LIMITATIONS OF JUDICIAL REASONING IN THE EVIDENTIARY ASSESSMENT OF BREACH OF CONTRACT DISPUTES ARISING FROM ONLINE LOAN AGREEMENTS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.29123/jy.v19i1.758Keywords:
electronic evidence, breach of contract, peer-to-peer lendingAbstract
This study examines the limitations of judicial reasoning in the evidentiary assessment of a breach of contract dispute involving an online loan agreement in Judgment Number 267/Pdt.G/2020/PN.Bdg. The case arose from a claim brought by PT Satustop Finansial Solusi, as the operator of a peer-to-peer lending platform, together with individual lenders, against a borrower who failed to fulfill the repayment obligations under the loan agreement. The central issue concerns the court’s reasoning, which failed to adequately articulate the legal relationship between the platform operator, the lenders, and the borrower, as well as the evidentiary status of the investment history data and loan statements as electronic evidence. However, the facts established at trial, together with the supporting evidence, including the investment history data, digital transfer records, and the platform’s operational mechanism, clearly indicate the characteristics of an information technology-based transaction. This study critiques the evidentiary process at trial, which continues to rely on conventional documentary evidence without making full use of the electronic discovery (e-discovery) framework to verify metadata, digital traces, and the integrity of electronic data, as mandated by the Electronic Information and Transactions Law and the Financial Services Authority regulations. The findings indicate that the panel of judges’ reasoning was sufficient to conclude that a breach of contract had occurred because the defendant admitted the existence of the principal debt, interest, and penalties and failed to fulfill the repayment obligations. Such admission was corroborated by the loan agreement, transfer records, warning letters, and demand letters. The panel of judges also failed to explain the evidentiary status and probative value of exhibit P-8, consisting of investment history data, and exhibit P-9, consisting of loan statements, as electronic information and/or electronic documents. These limitations do not undermine the evidentiary basis for establishing a breach of contract, but the legal reasoning in the judgment does not fully reflect the characteristics of information technology-based peer-to-peer lending transactions.
References
Adhikari, N., Chhajed, M., Raichura, D., & Bhavathankar, P. (2025). Lexchain: A blockchain-based solution to safeguard electronic evidence in legal systems. 2025 13th International Symposium on Digital Forensics and Security (ISDFS), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISDFS65363.2025.11012076.
Akarli, E. D. (2004). Gedik: A bundle of rights and obligations for Istanbul artisans and traders, 1750-1840. In Pottage, A., & Mundy, M. (Eds.). Law, Anthropology, and the Constitution of the Social: Making Persons and Things, 166–200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493751.006.
Al-Afeef, M.A., Alsmadi, A.A., Al-Okaily, M., & Al-Sartawi, A. (2024). The role of peer-to-peer lending platforms in expanding financial inclusion. In Musleh Al-Sartawi, A. M. A., & Nour, A. I. (Eds.). Artificial intelligence and economic sustainability in the era of industrial revolution 5.0. Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 528, 137-150. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-56586-1_10.
Alfitra. (2011). Hukum pembuktian dalam beracara pidana, perdata, dan korupsi di Indonesia. Jakarta: Raih Asa Sukses.
Alias, M. A. A., Wan Ismail, W. A. F., Baharuddin, A. S., & Syah Mallow, M. (2024). Wasa’il ithbat dalam undang-undang keterangan Islam: Analisis perundang terhadap keabsahan dokumen elektronik di Mahkamah Syariah Malaysia. Malaysian Journal of Syariah and Law, 12(3), 689-700. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol12no3.792.
Arifin, M. F., & Santoso, L. (2018). Implementasi metode rechtvinding hakim terhadap pencabutan surat penolakan pekawinan dalam masa ‘iddah. Al-Risalah, 18(1), 29-46. https://doi.org/10.30631/al-risalah.v18i1.168.
Arvisya, W. C., & Putra, M. A. P. (2025). Kekuatan mengikat perjanjian elektronik dan implikasinya terhadap kepastian hukum transaksi digital di Indonesia. Jurnal Media Akademik, 3(11), 1-17.
Awwad, A., Omar, A., Alshurman, S. Y., & Angawi, M. (2023). The impact of digital transformation on civil action procedures. In Alareeni, B. A. M., & Elgedawy, I. (Eds.). Studies in Systems, Decision and Control, 488, 368-376. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-39158-3_35.
