•  
  •  
 

Abstract

Since the Roman era, there has been a general consensus that no one should prosper at the expense of another. However, the development of variations in legal systems in the world means that many countries must continue to adapt to this situation to avoid legal loopholes. In certain situations, the complexity of obligations in society causes quasi-contracts to occur. As a country that follows the civil law constitutional framework, Indonesia still encounters difficulties in handling quasi-contract disputes, not only due to the absence of written regulations but also because previous court decisions do not bind Indonesia. In contrast, in the United States of America, the creation of law occurs through court decisions. However, this study also aims to deliver insight into the legal systems' orientations in those two nations and how they relate to restorative justice. Hence, the author will discuss how quasi-contract problems are resolved by explaining the comparison between the two legal systems. This study uses a comparative juridical method to analyze the judgment practices on quasi-contracts between the United States of America and Indonesia and recommends the urgency of issuing regulations to address these disputes.

References

Books

Agustina, Rosa (et.al.) Hukum Perikatan. Bali: Pustaka Larasan, 2012.

Ali, Moch. Chaidir, Achmad Samsudin, and Mashudi. Pengertian-Pengertian Elementer Hukum Perjanjian Perdata. Bandung: Mandar Maju, 1993.

Anson, William. Principle of English Contract Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1961.

Badrulzaman, Mariam Darus. Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata, Buku III Hukum Perikatan Dengan Penjelasan. Bandung: Alumni, 1983.

Burrows, A. S. The Law of Restitution. United Kingdom: Butterworths, 1993.

Chernykh, Yuliya. Contract Interpretation in Investment Treaty Arbitration. Leiden: Brill Nijhoff, 2022.

Farid, A. Zainal Abidin. Hukum Pidana I. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 1995.

Harahap, Yahya. Segi-Segi Hukum Perjanjian. Bandung: Alumni, 1986.

Hartono, Sunaryati. Peranan Pengadilan Dalam Rangka Pembinaan dan Pembaharuan Hukum. Jakarta: Penerbit Bina Cipta, 1975.

Johnston, David and Reinhard Zimmermann. Unjustified Enrichment: Key Issues in Comparative Perspective. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

Khairandy, Ridwan. Hukum Kontrak Indonesia Dalam Perspektif Perbandingan. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press, 2014.

Macqueen, Hector L. and Joe Thomson. Contract Law in Scotland. UK: Bloomsbury Professional Limited, 2012.

Merryman, John Henry. The Civil Law Tradition: An Introduction to the Legal System of Western Europe and Latin America 2nd Ed. California: Stanford University Press, 1985.

Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Bab-Bab Tentang Penemuan Hukum. Jakarta: Citra Aditya Bakti, 1993.

___________________. Penemuan Hukum Sebuah Pengantar. Yogyakarta: Liberty, 1996.

___________________. Sejarah Peradilan dan Perundang-Undangannya di Indonesia Sejak 1943 dan Apakah Kemanfaatannya Bagi Kita Bangsa Indonesia. Yogyakarta: Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta, 2011.

Muladi. Hak Asasi Manusia, Politik, dan Sistem Peradilan Pidana. Semarang: Badan Penerbit Universitas Diponegoro: 2002.

Muljadi, Kartini. Perikatan yang Lahir dari Perjanjian. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers, 2014.

Neyers, J.W., Mitchell McInnes, and S. Pitel. Understanding Unjustified Enrichment. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2004.

Nonet, Phillipe and Philip Selznick. Hukum Responsif. Bandung: Nusa Media, 2018.

Panggabean. Penerapan Teori Hukum Dalam Sistem Peradilan Indonesia. Bandung: PT Alumni, 2014.

Prakorso, Abintoro. Penemuan Hukum. Sistem, Metode, Aliran, dan Prosedur Dalam Menemukan Hukum. Yogyakarta: Laksbang Pressindo, 2015.

Ranuhandoko, I.P.M. Terminologi Hukum. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2000.

Rawls, John. A Theory of Justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1971.

Rusli, Hardijan. Hukum Perjanjian Indonesia dan Common Law. Jakarta: Pustaka Sinar Harapan, 1996.

Setiawan, I Ketut Oka. Hukum Perikatan. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2016.

Shoim, Muhammad. Pengantar Hukum Perdata di Indonesia. Semarang: CV Rafi Sarana Perkasa, 2022.

Simanjuntak, P. N.H. Hukum Perdata Indonesia. Jakarta: PT Fajar Interpratama Mandiri, 2016.

Subekti. Aspek-Aspek Hukum Perikatan. Bandung: Alumni, 1999.

______. Hukum Perjanjian. Jakarta: Intermasa, 2010.

Suharnoko. Hukum Perjanjian: Teori dan Analisa Kasus. Jakarta: Kencana, 2004.

Susanti, Diah Imningrum. Penafsiran Hukum yang Komprehensif. Malang: Iphils, 2015.

Weinrib, Ernest J. The Idea of Private Law. United States of America: Harvard University Press, 1995.

Widjadja, Gunawan. Perikatan yang Lahir dari Perjanjian. Jakarta: PT Raja Grafindo Persada, 2014.

