The Francovich Principle as the Basis of State Responsibility for Laborer Loss Due to Company Bankruptcy

Agus Widyantoro, Moch. Marsa Taufiqurrohman, Xavier Nugraha

Abstract

The absence of legal certainty in the application of the pari passu pro rata parte principle in the distribution of bankrupt accounts in Indonesia has given rise to uncertainty regarding the protection of the rights of laborers whose employers or companies have faced bankruptcy. This article considers that Indonesia requires a set of formulations enabling the state to provide legal protection for the rights of laborers affected by employer or company bankruptcy. The article explores the feasibility of adopting the Francovich Principle in Indonesia, defining it as a principle holding the state accountable for the losses incurred by laborers due to company bankruptcies.  The  article  concludes  that  several  conditions must be met to apply the Francovich Principle, including the establishment of a guarantee institution, the obligation for financial contributions from companies, and the implementation of specific measures to prevent abuse. The state’s effort to adopt the Francovich Principle involves establishing a priority scale in drafting laws related to the Francovich Principle into the Priority National Legislation Program. Furthermore, the government needs to revitalize institutions related to the Francovich Principle within the national legal and regulatory system

Keywords

Bankruptcy; Francovich Principle; Labors’Rights

Full Text:

PDF

References

Amboro, F.Y.P.(2022). Pengaturan Hukum Kepailitan Indonesia: Kajian Perbandingan Hukum Amerika Serikat dan Inggris. Lex Prudentium Law Journal, 1(2), 62-81. Doi: https://doi.org/10.61619/lexprudentium.v1i2.6

Biondi, A., & Farley, M. (2009). The right to damages in European law (Vol. 5). Kluwer Law International BV.

Black, H. C., Garner, B. A., McDaniel, B. R., Schultz, D. W., & Company, W. P. (1999). Black’s law dictionary (Vol. 196). West Group St. Paul, MN.

Budiyono, T. (2013). Problematika Posisi Buruh Pada Perusahaan Pailit. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 42(3), 416–425.

Caranta, R. (1993). Governmental liability after Francovich. The Cambridge Law Journal, 52(2), 272–297.

Coppel, J. (1993). Individual enforcement of Community law: The future of the Francovich remedy.

Dougan, M. (2000). The Francovich right to reparation: Reshaping the contours of community remedial competence. European Public Law, 6(1).

Efendi, A., Susanti, D. O., & Tektona, R. I. (2019). Penelitian Hukum Doktrinal. Yogyakarta: LaksBang Justitia.

Emiliou, N. (1996). State liability under Community law: Shedding more light on the Francovich principle? European Law Review, 21(5), 399–411.

Goode, R. M. (2011). Principles of corporate insolvency law. Sweet & Maxwell.

Granger, M. (2007). National applications of Francovich and the construction of a European administrative jus commune. European Law Review, 32(2), 157.

Haba, M. (2014). The case of state liability: 20 years after Francovich. Springer.

Haba, M. (2015). The Seminal Francovich Judgment on State Liability. In M. Haba, The Case of State Liability (pp. 22–32). Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-08080-8_3

Hanft, J. E. (1991). Francovich and Bonifaci v. Italy: EEC Memeber State Liability for Failure to Implement Community Directives. Fordham Int’l LJ, 15, 1237.

Harlow, C. (1996). Francovich and the Problem of the Disobedient State. European Law Journal, 2(3), 199–225.

Hartini, R. (2020). Hukum kepailitan. UMMPress.

Hervey, T. K., & Rostant, P. (1996). After Francovich: State liability and British employment law. Indus. LJ, 25, 259.

Hiariej, E. O. (2016). Prinsip-prinsip hukum pidana. Cahaya Atma Pustaka.

Irwansyah. (2020). Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode&Praktik Penulisan Artikel. Mitra Buana Media.

Kamahayani, M., & Margono, S. (2020). Penerapan Asas Pari Passu Pro Rata Parte Terhadap Pemberesan Harta Pailit PT Dhiva Inter Sarana dan Richard Setiawan (Studi Kasus Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor: 169 PK/Pdt. Sus-Pailit/2017). Jurnal Hukum Adigama, 3(1), 71–91.

Kurniawan, F., Nugraha, X., Bagus, A. O., & Ramadhanti, S. (2020). The Right to Access Banking Data in a Claim for a Division of Combined Assets That is Filed Separately from a Divorce Claim. Yustisia, 9(1), 46–64. https://jurnal.uns.ac.id/yustisia/article/view/34859

Krümmel, T., & D’Sa, R. M. (2009). Implementation by German Courts of the Jurisprudence of the European Court of Justice on State Liability for Breach of Community Law as Developed in Francovich and subsequent cases. European Business Law Review, 20(2).

Kurniawan, R. (2015). Harmonisasi Hukum Sebagai Perlindungan Hukum Bagi Pekerja Pada Perusahaan Pailit Ditinjau Dari Perspektif Pancasila Sila Ke Lima. Jurnal Wawasan Yuridika, 28(1), 687–704.

Lang, J. T. (1992). New Legal Effects Resulting from the Failure of States to Fulfill Obligations Under European Community Law: The Francovich Judgement. Fordham Int’l LJ, 16, 1.

Marbun, E. B. (2017). Pemenuhan Hak Buruh Pada Perusahaan Yang Mengalami Pailit. ., 1–12.

Nainggolan, B. (2011). Perlindungan Hukum Seimbang Debitor, Kreditor, dan Pihak-pihak Berkepentingan dalam Kepailitan. Alumni.

Nindyo Pramono, S. H., & Sularto, S. H. (2017). Hukum Kepailitan dan Keadilan Pancasila-Kajian Filsafat Hukum atas Kepailitan Badan Hukum Perseroan Terbatas di Indonesia. Penerbit Andi.

Nugroho, S. A., & SH, M. (2018). Hukum Kepailitan Di Indonesia: Dalam Teori dan Praktik Serta Penerapan Hukumnya. Kencana.

Póltorak, N. (2014). State liability in EU law: Have the member states learnt anything in 20 years after" Francovich"? Responsibility, Accountability and Control of the Constitutional State and the European Union in Changing Times, Nomos, 181–194.

Pradiendi, D. P., Muryati, D. T., & Aryaputra, M. I. (2015). Tanggung Jawab Kurator Dalam Pemberesan Terhadap Hak Pekerja Selaku Kreditur Preferen Berdasarkan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 67 Tahun 2013. Hukum Dan Masyarakat Madani, 5(1).

Pratama, R. C. Y. (2019). Zero Hour Rule Terhadap Perikatan Berdasarkan UndangUndang Nomor 37 Tahun 2004 Tentang Kepailitan dan PKPU. Jurist-Diction, 2(4), 1441–1456.

Putra, F. M. K. (2014). Eksistensi Kreditor Separatis Sebagai Pemohon Dalam Perkara Kepailitan. Perspektif, 19(1), 1–19.

Putri, N. N. N. S., & Dharmawan, N. K. S. (2018). Pengaturan Hak Pekerja Yang Di PHK Berkaitan Dengan Perusahaan Pailit. Kertha Semaya: Journal Ilmu Hukum, 6(11), 1–15.

Ross, M. (1993). Beyond Francovich. Mod. L. Rev., 56, 55.

Rukmono, B. S. (2019). The Role Of Supervisory Judge Inresolving The Deadlock Of The Assets Settlement Inbankruptcy Of Foundation.

Safriani. (2019). Ineffectiveness Of The Law On Cross Insolvensi Uncitral Model. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 8(1), 30. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v0ixx.27858

Santoso, B. (2018). The Circumstance That Needs To Be Considered By Judges Of Industrial Relation Court In Deciding Reinstate Decision. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 7(3), 494. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v7i3.19246

Sari, I. P., & Yunus, A. (2019). Tanggung Jawab Perusahaan Terhadap Pemenuhan Upah Pekerja dalam Proses Pemberesan Boedel Pailit. Jurnal Magister Hukum Udayana (Udayana Master Law Journal), 8(3), 403–413.