Badriyah. (2022). Pertimbangan hakim di Indonesia dan Malaysia dalam memberikan hak hadânah kepada ayah perspektif maslahah dan keadilan gender. Ponorogo: Uwais Inspirasi Indonesia.
Bernstein, G. (2004). Accommodating technological innovation: Identity, genetic testing and the internet. Vanderbilt Law Review, 57(3), 963-1037.
Budiharto, B., Lestari, S. N., & Hartanto, G. (2019). The legal protection of lenders in peer to peer lending system. Law Reform: Jurnal Pembaharuan Hukum, 15(2), 275-289. https://doi.org/10.14710/lr.v15i2.26186.
CNA Indonesia. (2025). Anak muda 19-34 tahun pengguna pinjol terbanyak di Indonesia. CNA Indonesia. https://www.cna.id/indonesia/anak-muda-19-34-tahun-pengguna-pinjol-terbanyak-di-indonesia-37991.
Ermakova, E. P. (2022). Digitalization of civil proceedings in the USA: Consolidation of the procedure for electronic disclosure of evidence (E-discovery). Gosudarstvo i Pravo, 2022(11). https://doi.org/10.31857/S102694520022769-6.
Forte, D. (2007). The negative effects of e-discovery rules. Network Security, 2007(2). https://doi.org/10.1016/S1353-4858(07)70020-X.
Gibilaro, L., & Mattarocci, G. (2018). Peer-to-peer lending and real estate mortgages: Evidence from United Kingdom. Journal of European Real Estate Research, 11(3), 319-334. https://doi.org/10.1108/JERER-12-2016-0048.
Gronic, I. A. (2022). On some aspects of case management in electronic courts of Indonesia. In Inshakova, A. O., & Inshakova, E. I. (Eds.). New technology for inclusive and sustainable growth. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies, 288, 193-199. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-9808-8_21.
Gupta, S., Mahajan, J., & Jain, V. (2024). Sentiment analysis of lenders motivation to use a peer-to-peer (P2P) lending platform: LenDenClub.Com. 2024 International Conference on Trends in Quantum Computing and Emerging Business Technologies, 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/TQCEBT59414.2024.10545135.
Harjono, D. K. (2022). Legal development of the validity of electronic mortgage certificate in land registration system in Indonesia. Yustisia, 11(2), 110-124. https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v11i2.61111.
Husna, N., Jumadiah, J., & Aksa, F. N. (2024). Analisis hukum terhadap pertimbangan hakim dalam menolak perkara gugatan penggugat penyandang dana (Berdasarkan Putusan Nomor 7/Pdt.G/2023/PN Lhokseumawe). Jurnal Ilmiah Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Malikussaleh, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.29103/jimfh.v7i3.17126.
Jokubauskas, R., & Świerczyński, M. (2020a). Impact of the council of Europe guidelines on electronic evidence in civil and administrative law. Global Journal of Comparative Law, 9(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.1163/2211906X-00901001.
_____________________________. (2020b). Is revision of the council of Europe guidelines on electronic evidence already needed? Utrecht Law Review, 16(1), 13-20. https://doi.org/10.36633/ulr.525.
Kaczmarek-Templin, B. (2023). The smart contract – problems with taking evidence in polish civil proceedings in the light of European regulations. Bratislava Law Review, 7(1), 65-76. https://doi.org/10.46282/blr.2023.7.1.308.
Kharlie, A. T., & Cholil, A. (2020). E-court and e-litigation: The new face of civil court practices in Indonesia. International Journal of Advanced Science and Technology, 29(2), 2206-2213.
Kimes, B. (2008). Web 2.0 and e-discovery. In Social Software and Web 2.0 Technology Trends. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-122-3.ch006.
Krylova, E. P., & Loshkarev, A. V. (2021). Electronic document in civil proceedings: Evidentiary value. Наука XXI Века: Актуальные Направления Развития, (2–2). https://doi.org/10.46554/sciencexxi-2021.10-2.2-pp.153.
Lekala, R. S. (2011). E-mail communication for provisional sentence summons. Journal of International Commercial Law and Technology, 6(3), 145-150.
Liophanich, C. (2005). Automatic e-evidence generation system and duplicate reduction. Proceedings - 2005 IEEE International Conference onServices Computing, SCC 2005, II. https://doi.org/10.1109/SCC.2005.33.
