MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970296971 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v12n3p178

Legal Protection for Creditors in Money Loans Agreement Lending with Constitutional Court's Decision No. 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015

2019· article· en· W2970296971 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Daniel Hendrawan, Christian Andersen, Theodora Novia Tjasa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMarriage and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawCreditorConstitutional courtLoanPolitical scienceParagraphLegislationMarriage lawSociologyConstitutionEconomicsDebt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Indonesia, the Marriage Agreement has long been valid and regulated in the legislation in Law Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage. Marriage Agreement regulates marriage property. In Article 29 paragraph (1) Law Number 1 Year 1974 concerning Marriage stipulates that marriage agreements must be made before the marriage takes place, but in 2015 the Constitutional Court issued Decision Number 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015 concerning changes to Article 29 paragraph (1), paragraph (3), and paragraph (4) of Law Number 1 of 1974 concerning Marriage which states that the Marriage Agreement can be made before, at the time of, and after the marriage takes place. The Constitutional Court ruling raises questions from various parties about how the legal consequences of the Marriage Agreement made after the marriage took place and what legal protection can be given to third parties on the Marriage Agreement which was made after the marriage took place. This study uses a normative juridical research method that is descriptive analytical based on the merging of primary, secondary and tertiary data acquisition. The results of this study indicate that the legal consequences of the Marriage Agreement made after the marriage took place will have legal consequences for the parties themselves, assets, and also for third parties. Legal protection that can be given to creditors is to pay attention to the element of good faith in each loan agreement making so that creditors will be protected by themselves, if one of the parties making the loan agreement has bad faith, the loan agreement will automatically be canceled law because it does not meet the objective requirements. The author's hope for this research is that the government can provide further regulation regarding the Constitutional Court Decision Number 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015 so that the public gets legal certainty in the implementation of the Decision and for the community the writer recommends restraint in carrying out the Decision until the regulation further from the government. Finally, the authors hope that this research can benefit the world of legal development in Indonesia.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.043
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.043
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0190.003

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicMarriage and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207