Abstract :
This research aims at comprehending and analyzing the existence and the
consequence or legal result of the implementation of Pasal 1266 of KUHPerdata
to the agreement of the inactive debtor in his or her contract. This research uses a
normative method, in which the writer scrutinizes and delves into the legal
existence of the positive norms of Pasal 1266 KUHPerdata implemented to the
legal consequences of the formal and valid contract of an inactive debtor. Hence,
the approaches used here are conceptual ones taking benefit of the primary and
secondary legal resources. The theoretical frame used in this research is the
baseline of the theory of valid positive law.
The result of the research shows that the legal consequences of Pasal 1266
KUHPerdata, when implemented to the valid contract of an inactive debtor, is that
the inactive debtor could be classified or categorized as fail to fulfill his or her
obligation (ingebrekesteling). Consequently, the contract falls into cancelation
since the inactive debtor failed to do his obligation. In other words, he has made
wanprestasi. The cancelation of the contract should be made through the legal
decision in a court in which the creditor always has right to ask for debtor to repay
the loss he had made.
Accordingly, the existence of Pasal 1266 KUHPerdata, when implemented
to a valid contract, contains existential truth of positive value since it gives
certainty to all the parties in that contract. it is because of this reason, the parties
when they are making contract, they should take into account the existence of this
pasal. they could not put it aside or even ignore it. The justification of this is based
on the legal and valid decision of Supreme Court number 650/PK/pdt/2012,
February 19, 2013 showing the effective factors of Pasal 1266, after the demand
of agreement cancellation, through the legal efforts of final review.