Notary's Legal Responsibility for Differences in the Contents of the Deed and Copy of the Deed is associated with the Principle of Prudence
Abstract
This study aims to find out and criticize 1) the regulation of the difference in the content of the deed minuta and the copy of the deed issued by the Notary to the parties. 2) The notary's legal responsibility for the difference in the contents of the deed and the copy of the deed issued is associated with the principle of prudence. This research uses a normative juridical method, with a conceptual approach, a legislative approach and a case approach. The analysis of legal materials is carried out by inventorying, systematizing and interpreting. The results of the research are 1) Arrangements regarding the difference in the contents of the deed minuta and copies of the deed issued by the Notary to the parties are regulated in Article 1 number 9, Article 16 paragraph 1 letters a and d and corrections in Article 51 of the UUJN. The ambiguity of the legal norms of Article 51 of the UUJN-P does not explain the substantial or non-substantial typographical errors that can be corrected, how with the copy of the deed that has been given to the parties and the provisions of Article 51 of the UUJN-P it becomes difficult to implement in the event that the witnesses no longer exist before the Notary. Legal principles that can be used as a form of settlement for differences in the minuta of the deed and copies of the deed issued by the Notary to the parties are the principle of prudence, the principle of good faith and the principle of abuse of authority. The difference between the minutes of the deed and the copy of the deed is due to the lack of caution of the Notary and typos by the Notary. 2) Notaries are also responsible, especially if degradation of deeds occurs, subject to Administrative and Civil sanctions. Recommendations to 1) Policy makers, in order to be able to regulate in detail how the Notary principle of prudence, especially on the form and nature of the renvoi in the deed and the limits of the Notary's authority over it, especially the Renvoi which is only carried out after the issuance of a copy of the Deed to protect the Notary and the parties. 2) The Notary in carrying out his obligations must prioritize the attitude of thoroughness, thoroughness, prudence, not abusing authority and good faith when making a deed so that the deed he makes can give a sense of justice to the parties. Preventive efforts that can be made by the Notary sign or paraphrase each page of the deed that is made and works based on the principle of prudence
References
______ Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata.
______ Undang-Undang Nomor 2 Tahun 2014 Tentang Perubahan atas Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan Notaris Nomor 3. Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 5491.
______ Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan Notaris, Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2004 Nomor 117. Tambahan Lembaran Negara Nomor 4432.
Achmad Feryliyan, “Kedudukan Akta Notaris Sebagai Alat Bukti Dalam Proses Pemeriksaan Perkara Pidana”, Justuce Pro Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Volume 3 Nomor 2(2021), hlm. 9 .
Andi Mamminanga, Pelaksanaan Kewenangan Majelis Pengawas Notaris Daerah dalam Pelaksanaan Tugas Jabatan Notaris berdasarkan UUJN, Tesis, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gajah Mada, Yogyakarta, (2008) hlm. 32.
Budiawan, Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Notaris Yang Mengandung Kesalahan dalam Penulisan Komparisi, Al-quanun Volume 20 Nomor 2, (2017) hlm. 440.
Brillian Pratama, “Prinsip Kehati-Hatian Dalam Membuat Akta Oleh Notaris”, Repertorium Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Kenotariatan Volume 11 Nomor 1, (2022) hlm. 26.
Dedy pramono, “Kekuatan Pembuktian Akta Yang Dibuat Oleh Notaris Selaku Pejabat Umum Menurut Hukum Acara Perdata Di Indonesia”, Lex Jurnalica Volume 12 Nomor 3 (2018), hlm. 251 .
Eudea Adeli Arsy,Tanggung Jawab Notaris Terhadap Akta Yang Cacat Hukum Dan Tidak Sesuai Dengan Ketentuan Pembuatan Akta Dalam Undang-Undang Jabatan Notaris, Jurnal Bina Mulia Hukum Volume 6 Nomor 1, (2021) hlm. 135.
Habib Adjie, Hukum Notaris Indonesia ( Tafsir Tematik Terhadap Undang-Undang Nomor 30 Tahun 2004 Tentang Jabatan Notaris), PT. Refika Aditama, Bandung, (2018) hlm. 483.
