Supreme Court Circular Legislation Ratio Number 4 Of 2016 Related to Reserved Good Faith Buyer

Ahmad Yulianto Ihsan, Achmad Hariri, Dedy Stansyah


The land sale and purchase dispute in this case drags the seller who has sold the same object to two buyers in two transactions. The second buyer (plaintiff) filed a lawsuit against the first buyer (Defendant II). The legal position is a dilemma. Both buyers feel they have rights to the disputed land because they have purchased the same object from the seller. To prove who the right buyer is, the judge needs to consider the principle of "good faith" as the basis for determining the buyer who deserves legal protection. The problem is, both buyers claim that they are buyers with good intentions. In protecting parties with good intentions in an agreement, regulations are needed that can provide legal certainty. In 2016 the Supreme Court held a plenary meeting and issued a Supreme Court Circular Number 4 of 2016, which provides a formulation regarding the criteria for buyers who have good intentions in purchasing land. In this study, it examines the first, the implementation of the Supreme Court Circular No. 4 of 2016 in court decisions. Second, the consideration of judges in deciding cases related to buyers in good faith is in accordance with applicable regulations. This type of research is normative research.

Full Text:



C.S.T Kansil, (1989), introduction to Indonesian law and legal system, publisher of balai pustaka Jakarta, Hal 40.

Innaka, Antari, and Mr Sularto, (2012), "Application of the Precontractual Stage of Good Faith Principles to Housing Sale and Purchase Agreements." Pulpit Law-Faculty of Law, Gadjah Mada University 24, no. 3, P. 504 - 514.

Irwan Adi C, (2013), KKL Report on Legal Protection in SEMA Number 4 of 2011 concerning the Treatment of Whistle Blowers and Witnesses of Perpetrators Who Cooperate (Justice Collaborator) In Certain Criminal Cases, unpublished, Malang, Hal. 47.

Kartini Muljadi & Gunawan Widjaja, (2004), Perikatan Yang Lahir dari Agreement, Jakarta, PT. King Grafindo Persada, P. 45-46.

Mary. S.W. Sumardjono, (2001), Land Policy Between Regulation and Implementation. Jakarta. Compass, Hal. 158.

Philipus M. Hadjon, (1989), Legal Protection for the People in Indonesia, publisher of Bina Ilmu Surabaya. Thing. 20.

Philipus M. Hadjon and Tatiek Sri Djatmiati, (2009), Legal Argumentation, the principle of contrarius actus, cited M. Lutfi Chakim, Contrarius Actus, Constituency Magazine, P. 78.

Philipus M. Hadjon, (2002), Introduction to the Indonesian Administrative Law, Gadjah Mada University Press, Yogyakarta, Hal. 152-153.

R. Wiijono Prodjodikoro, (1983), Principles of Civil Law, Bandung, Wells, P. 9.

R.Wirjono Prodjodikoro, (1983), Principles of Civil Law, Bandung: Wells, P. 56.

Suharnoko, (2007), Covenant Law, Theory and Case Analysis, (Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media Group, P. 1.

Laws and Regulations

Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia of 1945.

Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Establishment of Laws and Regulations as amended by Law Number 15 of 2019 concerning Amendments to Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Establishment of Laws and Regulations;

Supreme Court Circular No. 3 of 1963 on the Idea of Considering Burgerlijk Wetboek Not As An Act, retrieved 18 september 2018.


Fitri hidayat, legal protection of essential elements in a legal State,, retrieved 18 september 2018

legal protection according to experts,,


Article Metrics

Abstract - 41 PDF - 23


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.