Schütze, R. (2012). European constitutional law. Cambridge University Press.

Shubhan, M. H. (2014). Insolvency Test: Melindungi Perusahaan Solven yang Beritikad Baik dari Penyalahgunaan Kepailitan. Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, 33(1), 11–20.

Shubhan, M. H. (2015). Hukum Kepailitan. Prenada Media.

Silaban, R., Ghafur, H. S., Widiawaty, D., & Basir, B. (2023). Eliminating the Gap of Labor and Social Protection for the Workers of Platform-Based Transportation. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 12(2), 185. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.69344

Simanjuntak, H. A. (2020). Prinsip Prinsip Dalam Hukum Kepailitan Dalam Penyelesaian Utang Debitur Kepada Kreditur. Jurnal Justiqa, 2(2), 17–28.

Situmorang, V. M. (1994). Pengantar Hukum Kepailitan di Indonesia.

Smith, F., & Woods, L. (1997). Causation in Francovich: The neglected problem. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 46(4), 925–941.

Sutan Remy Sjahdeini, S. H. (2016). Sejarah, Asas, dan Teori Hukum Kepailitan (Memahami undang-undang No. 37 Tahun 2004 tentang Kepailitan dan Penundaan Kewajiban Pembayaran). Kencana.

Suarda, I., Widhiana, G., & Taufiqurrohman, M. (2021). Limiting the Legality of Determining Suspects in Indonesia Pre-Trial System. Indon. L. Rev., 11, 137.

Szyszczak, E. (1992). European Community Law: New Remedies, New Directions-Joined Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90, Francovich and Bonafaci v. Italy. Mod. L. Rev., 55, 690.

Tallberg, J. (2000). Supranational influence in EU enforcement: The ECJ and the principle of state liability. Journal of European Public Policy, 7(1), 104–121.

Taufiqurrohman, M. M. (2022). Adopting Osman Warning In Indonesia: An Effort To Protect Potential Victims Of Crime Target. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 11(3), 22.

Taufiqurrohman, Moch. M., Jayus, J., & Efendi, A. (2022). Integrasi Sistem Peradilan Pemilihan Umum melalui Pembentukan Mahkamah Pemilihan Umum. Jurnal Konstitusi, 18(3), 562. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1834

Taufiqurrohman, Moch. M., Priambudi, Z., & Octavia, A. N. (2021). Mengatur Petisi Di Dalam Peraturan Perundang-Undangan: Upaya Penguatan Posisi Masyarakat Terhadap Negara Dalam Kerangka Perlindungan Kebebasan Berpendapat. Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia, 18(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.54629/jli.v18i1.750

Tedi Sudrajat, S. H., & Endra Wijaya, S. H. (2021). Perlindungan Hukum Terhadap Tindakan Pemerintahan. Bumi Aksara.

Tri Anggraini, A. M., Sabirin, A., & Rumahorbo, Y. N. A. (2023). The Form and Pattern of Business Actors Requirements in Exclusive Dealing: A Rule of Reason Approach. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 12(2), 107. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316

Valladares, R. (1995). Francovich: Light at the End of the Marshall Tunnel. U. Miami YB Int’l L., 3, 1.

Van Gerven, W. (1996). Bridging the unbridgeable: Community and national tort laws after Francovich and Brasserie. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 45(3), 507–544.

Vina, G. (2016). Perlindungan Pekerja/Buruh Dalam Hal Pemberian Upah Oleh Perusahaan Yang Terkena Putusan Pailit. ., 1–17.

Wijayanta, T. (2018). Deadline Settlement Of Petition For Declaration Of Bankruptcy Before The Commercial Court And The Legal Consequences According To Law Number 37 Of 2004 On Bankruptcy And Suspension Of Debt Payment Obligations. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 7(3), 519. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v7i3.15282

Yatna, I. K. G. S. S., & Purwanti, N. P. (2020). Perbandingan Hukum Negara Indonesia Dengan Hukum Negara Belanda Dalam Penyelesaian Perkara Sisa Hutang Debitor Pailit. Acta Comitas, 5(2).

DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v12i3.79345

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.