws) or in
the judicial or official governmental interpretation of such Laws, made after the
Base Date, which affect the Contractor in the performance of obligations under
the Contract.
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
Sub-Clause 1.13 Compliance with Laws
The Contractor shall, in performing the Contract, comply with
applicable Laws. Unless otherwise stated in the Particular
Conditions:
The parties should have the same interpretation on the “applicable laws” i.e.
all regulations established by the law itself instead of the parties obligation
under the contract. Parties should not only comply with the laws and
regulations issued before the base date, but also to all laws and regulations
issued during the course of the project. The FIDIC Contract allocate the risk of
change of law to the Employer as far as such law and regulation affect the
Contractor in performing their obligation, but the contractor should follow
such law and regulation, and submit the notice on the incident (Sub-Clause
1.13 clearly specify that each party is responsible to comply with the
applicable Laws”).
FIDIC World Centenary Conference
Barcelona, Spain
September 15-18, 2013
Occurrence
FIDIC CONDITIONS OF CONTRACT
Clause 20,
Claims, Disputes and Arbitration
28 days (Clause 20.1Para 1)
Notification
Rejected
No
14 days (Clause 20.1 Para 5)
Yes
(or period proposed by contractor agreed by engineer)
Fully detailed claim
with supporting
particular
42 days (Clause 20.1 Para 6)
(or period proposed by contractor agreed by engineer)
Engineer
response
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
SENGKETA
DAN PENYELESAIANNYA
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
CAYA CEOLANG SALJANA TEKNIK YANG
SANGAT PINTEL DAN MENGUACAI
PELHITUNGAN KONTLUKSI.
APA GUNANYA PENGETAHUAN TENTANG
KONTLAK, ITU KHAN ULUSANNYA AHLI
HUKUM.
PENANGGUNG JAWAB TEKNIK
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum Jakarta, 9
September 2014
Republic of Indonesia
Law No. 30 Year 1999
CONCERNING ARBITRATION AND ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Article 1 (10)
Alternative Dispute Resolution (or ADR) shall mean a mechanism for the
resolution of disputes or differences of opinion through procedures agreed upon
by the parties, i.e. resolution outside the courts by consultation, negotiation,
mediation, conciliation, or expert assessment.
Annual Conference of Dispute Resolution Board Foundation
Singapore, May 16-17, 2014
3
Dispute Resolution of Construction Contracts in Indonesia
DISPUTES
ADR
LITIGATION
by negotiation
by cosultation
by conciliation
by mediation
by arbitration
by expert assesment
INDONESIAN LAW No 30/ 1999
by mediation
by conciliation
assisted
by expert assesor
by arbitration
INDONESIAN LAW No 18/ 1999
Act No 29 Year 2000
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
3
Clause 20,
Claims, Disputes and Arbitration
84 days
(Clause 20.4 Para 5)
DB/DRB/
DAB
Fail to
decide
84 days
(Clause 20.4 Para 4)
Agreed
Final and
binding
Decision
28 days
(Clause 20.4 Para 5)
Disagreed
28 days
(Clause 20.4 Para 5)
Notice of
Dissatisfication to
other Party
56 days
(Clause 20.5 Para 1)
Yes
Amicable
Setlement
No
Commence
of Arbitration
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
© Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Dispute Resolution of Construction Contracts in Indonesia
Supreme Court
Supreme Court
Law No 30
Year 1999
Art 72
High Court
District Court
Supreme Court
FIDIC GCC
Clause 20
District Court
District Court
Arbitration
Arbitration
MEDIATION
CONSULTATION
NEGOTIATION
Annual Conference of Dispute Resolution Board Foundation
Singapore, May 16-17, 2014
Dispute
Board
EXPERT ASSESMENT
Decision
by the
Parties
Dispute
Board
CONCILLIATION
2
DISPUTE
LITIGATION
ARBITRATION
DISPUTE BOARD
COST
TIME
CERTAINTY
RELATIONSHIP
Based on the questionnaire distributed to 25 Employer Staff, 15 Engineer Staff and 25 Contractor Staff
Annual Conference of Dispute Resolution Board Foundation
Singapore, May 16-17, 2014
Kontrak Konstruksi masuk
ke ranah pidana, apabila
dalam pelaksanaannya
terjadi penyimpangan
dan/atau yang diduga
merupakan penyimpangan
prosedur, yang berdampak
merugikan negara,
menguntungkan orang lain.
