Main Article Content
Abstract
ABSTRAK
Perkawinan yang sah tidak saja membawa akibat ikatan lahir batin antara seorang pria dan seorang wanita saja yang menyatu, akan tetapi terciptanya harta benda suami dan isteri dalam perkawinan. Salah satu bentuk harta benda perkawinan berupa harta bersama. Harta bersama merupakan harta benda yang diperoleh suami dan isteri selama perkawinan berlangsung, dengan tidak mempermasalahkan pihak mana yang menghasilkannya. Dengan adanya Putusan Mahakamah Konstitusi Nomor 69/PUU-XIII/2015 dibolehkannya perjanjian kawin dibuat setelah perkawinan berlangsung. Dapat menjadi masalah apabila terjadinya perjanjian kredit dengan jaminan harta bersama, yang dikemudian hari baru dibuat perjanjian perkawinan yang diperbolehkan dengan adanya putusan Mahkamah Kostitusi. Artikel ini merupakan hasil dari penelitian dengan menggunakan metode pendekatan yuridis normatif kemudian dianalisis secara normatif kualitatif. Disimpulkan bahwa suami/istri tidak dapat dimintakan pertanggungjawaban apabila tidak menyatakan persetujuan dalam perjanjian kredit dengan jaminan harta bersama. Perjanjian kawin pasca adanya Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 69/PUU-XIII/2015 belum memberikan kepastian hukum bagi pihak ketiga dikarenakan para pihak dikhawatirkan tidak beritikad baik dalam pembuatan perjanjian kawin. Untuk memberikan kepastian bagi pihak ketiga selaku pemberi fasilitas kredit bagi pasangan suami dan istri dan dapat dipertanggungjawabkan, maka pasangan suami istri seharusnya melakukan pendaftaran pencatatan perjanjian perkawinan guna memenuhi asas publisitas.
Kata kunci: harta bersama, perjanjian kawin, perjanjian kredit, perkawinan.
ABSTACT
Legitimate marriages not only bring the consequences of an inner bond between a man and a woman merely but the creation of the husband and wife’s property in the marriage. One form of marital property is a common property. Mutual property is a property acquired by a husband and wife during marriage, without questioning which party produces them. With the Constitution of the Constitution Number 69/PUU-XIII/2015, a marriage agreement was made after the marriage took place. It can be a problem when a credit agreement with a joint property collateral, which was later made a marriage agreement allowed with the verdict of the Constitutional Court. This article is a result of research using a normative juridical approach method then normatively analyzed qualitatively. It is concluded that husbands and wives can not be held accountable when not expressing consent in a credit agreement with the guarantee of common property that the spouse does not express agreement in a credit agreement with a joint property guarantee. The marriage agreement after the Constitutional Court Decision Number 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015 has not given legal certainty for third parties as the parties are feared not to have good faith in the making of a marriage agreement. To provide certainty for a third party as a credit facility for couples and spouses and to be accountable, spouses should register registration of marriage agreements in order to fulfill the publicity basis.
Keywords: credit agreement, marriage, marriage agreement, mutual property.
Keywords
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions and will retain publishing rights without restrictions.
The submitted papers are assumed to contain no proprietary material unprotected by patent or patent application; responsibility for technical content and for protection of proprietary material rests solely with the author(s) and their organizations and is not the responsibility of the ACTA DIURNAL or its Editorial Staff. The main (first/corresponding) author is responsible for ensuring that the article has been seen and approved by all the other authors. It is the responsibility of the author to obtain all necessary copyright release permissions for the use of any copyrighted materials in the manuscript prior to the submission.