Habib Adjie, Memahami dan Menguasai Teori Akta Notaris Ragam Awal Akta, Komparisi dam Akhir Akta Notaris, Duta Nusindo, Semarang, (2018) hlm. 36.
Habib Adjie,Sanksi Perdata dan administrasi terhadap Notaris sebagai pejabat publik, PT Refika Aditama cetakan ke-IV , Bandung,(2017) hlm. 81.
Hasan Utoyo,Teknik Pembuatan Akta, Bina Ilmu, Surabaya,(2006) hlm. 95.
Irwansyah, Penelitian Hukum, Pilihan Metode & Praktik Penulisan Artikel Edisi Revisi, Mira Buana Media, Yogyakarta.(2021) hlm. 65 .
Kristien Tjahjaningtyas, “Tanggung Jawab Hukum Notaris terhadap Ketidak Sesuaian Salinan Akta dengan Minuta”, Jurnal Hukum Indonesia Volume 2 Nomor 3, (2023) hlm. 143.
Luh Nila Winarni, "Asas Itikad Baik Sebagai Upaya Perlindungan Konsumen Dalam Perjanjian Pembiayaan", Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, Volume 11, Fakultas Hukum Universitas Denpasar Bali, (2015) hlm. 3–4
ade Ciria Angga Mahendra, “Akibat Hukum Terhadap Kesalahan Ketik pada Akta yang Dibuat Notaris”, acta comitas jurnal hukum kenotariatan volume 4 Nomor 2, (2021) hlm 229.
Maria Fransiska Christiani Nawang, Putu Rasmadi Arsha Putra, Akibat Hukum Pembatalan Salinan Akta Notaris Oleh Pengadilan, Akta Comitas, Volume 6 Nomor 3, (2021) hlm. 581.
Mauliawati Alifah, “Proses penyidikan Notaris dalam perkara pembuatan salinan akta pendirian perseroan komanditer (cv) yang nomornya berbeda dengan minuta”, Tesis Kenotariatan UNIISSULA, (2021) hlm. 5.
Muchammad Ali Marzuki, “Tanggung Jawab Notaris Atas Kesalahan Ketik Pada Minuta Akta Yang Sudah Keluar Salinan Akta”, Jurnal Komunikasi Hukum (Jhk) Volume 4 Nomor 2, (2020) hlm. 129.
Munir Fuady, Hukum Kontrak (Dari Sudut Pandang Hukum Bisnis), Bandung: PT. Citra Aditya Bakti,(2004) hlm 81 .
Muskibah, Penerapan Prinsip Kebebasan Berkontrak Dalam Kontrak Standar Pengadaan Barang Dan Jasa Pemerintah Di Indonesia, Jurnal Refleksi hukum Ilmiah Hukum volume 4 Nomor 2, (2020) hlm. 176.
Pahlefi dan Raffles,” Klausula Pembatalan Sepihak Dalam Perjanjian Menurut Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Indonesia”, Gorontalo Law Review volume 2 Nomor 2,(2019) hlm. 75.
Pieter Latumenten, Aplikasi Perubahan UU Jabatan Notaris Dalam Akta Notaris, Makalah yang disampaikan dalam Rapat Pleno Pengurus Pusat Yang Diperluas Pembekalan Dan Penyegaran Pengetahuan, Ikatan Notaris Indonesia, Jakarta, (2014) hlm.12-13.
Rahmad Hendra, “Tanggungjawab Notaris Terhadap Akta Otentik Yang Penghadapnya Mempergunakan Identitas Palsu Di Kota Pekanbaru”, Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Volume 3 Nomor 1, (2014) hlm. 3.
Ridwan HR, Hukum Administrasi Negara, Raja Grafindo Persada, Jakarta (2008), hlm. 318.
Rizky Amalia, “Pertanggungjawaban Notaris Terhadap Isi Akta Autentik Yang Tidak Sesuai Dengan Fakta”, Al-Ishlah: Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum Volume 24 Nomor 1, (2021) hlm.197.
Copyright (c) 2024 Tiurma Helena, Muskibah Muskibah, Raffles Raffles
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
