# 📚 UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES 2016 - DATABASE LENGKAP

**UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts 2016**  
**4th Edition**  
**LegalMind AI Database**  
**Tanggal: 11 November 2025**

---

## 📋 METADATA

```
Nama Lengkap: UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contracts
Edisi: 4th Edition (2016)
Diterbitkan: 2016
Penerbit: International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT)
Status: ✅ Current edition
Berlaku: Worldwide (soft law)
Sifat: Model law / Persuasive authority
Bahasa: English, French, Spanish, dll
Sumber: https://www.unidroit.org/instruments/commercial-contracts/unidroit-principles-2016/
```

---

## 🎯 TENTANG UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES

### **APA ITU UNIDROIT PRINCIPLES?**

UNIDROIT Principles adalah seperangkat aturan untuk kontrak komersial internasional yang:
- ✅ Dapat dipilih oleh para pihak sebagai hukum yang mengatur kontrak
- ✅ Dapat digunakan untuk menafsirkan atau melengkapi instrumen hukum internasional
- ✅ Dapat digunakan sebagai model untuk legislasi nasional dan internasional
- ✅ Bersifat "soft law" - tidak mengikat kecuali dipilih oleh para pihak

### **MENGAPA PENTING?**

1. **Universal:** Tidak terikat pada sistem hukum tertentu
2. **Modern:** Mencerminkan praktik bisnis terkini
3. **Balanced:** Menyeimbangkan kepentingan semua pihak
4. **Flexible:** Dapat disesuaikan dengan kebutuhan
5. **Authoritative:** Dibuat oleh ahli hukum internasional

---

## 📚 ARTIKEL-ARTIKEL PENTING

### **ARTICLE 1.7 - GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING**

**Teks Lengkap:**
```
Article 1.7
(Good faith and fair dealing)

(1) Each party must act in accordance with good faith and fair dealing 
    in international trade.

(2) The parties may not exclude or limit this duty.
```

**Penjelasan:**

**Ayat (1) - Kewajiban Itikad Baik:**
- **Good faith:** Kejujuran dalam fakta (honesty in fact)
- **Fair dealing:** Kepatutan dalam transaksi (fairness in transaction)
- **In international trade:** Standar internasional, bukan nasional

**Ayat (2) - Tidak Dapat Dikecualikan:**
- Kewajiban itikad baik adalah **mandatory**
- Para pihak **tidak dapat** mengecualikan atau membatasi
- Klausul yang mengecualikan itikad baik adalah **batal**

**Komentar Resmi:**

1. **Fundamental principle:**
   - Itikad baik adalah prinsip fundamental
   - Berlaku di semua tahap kontrak:
     - Negosiasi
     - Pembentukan kontrak
     - Pelaksanaan
     - Penyelesaian sengketa

2. **Objective standard:**
   - Bukan subjektif (apa yang dipikir pihak)
   - Objektif (apa yang wajar dalam perdagangan internasional)

3. **Examples of bad faith:**
   - Negosiasi tanpa niat untuk kontrak
   - Menyembunyikan informasi material
   - Mengeksploitasi kelemahan pihak lain
   - Melanggar confidentiality
   - Menggunakan klausul yang sangat tidak adil

**Aplikasi untuk Klausul Unconscionable:**

```
Klausul arbitrase dengan biaya 10x penghasilan:
- Melanggar fair dealing ✅
- Mengeksploitasi kelemahan pihak lain ✅
- Tidak sesuai dengan itikad baik ✅
→ Dapat dibatalkan berdasarkan Article 1.7
```

**Yurisprudensi:**

- **ICC Arbitration Case No. 7110 (1995):**
  - Pihak yang menyembunyikan informasi material melanggar good faith
  - Kontrak dapat dibatalkan

- **ICC Arbitration Case No. 8486 (1996):**
  - Klausul yang sangat tidak adil melanggar fair dealing
  - Klausul dapat dimodifikasi oleh arbiter

**Precedent Nasional yang Mengadopsi:**

- **Indonesia:** Pasal 1338 ayat (3) KUH Perdata
- **Jerman:** § 242 BGB (Treu und Glauben)
- **Prancis:** Article 1104 Code Civil
- **UK:** Common law duty of good faith (limited)

---

### **ARTICLE 3.2.7 - GROSS DISPARITY**

**Teks Lengkap:**
```
Article 3.2.7
(Gross disparity)

(1) A party may avoid the contract or an individual term of it if, at 
    the time of the conclusion of the contract, the contract or term 
    unjustifiably gave the other party an excessive advantage. Regard 
    is to be had, among other factors, to

    (a) the fact that the other party has taken unfair advantage of 
        the first party's dependence, economic distress or urgent 
        needs, or of its improvidence, ignorance, inexperience or 
        lack of bargaining skill, and

    (b) the nature and purpose of the contract.

(2) Upon the request of the party entitled to avoidance, a court may 
    adapt the contract or term in order to make it accord with 
    reasonable commercial standards of fair dealing.

(3) A court may also adapt the contract or term upon the request of 
    the party receiving notice of avoidance, provided that that party 
    informs the other party of its request promptly after receiving 
    such notice and before the other party has reasonably acted in 
    reliance on it. Article 3.2.10(2) applies accordingly.
```

**Penjelasan:**

**Ayat (1) - Definisi Gross Disparity:**

**Unsur-unsur:**
1. **Excessive advantage:** Keuntungan yang berlebihan
2. **Unjustifiably:** Tidak dapat dibenarkan
3. **At the time of conclusion:** Pada saat kontrak dibuat

