Execution of Mortgage Rights: Creditor’s Legal Remedies for Third Party Claims Against Auctioned Collateral
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22225/elg.7.2.2025.151-159Keywords:
Auction, execution of mortgage rights, lawsuits, parate executionAbstract
This study examines the legal implications of lawsuits filed against collateral objects on the implementation of mortgage right execution under Indonesia Mortgage Law. Normatively, Article 6 of the Mortgage Law stipulates that upon the debtor’s default, the first-ranking mortgage holder has the right to independently sell the mortgaged object through a publich auction (parate execution). However, in practice, such executions are frequently obstructed by pre-auction lawsuits concerning the collateral, thus impeding enforcement. Using an empirical juridical method, this research analyzes the legal consequences of lawsuits on the execution of mortgage rights and the creditor’s legal remedies upon a lawsuit filed against the object of the mortgage right. The result of this study indicate that a lawsuit concerning the collateral object for auction legally prevents the execution of mortgage rights through parate execution, and the legal remedy available to banks as a creditor is to pursue execution through an executorial title in District Court. This process requires a fiat executions issued by the Chief Judge of the District Court, in accordance with Article 34 paragraph (3) of the Minister of Finance Regulation concerning Auction Guidelines 2023. This study recommend that the government should enact a specific regulation governing the procedures for executing mortgage rights via District Courts as mandated by article 26 of Mortgage Rights. Furthermore, the judiciary is encouraged to establish dedicated units within District Courts specifically tasked with handling collateral executions, to develop and implement of nationwide online filling system for execution applications.
References
Harahap, A. T., & Siregar, H. A. (2023). LEGAL REVIEW OF THE EXECUTION MECHANISM OF MORTGAGE RIGHTS AT BANK DKI JAKARTA. SEIKAT: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, Politik Dan Hukum, 2(6), 561–568. https://doi.org/10.55681/seikat.v2i6.1025
Hardianysah, F. (2022). Pelaksanaan Parate Eksekusi Dalam Jaminan Fidusia Di Indonesia. JISOS: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial, 1(7), 571–584. https://doi.org/10.55606/jhpis.v1i1.1762
Ismamudi, I., Hartati, N., & Sakum, S. (2023). Peran bank dan lembaga keuangan dalam pengembangan ekonomi: Tinjauan literatur. Jurnal Akuntansi Neraca, 1(2), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.59837/jan.v1i2.10
Kurniawan, N. N., Utara, E. R., Susanto, H. S., & Lumbanraja, S. H. (2023). Analisis Kekuasaan Eksekutorial Di Indonesia Dalam Eksekusi Objek Jaminan Yang Dibebani Hak Tanggungan (Putusan MA Nomor 3418 K/Pdt/2019). Diponegoro Private Law Review, 8(2), 116–131.
Li, Y., Wang, H., Gao, H., Li, Q., & Sun, G. (2024). Credit rating, repayment willingness and farmer credit default. International Review of Financial Analysis, 93, 103117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2024.103117
Mayasari, I., Kumala, Y. C., & Mustafa, M. E. (2025). KEPASTIAN HUKUM EKSEKUSI HAK TANGGUNGAN TERKAIT GUGATAN AHLI WARIS PEMILIK OBJEK HAK TANGGUNGAN. Case Law: Journal of Law, 6(1). https://doi.org/10.25157/caselaw.v6i1.4780
Mochamad, M., Rachmad, B. A., Iwan, P., & Siti, H. (2021). PARATE EXECUTION OF LIABILITY RIGHTS BY CREDITORS AS A LEGAL ACTION: A CASE STUDY OF INDONESIA. Russian Journal of Agricultural and Socio-Economic Sciences, 112(4), 22–31.
Noor, A., Solihah, I. N., Dewata, M. I., Widyahastuti, M., & Najmi, N. (2023). Kompleksitas Pelaksanaan Eksekusi Hak Tanggungan: Analisis Kesulitan Eksekusi, Ketidakseimbangan Informasi, Birokrasi & Kepemilikan Properti. Innovative: Journal Of Social Science Research, 3(5), 8218–8232.
Pati, P. N. (2025). Permohonan Eksekusi Online (PEKSO). https://pn-pati.go.id/permohonan-eksekusi-online-pekso/#:~:text=ASAL USUL LAHIRNYA APLIKASI PEKSO,putusan) dan eksekusi jaminan fidusia.
Purba, I. G., Sipahutar, A., & Irwansyah, I. (2022). Pengaturan pemberian kredit pada dunia perbankan di indonesia. Jurnal Normatif, 2(2), 203–211. https://doi.org/10.54123/jn.v2i2.230
Rozmi, A. F. (n.d.). Legal Analysis of Legal Protection for Debtors Who Breach of a Credit Agreement with Guarantee of Mortgage Rights. Ratio Legis Journal, 3(3), 106–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.30659/rlj.3.3.%25p
Sari, A. P. (2023). The Urgency of Applying Banking Prudential Principles in The Era of Disruption to Minimize Financing Risks. Al-Muhasib: Journal of Islamic Accounting and Finance, 3(2), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.30762/almuhasib.v3i2.1100
Setyabudi, B., & Mashdurohatun, A. (2022). Reconstruction of Legal Protection Regulations for Debtors and Third Parties in Credit Agreements with the Object of Fiduciary Based Guarantee. Sch Int J Law Crime Justice, 5(12), 520–526. https://doi.org/10.36348/sijlcj.2022.v05i12.002
Utami, P. D. Y. (2019). Kajian Yuridis Agunan Yang Diambil Alih (Ayda) Oleh Bank. Kerta Dyatmika, 16(2), 69–77.
Utami, P. D. Y., & Yustiawan, D. G. P. (2021). Non Performing Loan sebagai Dampak Pandemi Covid-19: Tinjauan Force Majeure Dalam Perjanjian Kredit Perbankan. Jurnal Kertha Patrika, 43(3). https://doi.or/ 10.24843/KP.2021.v43.i03.p07
Yuri, Y. P. E., & Qomarudin, H. (2024). Peranan Fiat Ekseksi Pengadilan Dalam Upaya Eksekusi Hak Tanggungan Berdasarkan Tinjauan Teoritis Dan Praktis. J-CEKI: Jurnal Cendekia Ilmiah, 3(6), 8451–8460. https://doi.org/10.56799/jceki.v3i6.5971
Yustisia, D. (2021). Dampak Pandemi Covid-19: Perspektif Kualitas Kredit Perbankan.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Putu Devi Yustisia Utami, Ni Putu Purwanti, Gusti Ayu Era Yusnia, Sally Paramitha, Made Gde Surya Dharma Palguna
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
