IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY LEGAL DOCTRINE IN THE LIABILITY OF DIRECTORS IN INDONESIA

Authors

  • Syarifah Aisyah UIN Antasari Banjarmasin
  • Norhalisa Nabella UIN Antasari Banjarmasin
  • Alya Ahda Nadhirah UIN Antasari Banjarmasin
  • Muhamad Rahmani Abduh UIN Antasari Banjarmasin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3272-3153

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46773/36nxre15

Keywords:

Corporate Law Doctrine; Limited Liability Company; Directors’ Liability

Abstract

This study examines the implementation of key doctrines in corporate law related to directors’ liability in limited liability companies in Indonesia. The doctrines analyzed include Piercing the Corporate Veil, Business Judgment Rule, Ultra Vires, and Fiduciary Duty. This research employs a normative legal method with statute, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials were collected through literature studies and analyzed qualitatively to understand the application of these doctrines in corporate legal practice in Indonesia.  The findings indicate that these doctrines play an important role in determining the limits of directors’ responsibilities in corporate management. The doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil allows courts to impose personal liability when the corporate entity is misused, as illustrated in the case involving PT Effem Foods Inc. The Business Judgment Rule provides legal protection for directors in making business decisions in good faith, as reflected in the case of PT Merpati Nusantara Airlines. The Ultra Vires doctrine emphasizes that corporate actions must remain within the scope of the company’s objectives, as shown in the PT Condato Grup Indonesia case. In addition, the Fiduciary Duty doctrine highlights directors’ obligations to act with due care and loyalty in managing the company, as seen in the PT Bakara Bumi Energi case.

References

Agustinus Haryono. (2019, June 26). Mengenal Doktrin-Doktrin Hukum Dalam Perseroan Terbatas. Retrieved from Institute of Compliance Profesional Indonesia website: https://icopi.or.id/mengenal-doktrin-doktrin-hukum-dalam-perseroan-terbatas/

Cheng-Han, T., Wang, J., & Hofmann, C. (2019). Piercing the Corporate Veil: Historical, Theoretical and Comparative Perspectives. Berkeley Bus. LJ, 16, 140.

Darmawan, S. H. (2025). Implementasi Doktrin Piercing the Corporate Veil pada Perseroan Terbatas antara Indonesia dan Malaysia. Jaksa: Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, 3(4), 52–64.

Dewi, S. (2018). Mengenal Doktrin Dan Prinsip Piercing The Corporate Veil Dalam Hukum Perusahaan. Soumatera Law Review, 1(2), 380–399. https://doi.org/10.22216/soumlaw.v1i2.3744

Gerner-Beuerle, C. (2021). The duty of care and the business judgment rule: A case study in legal transplants and local narratives. In A. Afsharipour & M. Gelter (Eds), Comparative Corporate Governance. Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781788975339.00020

Gurrea-Martínez, A. (2018). Re-examining the law and economics of the business judgment rule: Notes for its implementation in non-US jurisdictions. Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 18(2), 417–438. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2017.1412688

Jatna, R. N., Amir Firmansyah, Hasbullah, & Muhammad Umar Bin Abdul Razak. (2025). Strengthening the Business Judgment Rule in Indonesia: Lessons from Malaysia. Journal of Sustainable Development and Regulatory Issues (JSDERI), 3(3), 568–589. https://doi.org/10.53955/jsderi.v3i3.157

Kusmastuti, I. P. (2023). Application of Piercing the Corporate Veil in Indonesia: A Legal and Islamic Perspective.

Muhamad Hafizh Akram & Nisriina Primadani Fanaro. (2019). Implementasi Doktrin Business Judgement Rule Di Indonesia. Ganesha Law Review, 1(1).

Muhammad Dafi Tanjung, Mahmul Siregar, & Robert. (2025). Penyalahgunaan Kedudukan Komisaris PT. Condato Grup Indonesia Sebagai Tindakan Ultra Vires (Studi Putusan Nomor 352/PDT.G/2021/PN Jkt.Pst). Acta Law Journal, 3(2).

Negara, T. A. S. (2023). Normative legal research in Indonesia: Its originis and approaches. Audito Comparative Law Journal (ACLJ), 4(1), 1–9.

Nugroho, S., Nasution, B., & Sitompul, Z. (2020). Implementation of Alter Ego Shareholders and Their Responsibilities According to the Piercing the Corporate Veil Doctrine in Indonesia. International Journal of Innovation, 425.

Said Hendri Darmawan. (2025). Implementasi Doktrin Piercing the Corporate Veil pada Perseroan Terbatas antara Indonesia dan Malaysia. JAKSA Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik, 3(4).

Salim, Y., & Prisandani, U. Y. (2022). Hostile Takeover Law and the Challenges in Market for Corporate Control: A Comparative Analysis between Indonesia and the United Kingdom. Jambura Law Review, 4(2), 246–269. https://doi.org/10.33756/jlr.v4i2.8534

Sánchez, M. A. J. (2021). The Ultra Vires Doctrine in Corporate Law: A Comparative Review.

Setyowati, E. (2024). Doktrin Modern Perseroan Terbatas dan Penerapannya Dalam Undang-Undang. JPeHI (Jurnal Penelitian Hukum Indonesia), 4(02), 75–88.

Silvana, E. D., & Wicaksana, A. (2022). Tanggung Jawab Direktur Utama Terkait Pelanggaran Prinsip Fiduciary Duty. Reformasi Hukum Trisakti, 4(5), 1255–1268.

Spercel, T. (2024). The Business Judgment Rule in Stakeholder Capitalism. Nw. J. Int’l L. & Bus., 44, 343.

Suastuti, E. (2018). Director’s Liability For Losses in The Management of PT Merpati Nusantara Airlines as one of the State Owned Companies. 1270–1275. Atlantis Press.

Taekema, S. (2018). Theoretical and normative frameworks for legal research: Putting theory into practice. Law and Method, 2018.

Tingle, B. C., & Spackman, E. (2019). Do corporate fiduciary duties matter? Annals of Corporate Governance, 4(4), 272–326.

Yessira Dianita. (2025). Penerapan Prinsip Piercing the Corporate Veil terhadap Pelanggaran Fiduciary Duty. Politika Progresif: Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Humaniora, 2(3).

Downloads

Published

2026-04-04

Issue

Section

Articles