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
© Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Kontrak konstruksi merupakan
hubungan perdata antara dua
pihak yang didasari penawaran
dari pihak yang satu dan
disetujui oleh pihak yang lain,
yang memuat persyaratan
umum dan persyaratan khusus,
dengan demikian dalam hal
terjadi pelanggaran maka
sifatnya adalah perdata
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
© Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Akhir-akhir ini banyak kontraktor maupun panitia
pengadaan barang dan jasa yang dikenai dakwaan pidana,
tidak sedikit dari mereka menjadi tersangka dan akhirnya
masuk penjara.
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
© Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
CONTOH PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG
TENTANG SENGKETA KONSTRUKSI
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
Kasus:
Belum diselesaikannya pembayaran dari pihak Tergugat I dan Tergugat II atas
penyelesaian pekerjaan pembangunan ruko-ruko di wilayah Gading Serpong oleh
Penggugat atas perintah Tergugat I dan Tergugat II.
PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG REPUBLIK INDONESIA
No. 1586 K/Pdt/2011
Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Tangerang:
Bahwa terhadap gugatan tersebut Pengadilan Negeri Tangerang telah mengambil putusan,
yaitu putusan Nomor 366/Pdt.G/2009/PN.Tng, tanggal 8 Juni 2010 yang amarnya sebagai
berikut:
1. Mengabulkan gugatan Penggugat untuk sebagian;
2. Menyatakan Tergugat I dan Tergugat II telah melakukan wanprestasi (ingkar janji);
3. Menyatakan Tergugat I dan Tergugat II berkewajiban untuk membayar sisa pembayaran
pekerjaan pokok sebesar Rp 172.821.911,89 kepada Penggugat;
4. Menghukum Tergugat I dan Tergugat II secara tanggung renteng membayar kepada
Penggugat uang sejumlah Rp 172.821.911,89;
5. Menolak gugatan Penggugat untuk selebihnya;
6. Menghukum Penggugat untuk membayar biaya yang timbul akibat perkaraini yang hingga
kini dihitung sejumlah Rp 266.000,- (dua ratus enam puluh enam ribu rupiah);
Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Banten:
Menimbang, bahwa dalam tingkat banding atas permohonan Penggugat putusan Pengadilan
Negeri tersebut telah dinyatakan tidak dapat diterima oleh Pengadilan Tinggi Banten dengan
putusannya Nomor 85/Pdt/2010/PT.Btn, tanggal 24 Februari 2011 yang amarnya sebagai
berikut:
1. Menyatakan permohonan banding yang dimohonkan oleh Pembandingsemula
Penggugat tidak dapat diterima;
2. Menghukum Pembanding semula Penggugat untuk membayar biaya perkara dalam
kedua tingkat peradilan yang dalam tingkat banding sebesar Rp 150.000,- (seratus lima
puluh ribu rupiah);
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia:
- Menolak permohonan kasasi dari Pemohon Kasasi: PT. GAJAH MUDA PERSADAtersebut;
- Menghukum Pemohon Kasasi/Penggugat untuk membayar biaya perkara dalam tingkat
kasasi sebesar Rp 500.000,- (lima ratus ribu rupiah);
APAKAH PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG
FINAL & MENGIKAT ?
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014
Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Dr, Ir, MSc (Civ), MSBA (Bus), MH (Law), MDBF, ACIArb, ACPE
FIDIC International Accredited Trainer
FIDIC Adjudicator
Federation Internationale des Ingenieurs-Conseils
FIDIC - Box 311 - CH-1215 Geneva 15 - Switzerland
SKYPE fidic.secretariat - Tl +41-22-799 49 00 - Fx +41-22-799 49 01 – w
ww.FIDIC.org
Country Representative for Indonesia
The Dispute Resolution Board Foundation
19550 International Blvd. So Suite 314
Seattle, Washington 98188, USA
Tel.(206) 878-3336, Fax (206) 878-3338
www.drb.org
Corporate Panel Member (MDBF)
The Dispute Board Federation
14, rue du Rhone
1204 Geneva, Switzerland
Tel: +41 22 819 19 68, Fax: +41 44 732 69 95
www.dbfederation.org
Associate Member (ACIArb)
Chartered Institute of Arbitrators
12 Bloomsbury Square
London, WC1A 2LP, UK
Tel: +44 (0)20 7421 7444; Fax: +44 (0)20 7404 4023
www.ciarb.org
THANK YOU
Sarwono Hardjomuljadi
Dr, Ir, MSC, MSBA, MH, MDBF, ACIArb, ACPE.
FIDIC International Accredited Trainer
FIDIC Approved Adjudicator
Country Representative of Dispute Resolutuion Board Foundation
National Board for Construction Services Development
Biro Hukum Kementerian Pekerjaan Umum
Jakarta, 9 September 2014