Jakarta, CNN Indonesia –
Mediation between PT Ace Hardware Indonesia Tbk and the plaintiff, namely Wibowo & Partners, reportedly failed. The plan is for the dispute between the two parties to be continued at the court table next year.
The failure of the mediation process was revealed by the Attorney for Wibowo & Partners Fajar Ardianto. Even so, he does not want to reveal the reasons behind the failure of the mediation process.
Fajar only explained that the failure of the mediation process made Wibowo & Partners to take the dispute to court.
“The mediation failed so that the process was continued to the trial. Today’s trial agenda is the reading of the lawsuit from the plaintiff,” Fajar said to CNNIndonesia.com, Thursday (17/12).
He said the trial schedule is planned to be held on January 7, 2021. After that, it has not been mapped what kind of dispute resolution steps will be carried out.
Previously, Wibowo & Partners sued Ace Hardware at the Central Jakarta Commercial Court over a request for Postponement of Debt Payment Obligations (PKPU), aka bankruptcy. The lawsuit was registered with PKPU Application Letter Number 329 / Pdt.Sus-PKPU / 2020 / PN Niaga Jkt Pst on October 6, 2020.
The lawsuit was filed because Wibowo & Partner claimed that Ace Hardware had unpaid IDR 10 million in arrears. The arrears are the value of cooperation in the field of legal services (legal service agreement) which both parties have signed.
The bill was confirmed by the Director of Ace Hardware Indonesia, Sugianto Wibawa. However, Sugianto claimed that his party had not received an official notification regarding the lawsuit.
Not long ago, Ace Hardware countered Wibowo & Partners at the Central Jakarta District Court with suit number 599 / Pdt.G / 2020 / PN NiagaJkt.Pst for allegedly breaking the law.
Quoting the lawsuit document quoted from the website of the Central Jakarta District Court (22/10), Ace Hardware asked the court to declare that Wibowo & Partners had committed an illegal act.
“Declare legal as law declare for the right that the defendant has committed illegal acts, “they said in the petitum of the lawsuit.
Furthermore, they also asked the court to state if the agreement Legal Service Agreement dated October 1 2015 against the law. Thus, the agreement and its consequences are null and void null and void or at least not having binding legal force not.
“Stating that the defendant’s right to collect the plaintiff or the plaintiff’s payment obligations against the defendant has ended since March 2020,” wrote the petitum.
(uli / sfr)