Liu, Y., Fujiwara, K., & Jinushi, T. (2024). Peer-to-peer lending for individual and MSME finance: Evidence from an original survey in China. International Review of Economics and Finance, 93, 38-51.
Ma, L. (2025). Design and implementation of pre-litigation mediation platform under web technology. 2025 6th International Conference on Computer Engineering and Application (ICCEA), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICCEA65460.2025.11102974.
Mac an Bhaird, C., Owen, R., Dodd, S. D., Wilson, J., & Bisignano, A. (2019). Small beer? Peer-to-peer lending in the craft beer sector. Strategic Change, 28(1), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1002/jsc.2246.
Mahmoud, R. (2023). An analysis of the judicial and legislative attitude to hearsay electronic data in South Africa. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 20, 10-29. https://doi.org/10.14296/deeslr.v20i.5566.
Manulang, D. S. H. (2016). Penerapan alternatif penyelesaian sengketa di Badan Penyelesaian Sengketa Konsumen (BPSK) untuk mewujudkan kepastian hukum. Tesis. Yogyakarta: Universitas Atmajaya Yogyakarta.
Marcus, R. L. (2012). The impact of digital information on American evidence-Gathering and trial – The straw that breaks the camel’s back? In Kengyel, M., & Nemessányi, Z. (Eds.). Electronic Technology and Civil Procedure. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, 15, 29-48. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4072-3_2.
Maryam P. Z, F., Wulandari, F., Wulandari, R., & Handayani, S. (2026). Inkonsistensi pertimbangan hakim terhadap alat bukti elektronik dalam perkara perdata. Sosial Simbiosis: Jurnal Integrasi Ilmu Sosial dan Politik, 3(1), 15-28. https://doi.org/10.62383/sosial.v3i1.2901.
Mild, A., Waitz, M., & Wöckl, J. (2015). How low can you go? - Overcoming the inability of lenders to set proper interest rates on unsecured peer-to-peer lending markets. Journal of Business Research, 68(6). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2014.11.021.
Nihoul, P. (2000). Michael Chissick & Alistair Kelman, e-commerce law and practice, sweet & maxwell limited. European Business Law Review, 11(2), 128. https://doi.org/10.54648/271559.
Ningtias, A. D., Suisno., & Nayasari S, D. (2020). Aspek hukum terhadap perusahaan pinjaman online ilegal menurut sistem hukum di Indonesia. Jurnal Independent, 8(2), 340-349. https://doi.org/10.30736/ji.v8i2.122.
Noor, A. (2021). Certificate of electronic liability rights: Normative legal study on the execution of object liability based on Law No 4 of 1996. Review of International Geographical Education Online, 11(4), 1570-1580.
Ojo, A. O., Salam, A. A. A., Tan, C. N., & Chong, C. W. (2024). Investigating intention to invest in online peer-to-peer lending platforms among the bottom 40 group in Malaysia. Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management, 19, 1-19. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.28945/5364.
Pandiangan, H. J. (2017). Perbedaan hukum pembuktian dalam perspektif hukum acara pidana dan perdata. To-Ra, 3(2), 565-583. https://doi.org/10.33541/tora.v3i2.1154.
Pooja., Poonam., & Monika. (2024). Adoption of technology and e-discovery: An overview and importance in legal practice. Nanotechnology Perceptions, 20(S5), 648-658. https://doi.org/10.62441/nano-ntp.v20iS5.61.
Priyana, P., Baluqia, S. H., & Darmawan, W. (2021). Alat bukti informasi elektronik tindak pidana penipuan online dalam perspektif hukum acara pidana di Indonesia. Jurnal IUS Kajian Hukum dan Keadilan, 9(1), 183-198. https://doi.org/10.29303/ius.v9i1.848.
Ramadhan, M. S., Afrilia, D., & Syaifuddin, M. (2024). Urgensi penguatan sinkronisasi kaidah hukum positif dan religi dalam pemanfaatan pinjaman online di Indonesia. Proceeding Conference on Da’wah and Communication Studies, 3, 43-55. https://doi.org/10.61994/cdcs.v3i1.194.
Rumadan, I. (2017). Peran lembaga peradilan sebagai institusi penegak hukum dalam menegakkan keadilan bagi terwujudnya perdamaian. Jurnal Rechts Vinding: Media Pembinaan Hukum Nasional, 6(1), 69-87. https://doi.org/10.33331/rechtsvinding.v6i1.128.