Wignjodipoero, Soerojo. Pengantar dan Asas-Asas Hukum Adat. Jakarta: Gunung Agung, 1983.

Other Documents

Cane, Peter. “Corrective Justice and Correlativity in Private Law.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 16, no. 3 (1996): 471-488. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/16.3.471.

Corbin, Arthur Linton. “Quasi-Contractual Obligations.” The Yale Law Journal Company 21, no. 7 (1912): 533-554. https://doi.org/10.2307/785883.

Dickson, Brice. “Unjustified Enrichment Claims: A Comparative Overview.” The Cambridge Law Journal 54, no. 1 (1995): 100-126.

Eleftheriadis, Pavlos. “Corrective Justice Among States.” Jus Cogens 2 (2020): 7-27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42439-019-00013-x.

Febrianto, Tri Bowo Hersandy. “Peran Civil Law Dalam Sistem Hukum Indonesia.” Jurnal Hukum dan Sosial Politik 2, no. 1 (2024): 235-245. https://doi.org/10.59581/jhsp-widyakarya.v2i1.2178.

Fon, Vincy and Francesco Parisi. “Judicial Precedents in Civil Law Systems: A Dynamic Analysis.” International Review of Law and Economics 26, no. 4 (2006): 519-535. https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.534504.

Keener, William A. “Quasi-Contract, Its Nature and Scope.” Harvard Law Review 7, no. 2 (1893): 57-75. https://doi.org/10.2307/1322006.

Lewinshon, Joseph L. “Contract Distinguished from Quasi-Contract.” California Law Review 2, no. 3 (1914): 171-190. https://doi.org/10.2307/3474509.

Maitreya. “Rationale Behind Quasi-Contract.” Pennaclaims 6 (2019): 1-6.

Mannolini, Justin. “Restitution: Where an Anticipated Contract Fails to Materialise.” The Modern Law Review 59, no. 1 (1996): 111-116.

Nurhardianto, Fajar. “Sistem Hukum dan Posisi Hukum Indonesia.” Jurnal TAPIs 11, no. 1 (2015): 34-45. http://dx.doi.org/10.24042/tps.v11i1.840.

Pati, Sakka. “Quasi-Contract Dalam Hubungan Hukum Pekerja Rumah Tangga.” Legal Pluralism 7, no. 1 (2017): 78-84.

Perry, Stephen R. “On the Relationship Between Corrective and Distributive Justice.” Oxford Essays in Jurisprudence, 4th Series (2000): 237-264.

Salam, Syukron. “Perkembangan Doktrin Perbuatan Melawan Hukum Penguasa.” Nurani Hukum Journal 1, no. 1 (2018): 33-44. https://doi.org/10.51825/nhk.v1i1.4818.

Schwartz, Alan and Robert E. Scott. “Precontractual Liability and Preliminary Agreements.” Harvard Law Review 120, no. 3 (2007): 662-705.

Sinel, Zoe. “Through Thick and Thin: The Place of Corrective Justice in Unjustified Enrichment.” Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 31, no. 3 (2011): 551-564. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqr015.

Sullivan, Timothy J. "The Concept of Benefit in the Law of Quasi-Contract." The Georgetown Law Journal 64, no. 1 (1975): 1-26.

Widjaja, Gunawan (et.al.) “Unjustified Enrichment.” Cross-Border 1, no. 1 (2018): 252-263.

Winastri, Rivo Krisna (et.al.) “Tinjauan Normatif Terhadap Ganti Rugi Dalam Perkara Perbuatan Melawan Hukum yang Menimbulkan Kerugian Immateriil (Studi Kasus Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Istimewa Jakarta No. 568/1968. G).” Diponegoro Law Journal 6, no. 2 (2017): 1-18. https://doi.org/10.14710/dlj.2017.17314.

Legal Documents

California Court of Appeal, Peter Kossian v. American National Insurance (Judgment of 1967).

Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia of 1945 [Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945].

Court of Wales, Kelly v. Solari (1841) 9 M&W 54, 152 ER 24.

District Court of Kotamobagu, Glandy J. B. Damping v. Moudy Ngantung (et.al.) (Judgment of 5 March 2018).

Indonesian Civil Code [Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata].

Law Number 3 of 2009 on Second Amendment on the Law Number 14 of 1985 concerning Supreme Court [Undang-Undang Nomor 3 Tahun 2009 tentang Perubahan Kedua Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 14 Tahun 1985 tentang Mahkamah Agung].

Law Number 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power [Undang-Undang Nomor 48 Tahun 2000 tentang Kekuasaan Kehakiman].

Supreme Court Regulation Number 4 of 2019 on the Amendments of Supreme Court Regulation Number 2 of 2015 Small Claim Court Settlement Procedures [Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 4 Tahun 2019 tentang Perubahan Atas Peraturan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 2 Tahun 2015 tentang Tata Cara Penyelesaian Gugatan Sederhana].

Supreme Court of Indonesia, PT Adi Sampoerna v. Soetjipto W. S. (Judgment of 22 December 2014).

Supreme Court of Alaska, Robert J. Sparks v. Ernie Gustafson (Judgment of 19 February 1988).

Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

DOI

https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v11n2.a6

Download

Share

COinS