Legal study of court decisions regarding errors in requests for cancellation of standard clauses in financial services sector agreements

Ninik Ayuhandika (), Dahlan Dahlan (), Athika Salsabilla Harahap () and Rendie Meita Sarie Putri ()
Additional contact information
Ninik Ayuhandika: Faculty of Law, Universitas Riau
Dahlan Dahlan: Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Universitas Maritim Raja Ali Haji
Athika Salsabilla Harahap: Faculty of Law, Universitas Riau
Rendie Meita Sarie Putri: Faculty of Law, Universitas Musamus

Priviet Social Sciences Journal, 2026, vol. 6, issue 8, 15-28

Abstract: Consumers (customers) who feel disadvantaged by the standard clauses in credit (financing) agreements with financial institutions can submit a request for cancellation of the standard clauses through the Consumer Dispute Resolution Agency or Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen (BPSK) and take legal action in the form of objections to the District Court and cassation to the Supreme Court. This study aims to describe, in detail and systematically, the legal reasons for consumers’ requests for cancellation of standard clauses and analyze the considerations of the panel of judges in decisions on requests for cancellation of standard clauses in financial services sector agreements. This study employs normative legal research with a descriptive approach. The approaches used include the statute, case, and conceptual approaches to the Cassation Decision Number 651 K/Pdt. Sus-BPSK/2013, District Court Decision No. 185/Pdt. Sus-BPSK/2016/PN-Rap and Cassation Decision No. 459 K/Pdt. Sus-BPSK/2017. Data were collected through literature and document studies and then qualitatively analyzed. The study’s results indicate that the request to annul the standard clause is based on the argument that the standard agreement made by business actors in the financial services sector contains a prohibited clause, as regulated in Article 18 of Law Number 8 of 1999 concerning Consumer Protection. However, in the three decisions, the panel of judges tended to qualify the dispute as a breach of contract or purely civil dispute, thus deeming the BPSK incompetent to examine and decide the case. This has implications for legal uncertainty regarding the limits of the BPSK's authority and the effectiveness of consumer protection in the financial services sector.

Keywords: cancellation request; prohibited standard clauses; authority of the consumer dispute resolution agency; BPSK (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2026
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journal.privietlab.org/download.php?id=12234 (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:prv:pssjpv:1859

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
https://journal.priv ... SJ/article/view/1859

DOI: 10.55942/pssj.v6i8.1859

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Priviet Social Sciences Journal from Privietlab Research Center
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Mochammad Fahlevi ().