Rüßmann, H. (2012). Electronic documents. Security and authenticity. In Kengyel, M., & Nemessányi, Z. (Eds.). Electronic technology and civil procedure. Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, 15, 233-260. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-4072-3_12.
Selamat, S. R., Yusof, R., Sahib, S., Hassan, N. H., Abdollah, M. F., & Abidin, Z. Z. (2011). Traceability in digital forensic investigation process. 2011 IEEE Conference on Open Systems, ICOS 2011. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICOS.2011.6079259.
Setiawan, H. D., Erhuma, M., & Holish, A. M. (2023). E-court paradigm shift: Problems of legitimacy mechanisms of electronic evidence in state administrative procedure law. Indonesian State Law Review, 6(1), 53-74. https://doi.org/10.15294/islrev.v6i1.68232.
Siering, M. (2023). Peer-to-peer (P2P) lending risk management: Assessing credit risk on social lending platforms using textual factors. ACM Transactions on Management Information Systems, 14(3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3589003.
Sinaga, R., Sulaiman, S., & Fatahillah, F. (2024). Analisis hukum terhadap wanprestasi atas perjanjian hutangpiutang (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Nomor 686/Pdt.G/2021/Pn.Mdn). Jurnal Ilimiah Mahasiswa Fakultas Hukum Universitas Malikussaleh, 6(4). https://doi.org/10.29103/jimfh.v6i4.13651.
Soekanto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2001). Penelitian hukum normatif (Suatu tinjauan singkat). Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Sun, F., & Zhou, L. (2012). Study of authentication mechanism of e-evidence in the e-commerce litigation. Proceedings - 2012 International Conference on Management of e-Commerce and e-Government, ICMeCG 2012. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICMeCG.2012.85.
Suteki., & Taufani, G. (2018). Metodologi penelitian hukum (Filsafat, teori dan praktik). Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.
Tan, D. (2023). Demystifying the proliferation of online peer-to-peer lending in Indonesia: Decoding fintech as a regulatory challenge. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 10(3), 376-400. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2022.21.
Tran, Q. A. (2022a). Fundamental principles of civil procedure and the basic principles relating to evidence in civil procedure. In: Electronic evidence in civil and commercial dispute resolution. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, 27. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18572-4_3.
_________. (2022b). The authentication of electronic evidence. In: Electronic evidence in civil and Commercial Dispute Resolution. European Yearbook of International Economic Law, 27, 167-210. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18572-4_7.
Una, B. K. (2025). Pinjaman online di Indonesia: Menjembatani keuangan ataukah perangkap digital? Yogyakarta: Deepublish.
Ward, B. T., Purwin, C., Sipior, J. C., & Volonino, L. (2009). Recognizing the impact of e-discovery amendments on electronic records management. Information Systems Management, 26(4), 350-356. https://doi.org/10.1080/10580530903245721.
Ward, B. T., Sipior, J. C., Volonino, L., & Purwin, C. (2011). A United States perspective on electronic discovery rules and electronic evidence. Transforming Government: People, Process and Policy, 5(3), 268-279. https://doi.org/10.1108/17506161111155405.
Wei, S. (2016). Regulating P2P lending in China industrial landscape and regulatory approaches. Silk Road Studies in International Economic Law, 3, 286-323. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004315815_012.
Yuspin, W., Fitriana, I., Budiono, A., Fauzie, A., & Nurrachman, A. D. (2022). Evaluating the regulatory scheme on mitigation default risk through insurance in peer-to-peer lending. WSEAS Transactions on Systems, 21, 347-358. https://doi.org/10.37394/23202.2022.21.38.
Zeynalvand, L., Luo, T., Andrejczuk, E., Niyato, D., Teo, S. G., & Zhang, J. (2021). A blockchain-enabled quantitative approach to trust and reputation management with sparse evidence. Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, AAMAS, 3.
Zhdanova, O. A., Bondarenko, T. G., & Maksimova, T. P. (2019). Peer-to-peer lending in the modern financial system. Journal of Advanced Research in Dynamical and Control Systems, 11(11 Special Issue). https://doi.org/10.5373/JARDCS/V11SP11/20192937.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Muhammad Syahri Ramadhan, Meria Utama, Rizha Claudilla Putri
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
