Tinjauan Yuridis Gugatan Wanprestasi Pemasangan Transformer (Travo) Antara PT. Teknik Listrik Batam Dengan PT. Bintan Lagoon Resort Dalam Perkara Nomor : 29/Pdt-G/2011/PN.Tpi (Studi Kasus)

Siahaan, Hasan (2019) Tinjauan Yuridis Gugatan Wanprestasi Pemasangan Transformer (Travo) Antara PT. Teknik Listrik Batam Dengan PT. Bintan Lagoon Resort Dalam Perkara Nomor : 29/Pdt-G/2011/PN.Tpi (Studi Kasus). Other thesis, Universitas Islam Riau.

Preview

Text 151010138.pdf Download (4MB) | Preview

Abstract

In fulfilling their lives, since long time ago humans have carried out trade business both by individuals and business entities. One of them is PT. Tekknik Listrik Batam (Plaintiff) made a working agreement with PT. Bintan Lagoon Resort (Defendant). PT.Bintan Lagoon Resort Proposes to PT Teknik Listrik Batam to hold and install a Transformer (Travo) in his building. The agreement was made verbally and agreed on the wholesale price of Sin $ 70,000 (Seventy Thousand Singapore Dollars) and the Plaintiff completed the work properly and the Plaintiff gave a 12-month guarantee. But after the job is finished and the warranty period has passed. The Defendant was not willing to pay the contract until the Plaintiff finally sued the Defendant in the Tanjung Pinang District Court. The judge grants the Plaintiff's claim in the form of compensation for the cost of contracting the travo and paying the rent as long as it is used by the Defendant, including during the 12-month warranty period which should not be calculated because the trial period is a grace period to test the quality of goods / work. Based on the background of the problem, the authors formulated the issues that will be discussed in this study, namely: What is the default of the Transformer installation agreement between PT Teknik Listrik Batam and PT. Bintan Lagoon Resort in Case Number: 29 / Pdt-G / 2011 / PN.TPI ?and how are the legal considerations used by the Judge in deciding Case Number: 29 / Pdt-G / 2011 / PN.TPI? When viewed from this type of research classified into normative research, by way of document study, namely by studying the case files Number 29 / Pdt-G / 2011 / PN.TPI. Whereas seen from its nature this research is descriptive with the intention of being able to provide a clear and detailed description of the case of defaulting the installation of Transformers (Travo) in the case. The data in this study are in the form of file documents Case Decision Number 29 / Pdt-G / 2011 / PN.TPI and seen from the conclusion, this study uses an inductive method, namely drawing conclusions starting from data that is specific to data that is general in nature. In his proof, the Plaintiff submitted a witness, namely Supriyono, Martala Yunus and Expert witness namely Marsius M Sembiring who stated that the Plaintiff was correct in placing the Defendant in the Defendant's building. The Defendant presented a witness, namely Muhammad Ridwan bin Razali, who stated that he had spoken verbally with the Plaintiff that the wholesale price of the Travo was Sin $ 70,000, - The Judge granted the Plaintiff's Claim in the form of compensation in accordance with the contract price plus compensation in the form of rental for the Defendant including during the 12 month warranty period that should not be subject to rent. Because losses are due to default are losses incurred directly by the cause of default.

Actions (login required)

View Item