Legal Analysis of Tacit Power of Attorney Based onIndonesian Civil Code(Case Study of Cassation Decision Number 1855 K/pdt/2022 )

Abstract

Law functions as a social regulator and encompasses various fields, including the granting of power of attorney. Power of attorney may be given through public deeds, private documents, letters, or verbally, and for specific actions, an explicit mandate is required. This study analyzes Supreme Court Decision No. 1855 K/ Pdt /2022 concerning “implied power of attorney.” The case involved PT Aneka Tambang (PT Antam Tbk ), the Ministry of State-Owned Enterprises, and a gold trading dispute at Antam Gold Boutique Surabaya. The plaintiff, Daniel Kristanto, was engaged in habitual transactions via an intermediary who regularly collected gold and signed receipts. In a disputed transaction, the intermediary claimed non-receipt despite signing the invoice. The plaintiff sued PT Antam, initially winning in District Court, but the Supreme Court reversed the ruling, recognizing implied power of attorney based on habitual conduct. The dispute originated from a gold trading promotion in 2018, where the plaintiff purchased 36,078 kg of gold via bank transfers and cash but alleged non-delivery. Civil law does not mandate representation; However, power of attorney is common and essential for representation in legal or non-legal matters. The study underscores Article 1793 of the Indonesian Civil Code, allowing power of attorney by deed, writing, letter, or orally, and explores the evolution and recognition of implied power of attorney in judicial practice.