Penetapan Honorarium Notaris dalam Praktik Pelaksanaan Jabatan Notaris

I Ketut Adi  Gunawan; I Nyoman  Sumardika; Ida Ayu Putu  Widiati

doi:10.22225/jkh.1.2.2547.369-373

I Ketut Adi Gunawan
I Nyoman Sumardika Univesitas Warmadewa
Ida Ayu Putu Widiati Univesitas Warmadewa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.22225/jkh.1.2.2547.369-373

Keywords: â€¢ Honorarium, â€¢ Notary, â€¢ UUJN

Abstract

The Law on Notary Position (hereafter called UUJN) states the honorarium, but in practice, it has certain limits. The uncertainty of honoraria can lead to misunderstanding between the notary and the client. This research was conducted with the aim of revealing whether the determination of the economic value of each deed in the practice of implementing the position of a notary is in accordance with the provisions of the UUJN and whether a notary can provide legal services in connotarial matters to underprivileged people. This research was designed using juridical-empirical research methods. The results of this study indicated that the determination of the economic value of each deed in the practice of implementing the position of a notary is in accordance with the provisions of UUJN as stipulated in article 36. All public officials who have agreed on the arrangement of the honorarium state that they must have a sense of binding and the existence of coercive power which is adjusted to the provisions in UUJN. In addition, a notary can provide legal services in the field of connotarization to underprivileged people based on a notary's morality and integrity. This is supported by Article 37 of the UUJN which states that notaries are required to provide services free of charge to people who cannot afford it.

References

Bagus, I. (2018). Prinsip Kehati-Hatian Notaris dalam Membuat Akta

Bambang, W. (2002). Penelitian Hukum dalam Praktek. Sinar Grafika.

Kartikosari, H., & Sesung, R. (2017). Pembatasan Jumlah Pembuatan Akta Notaris oleh Dewan Kehormatan Pusat Ikatan Notaris Indonesia. Jurnal Panorama Hukum, 2(2), 167â€“184.

Ningsih, A., Faisal, & Adwani. (2019). Kedudukan Notaris sebagai Mediator Sengketa Kenotariatan Terkait dengan Kewajiban Penyuluhan Hukum. Mimbar Hukum, 27(1), 15â€“28.

Prasetiyo, A. (2017). Kewajiban Notaris dalam Menjalankan Prinsip Tata Kelola Kantor Notaris. Jurnal Akta, 4(3), 441â€“448.

Putri, N., & Prananingtyas, P. (2019). Peran Ikatan Notaris Indonesia (INI) dalam Penetapan Tarif di Antara Notaris Kota Balikpapan. Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling, 12(1), 134â€“146.

SukoPrayitno, I., & Hutabarat, E. A. (2019). Akibat Hukum terhadap Pelanggaran atas Ketentuan Honorarium Akta Notaris. Res Judicata, 2(1), 186â€“199.

Supriyanta. (2013). Kajian Filosofis terhadap Standar Perilaku Etis Notaris. Yustisia Jurnal Hukum, 2(3), 137â€“144.

Surmayono, E. (2003). Etika Profesi Hukum. Kanisius.

Yuniati, S., & Wahyuningsih, S. E. (2017). Mekanisme Pemberian Sanksi terhadap Notaris yang Melakukan Pelanggaran kode Etik Jabatan Notaris. Universitas Nusantara PGRI Kediri, 4(4), 585.

Yunita Laytno, V., & Setiabudhi, I. K. R. (2019). Sinkronisasi Pengaturan Honorarium Jasa Notaris antara UUJN dengan Kode Etik Notaris. Acta Comitas, 4(1), 22â€“33.