ronb wrote1. So Patrick Alexander "owned" 35 are using a nominee. He subdivided and then "sold" 12 are to Jeremy Thomas. He received 1 billion as a deposit on the larger agreed amount, then allowed the transfer of the land certificate to proceed so that Jeremy Thomas could then borrow from the bank using the land certificate as security. He borrowed the money but did not pay off Patrick Alexander. So Patrick Alexander goes to court and the court "awards possession" to Patrick Alexander.
2. Now, we are reading English translations of court outcomes - but it is clear that this Gianyar court had no trouble with the nominee ownerships. They reversed Jeremy Thomas's nominee ownership and re-instated Patriick Alexander's nominee ownership.
3. So then Jeremy Thomas and the bank have a problem.
1. I didn't read, from the balidiscovery report, if the whole Hak Milik lot, or only a portion of the original lot, was transferred from nominee #1 (the foreigner's original) to Nominee #2 (the actor). It just says that the actor was planning to develop the smaller lot.
2. If you have the Court's English translation outcome I'd appreciate you post...maybe then we can determine the real situation.
3. I'd think, as he has been criminally charged, he's more focused on staying out of prison.
IMO the case doesn't determine anything in regard to the nominee structures. I've always contended that the name on the hak milik property title deed (Tanda Bukti Hak Milik) is the rightful owner. Other contractual agreements on the property cannot bestow title nor attempt to circumvent that law.
Again....IMO the report infers the foreigner 'inherited' the Hak Milik property from the court's decision...so spicyayam's lawyer wife's opinion makes sense. He will now either have to sell within 1 year or convert to Hak Pakai or even find another nominee...although I'd be hard pressed to believe the latter considering what happened...:icon_rolleyes:
The case cannot be used as an example because Indonesia adopted Netherland's legal jurisprudence which doesn't include the use of 'Precedence'. So each case of a nominee going rogue, and being sued, will be determined 'on its own merit' without reference to any 'precedence'.
