Interpretation of Jimenez's Theory in Contract Law Practice in Indonesia

Sujoko Bagus; Reza Ryandra; Andri Darmawan; Neilpon Yulinar Marquez; Faisal Santiago

doi:10.61860/jigp.v4i3.343

Authors

Sujoko Bagus Borobudur University Jakarta
Reza Ryandra Borobudur University Jakarta
Andri Darmawan Borobudur University Jakarta
Neilpon Yulinar Marquez Borobudur University Jakarta
Faisal Santiago Borobudur University Jakarta

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.61860/jigp.v4i3.343

Keywords:

Civil Code; Contract Equity; Contract Legal Remedies; Contract Rights; Felipe Jiménez.

Abstract

Contract law practice in Indonesia tends to resolve disputes through economic compensation, overlooking the moral and social dimensions inherent in contractual relationships. This gap exists between the current formalistic civil law approach and the need for substantive justice, raising questions about the adequacy of the existing legal framework to fully remedy damages. This research examines the urgency of applying a more holistic contract remedy theory. This study employs qualitative method with a normative legal method with conceptual and comparative approaches. The analysis focuses on primary legal materials, such as the Indonesian Civil Code and court decisions, and secondary materials, including journals and books, with a focus on Felipe Jiménez’s pluralistic theory to evaluate its relevance in the Indonesian legal context. The findings indicate a significant discrepancy between theory and practice, with the judiciary prioritizing financial compensation. Jiménez's theory, which balances economic, moral, and social values, offers a more comprehensive framework, with the principle of good faith in the Civil Code as its juridical basis. It is concluded that applying this theory can enrich contract law practice by integrating restorative justice. It is recommended that legal academics and practitioners delve deeper into the literature on contract remedy theory, and that legal education be reformed alongside a review of relevant Civil Code provisions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Fayyad, M. (2023). Reconstructing lease-to-own contracts: A contemporary approach to Islamic banking standards. Heliyon, 9(9), e19319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19319

Baharad, E., & Nitzan, S. (2008). Contest Efforts in Light of Behavioural Considerations. The Economic Journal, 118(533), 2047–2059. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0297.2008.02201.x

Barnett, R. E. (2014). Contract Is Not Promise; Contract Is Consent. Philosophical Foundations of Contract Law, 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198713012.003.0003

Bix, B. H. (2017). Theories of contract law. Comparative Contract Law, 7–18. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785369179.00007

Botterell, A. (2025). Corrective justice and contract law. Research Handbook on the Philosophy of Contract Law, 101–114. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781800885417.00014

Bridgeman, C. (2005). Strict Liability and the Fault Standard in Corrective Justice Accounts of Contract. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.669504

Cane, P. (1996). Review article. Corrective justice and correlativity in private law. Oxford Journal of Legal Studies, 16(3), 471–488. https://doi.org/10.1093/ojls/16.3.471

Craswell, R. (2006). Expectation damages and contract theory revisited. Virginia Law Review, 97(8), 1939-2012. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.925980

Eisenberg, M. A., & McDonnell, B. H. (2002). Expectation damages and the theory of overreliance. Hastings Law Journal, 54(3), 1-45. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1371858

Farrugia, A., & Grima, S. (2021). A model to determine the need to modernise the regulation of the principle of utmost good faith. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 29(4), 454–473. https://doi.org/10.1108/jfrc-12-2020-0120

Atiyah, P. S., & Fried, C. (1981). Contract as Promise: A Theory of Contractual Obligation. Harvard Law Review, 95(2), 509. https://doi.org/10.2307/1340714

Barnett K. & Harder, S. (2014). Self-help remedies. Remedies in Australian Private Law, 293–309. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781107445260.018

Giri, S. K. (2024). Breach of Contract and its Remedies; Theory and Practice with Special References to Nepalese Law. Journal of Management, 7(1), 98–114. https://doi.org/10.3126/jom.v7i1.73549

Goetz, C. J., & Scott, R. E. (1980). Enforcing Promises: An Examination of the Basis of Contract. The Yale Law Journal, 89(7), 1261. https://doi.org/10.2307/795967

Houh, E. M. S. (2005). The Doctrine of Good Faith in Contract Law: A (Nearly) Empty Vessel? Utah Law Review, 2005(1). https://doi.org/10.63140/mislyx_tur

Jiménez, F. (2020). Rethinking Contract Remedies. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3721546

Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata (Indonesian Civil Code). (1848). Jakarta: Indonesian Government.

Markovits, D. (2020). Contract. The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Law, 331–351. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316104439.018

Markovits, D., & Schwartz, A. (2017). (In)Efficient Breach of Contract. The Oxford Handbook of Law and Economics, 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199684205.013.003

Mitchell, C. (2019). Remedies and reality in the law of contract. Research Handbook on Remedies in Private Law. Edward Elgar Publishing. 1-40. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786431271.00012

Munukka, J. (2015). The Contractual Duty of Loyalty: Good Faith in the Performance and Enforcement of Contracts. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3076434

Nedzel, N. E. (2019). A Comparative Study of Good Faith, Fair Dealing, and Precontractual Liability. Tulane European and Civil Law Forum, 12. https://doi.org/10.37381/a6mr4835

Nugraha, S. N., Budiono, A. R., Santoso, B., & Sulistyarini, R. (2025). From formal validity to ethical accountability: good faith in sharia electronic contracts under indonesian law. Hakam: Jurnal Kajian Hukum Islam dan Hukum Ekonomi Islam, 9(2). https://ejournal.unuja.ac.id/index.php/hakam/article/view/12690

Posner, R. A. (1974). Economic Analysis of Law. Stanford Law Review, 26(3), 711. https://doi.org/10.2307/1227682

Rahardjo, S. (2009). Hukum progresif: Sebuah sintesa hukum Indonesia [Progressive law: A synthesis of Indonesian law]. Genta Publishing.

Asnawi, M. N. & Santiago, F. (2024). Pembaruan hukum kontrak di Indonesia: prakontrak, kontrak, pascakontrak [Updates on contract law in Indonesia: pre-contract, contract, post-contract]. Prenada Media.

Schwartz, A. (1990). The Myth That Promisees Prefer Supracompensatory Remedies: An Analysis of Contracting for Damage Measures. The Yale Law Journal, 100(2), 369. https://doi.org/10.2307/796619

Schwartz, A., & Scott, R. E. (2003). Contract Theory and the Limits of Contract Law. The Yale Law Journal, 113(3), 541. https://doi.org/10.2307/3657531

Shavell, S. (2009). Why Breach of Contract May Not Be Immoral Given the Incompleteness of Contracts. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1372170

Kumar, M., & Heidemann, M. (2022). Contract Law in Common Law Countries: A Study in Divergence. Liverpool Law Review, 43(2), 133–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10991-022-09312-8

Weinrib, E. J. (2012). Corrective Justice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199660643.001.0001

Wilkinson‐Ryan, T., & Baron, J. (2009). Moral Judgment and Moral Heuristics in Breach of Contract. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 6(2), 405–423. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2009.01148.x

Rogan, M. (2022) Taxation and the informal sector in the global South: strengthening the social contract without reciprocity? Extended Producer Responsibility: Opportunities and Challenges for Waste Pickers, 85–105. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781839108068.00011