Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Pengajuan Gugatan Baru Dengan Objek Sengketa Yang Sama Pada Putusan Nomor 70/Pdt.G/2019/Pn Gresik dan Putusan Nomor 23/Pdt.G/2023/Pn Gresik

Mustofa, Moh. Fauzan (2026) Analisis Yuridis Terhadap Pengajuan Gugatan Baru Dengan Objek Sengketa Yang Sama Pada Putusan Nomor 70/Pdt.G/2019/Pn Gresik dan Putusan Nomor 23/Pdt.G/2023/Pn Gresik. Undergraduate thesis, UPN VETERAN JAWA TIMUR.

	Text (cover) TEXT (Cover).pdf Download (2MB)
	Text (bab 1) TEXT (Bab 1).pdf Download (442kB)
	Text (bab 2) TEXT (Bab 2).pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 20 October 2029. Download (367kB)
	Text (bab 3) TEXT (Bab 3).pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 20 October 2029. Download (291kB)
	Text (bab 4) TEXT (Bab 4).pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 20 October 2029. Download (212kB)
	Text (daftar pustaka) TEXT (Daftar Pustaka).pdf Download (220kB)
	Text (lampiran) TEXT (Lampiran).pdf Restricted to Repository staff only until 20 October 2029. Download (3MB)

Abstract

This study examines the legal considerations of the Panel of Judges in assessing the difference in causa petendi between Decision Number 23/Pdt.G/2023/PN Gsk and Decision Number 70/Pdt.G/2019/PN Gsk in relation to the principle of ne bis in idem. The issue examined is not merely whether ne bis in idem exists, but rather the limits of assessing causa petendi when a new lawsuit is filed with a claim for the cancellation of an agreement and the submission of evidence P-20, while the parties, object, legal relationship, and breach of contract underlying the dispute remain closely related to the previous case. This study employs a doctrinal (normative) legal research method by combining statutory, case, and conceptual approaches to examine relevant academic literature and court decisions. The analysis finds that the Panel of Judges did not classify the case as ne bis in idem on the ground that the shift from a breach-of-contract claim to a claim for cancellation of the agreement established a different causa petendi. Insofar as this reasoning rests on changes in the petitum and legal basis, it is formalistic, since both cases arise from the same legal event, and the right to seek cancellation was available from the moment of the breach. Nevertheless, the outcome is defensible to a limited extent because evidence P-20 shows a relevant factual development after the earlier judgment. This approach expands substantive justice for the Plaintiff but weakens legal certainty absent clear parameters. The study recommends that the assessment of causa petendi rest on the substantive identity of the legal event and on material factual developments rather than on the formal construction of the posita and petitum, and that jurisprudence be applied more consistently.

Item Type:

Thesis (Undergraduate)

Contributors: