The Ambiguity of Resi Gudang (Warehouse Receipt) Guarantee Institution Legal Standing
),
(1) Law Faculty, Universitas Airlangga
Corresponding Author
Abstract
Farmers usually use warehouse receipts to obtain debt with commodity objects stored in the warehouse as a debt security. Warehouse receipts as valuable objects, of course, have the potential to be tied up in a debt bond that serves as a security for these debts. However, for an item of guarantee, the legal aspects are quite diverse. For objects to be used as collateral in a credit agreement, they must meet certain conditions, namely, economic value and transferability. Therefore, it is necessary to conduct a study of warehouse receipts to be used as collateral objects, given the characteristics of warehouse receipts as valuable objects and the property rights attached to the warehouse receipts. This research is normative research with a statutory approach. The result of this research is that warehouse receipts can be used as collateral objects but with some adjustments. And based on the existing regulations, it is understood that the warehouse receipt arrangement does not create a warehouse receipt guarantee institution.
Keywords: Resi Gudang, Debt, CollateralReferences
Ashari, NFN. “Potensi dan Kendala Sistem Resi Gudang (SRG) untuk Mendukung Pembiayaan Usaha Pertanian di Indonesia.” Forum Penelitian Agro Ekonomi 29.2 (2016): 129.
Bappepti. Panduan Pelaksanaan Sistem Resi Gudang. Jakarta: Kementerian Perdagangan Republik Indonesia, 2017.
Hariyani, Iswi, and R Serfianto. Resi Gudang Sebagai Jaminan Kredit&Alat Perdagangan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2010.
Nugraheni, Ninis. “The Movable Goods As A Collateral Object In Warehouse Receipt System.” Hang Tuah Law Journal 2.1 (2018): 95–103.
Olivia, Fitria. “Tanggung Jawab Pengelola Gudang Mengenai Resi Gudang Terhadap Kelalaian yang Mengakibatkan Kerugian.” Jurnal Lex Jurnalica 10.3 (2013): 161–173.
Pusat Kebijakan Perdagangan Dalam Negeri. Analisis Efektifitas Sistem Resi Gudang Melalui Pasar Lelang Forward Komoditi. Jakarta: Kementerian Perdagangan Republik Indonesia, 2015.
Putra, Fani Martiawan Kumara. “Characteristics of Notary Deeds for Transactions Through Electronic Media.” NORMA 17.3 (2021): 1–14.
———. “Karakteristik Pembebanan Jaminan Fidusia Pada Benda Persediaan Dan Penyelesaian Sengketa Saat Debitor Wanprestasi.” Perspektif 21.1 (2016): 34–47.
———. “Konstruksi Lembaga Jaminan Untuk Saham Sebagai Bentuk Dukungan Perkembangan Bisnis.” Perspektif 23.2 (2018): 66–75.
Setiono, Gentur Cahyo. “Jaminan Kebendaan dalam Proses Perjanjian Kredit Perbankan (Tinjauan Yuridis Terhadap Jaminan Benda Bergerak Tidak Berwujud).” Transparansi Hukum 1.1 (2018): 1–18.
Supramono, Gatot. Perjanjian Utang Piutang. Jakarta: Kencana Media, 2013.
Suwandi, Suwandi. “Kedudukan Jaminan Antara Utang-Piutang Dan Rahn.” Jurisdictie: Jurnal Hukum dan Syariah 7.2 (2016): 203–218.
Usanti, Trisadini Prasastinah, and Leonora Bakarbessy. Referensi Hukum Perbankan: Hukum Jaminan. Surabaya: Revka Petra Media, 2016.
Yuswalina. “Hutang-Piutang dalam Prespektif Fiqh Muamalah di Desa Ujung Tanjung Kecamatan Banyuasin III Kabupaten Banyuasin.” Intizar 19.2 (2016): 395–410.
Zaroni. Sistem Resi Gudang. Bandung: Artikel Supply Chain Indonesia, 2017.
Article Metrics
Abstract View
: 216 times
Download : 215 times
DOI: 10.30742/nlj.v18i1.1292
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
Copyright (c) 2021 NORMA
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
