GANTI RUGI DALAM PENERBANGAN INTERNASIONAL MENURUT KONVENSI MONTREAL 1999
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tulisan ini bertujuan untuk mengkaji ketentuan penerbangan internasional dalam hukum nasional serta untuk menganalisis pemberlakuan ganti rugi menurut Konvensi Montreal 1999 dalam sistem hukum Indonesia. Metode penelitian yang digunakan dalam penulisan jurnal ilmiah ini yaitu metode penelitian normatif yang bertitik tumpu pada konflik norma yang diangkat pada penelitian ini. Bahan hukum yang dipergunakan adalah bahan hukum primer dan bahan hukum skunder. Berdasarkan penelitian ini, diketahui bahwa aturan pelaksana sebagai dampak meratifikasi Konvensi Montreal 1999 menyebabkan asas lex superior derogate legi inferiori menjadi sandungan untuk tidak memberlakuakan ketentuan ganti rugi Konvensi Montreal 1999 yang hanya melalui Perpres Nomor 95 Tahun 2016 Pengesahan Convention For The Unification Of Certain Rules For International Carriage By Air (Konvensi Unifikasi Aturan-Aturan Tertentu Tentang Angkutan Udara Internasional).
 This article aims to examine the provisions of international aviation in national law and to analyze the application of compensation according to the 1999 Montreal Convention in the Indonesian legal system. research method used in this scientific journal research is normative research which focuses on the conflict of norms raised in this study. The legal materials used are primary and secondary legal materials. Based on this research, it is known that the implementing regulations as the impact of ratifying the 1999 Montreal Convention have caused the lex superior derogate legi inferiori principle to become an obstacle for not enforcing the provisions for compensation for the 1999 Montreal Convention which only through Presidential Decree Number 95 of 2016 concerning ratification Convention For The Unification Of Certain Rules For International Carriage By Air.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".