**Faktor-faktor yang dipertimbangkan:**

**(a) Unfair advantage of:**
- **Dependence:** Ketergantungan (misal: monopoli)
- **Economic distress:** Kesulitan ekonomi
- **Urgent needs:** Kebutuhan mendesak
- **Improvidence:** Kecerobohan
- **Ignorance:** Ketidaktahuan
- **Inexperience:** Kurang pengalaman
- **Lack of bargaining skill:** Kurang kemampuan negosiasi

**(b) Nature and purpose:**
- Jenis kontrak
- Tujuan kontrak
- Konteks bisnis

**Ayat (2) - Adaptation by Court:**
- Pengadilan dapat **memodifikasi** kontrak
- Atas permintaan pihak yang berhak membatalkan
- Untuk membuat kontrak sesuai dengan **reasonable commercial standards**

**Ayat (3) - Adaptation by Request:**
- Pihak yang menerima pemberitahuan pembatalan dapat meminta modifikasi
- Harus segera setelah menerima pemberitahuan
- Sebelum pihak lain bertindak berdasarkan pembatalan

**Komentar Resmi:**

1. **Relationship to other doctrines:**
   - Mirip dengan "unconscionability" (common law)
   - Mirip dengan "lésion" (civil law)
   - Mirip dengan "Wucher" (German law)

2. **Burden of proof:**
   - Pihak yang membatalkan harus membuktikan:
     - Ada excessive advantage
     - Unjustifiably
     - Pada saat kontrak dibuat

3. **Examples:**

   **Example 1: Excessive price**
   ```
   A, in urgent need of cash, sells valuable property to B for 
   50% of market value. B knows of A's distress.
   → Gross disparity ✅
   → A can avoid the contract
   ```

   **Example 2: Unfair arbitration clause**
   ```
   A, a small business, signs standard form contract with B, 
   a large corporation. Arbitration clause requires:
   - Arbitration in B's country
   - Filing fee: USD 50,000
   - A's annual revenue: USD 100,000
   → Gross disparity ✅
   → A can avoid the clause
   ```

   **Example 3: Penalty clause**
   ```
   Contract provides penalty of USD 1 million for breach.
   Actual loss from breach: USD 10,000.
   Ratio: 100x
   → Gross disparity ✅
   → Penalty can be reduced
   ```

**Aplikasi untuk Klausul Unconscionable:**

```
TEST UNTUK GROSS DISPARITY:

1. Excessive advantage?
   - Biaya arbitrase USD 14,500
   - Penghasilan tahunan USD 20,000
   - Ratio: 72.5% of annual income
   → YES ✅

2. Unjustifiably?
   - Standard form contract (no negotiation)
   - Take-it-or-leave-it
   - No legitimate business reason
   → YES ✅

3. Unfair advantage of:
   - Dependence: Need job ✅
   - Economic distress: Low income ✅
   - Lack of bargaining skill: Individual vs corporation ✅
   → YES ✅

CONCLUSION: Gross disparity exists
REMEDY: Avoid clause or adapt to reasonable terms
```

**Yurisprudensi:**

- **ICC Arbitration Case No. 8486 (1996):**
  - Penalty clause 50x actual loss
  - Held: Gross disparity
  - Reduced to 5x actual loss

- **CIETAC Arbitration (2005):**
  - Arbitration clause requiring USD 100,000 deposit
  - Party's annual revenue: USD 200,000
  - Held: Gross disparity
  - Clause struck down

**Precedent Nasional:**

- **Indonesia:** Pasal 1320, 1337, 1339 KUH Perdata
- **Canada:** Unconscionability doctrine (Uber v. Heller)
- **UK:** Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977
- **US:** UCC § 2-302 (Unconscionability)

---

### **ARTICLE 7.1.7 - FORCE MAJEURE**

**Teks Lengkap:**
```
Article 7.1.7
(Force majeure)

(1) Non-performance by a party is excused if that party proves that 
    the non-performance was due to an impediment beyond its control 
    and that it could not reasonably be expected to have taken the 
    impediment into account at the time of the conclusion of the 
    contract or to have avoided or overcome it or its consequences.

(2) When the impediment is only temporary, the excuse shall have 
    effect for such period as is reasonable having regard to the 
    effect of the impediment on the performance of the contract.

(3) The party who fails to perform must give notice to the other 
    party of the impediment and its effect on its ability to perform. 
    If the notice is not received by the other party within a 
    reasonable time after the party who fails to perform knew or 
    ought to have known of the impediment, it is liable for damages 
    resulting from such non-receipt.

(4) Nothing in this article prevents a party from exercising a right 
    to terminate the contract or to withhold performance or request 
    interest on money due.
```

**Penjelasan:**

**Ayat (1) - Definisi Force Majeure:**

**Unsur-unsur:**
1. **Impediment beyond control:** Hambatan di luar kontrol
2. **Could not reasonably be expected:**
   - Tidak dapat diperkirakan saat kontrak dibuat
   - Tidak dapat dihindari
   - Tidak dapat diatasi

**Ayat (2) - Temporary Impediment:**
- Jika hambatan hanya sementara
- Excuse berlaku selama periode yang wajar

**Ayat (3) - Notice Requirement:**
- Pihak yang tidak dapat perform harus memberitahu
- Dalam waktu yang wajar
- Jika tidak: Liable untuk damages akibat keterlambatan pemberitahuan

**Ayat (4) - Rights Preserved:**
- Hak untuk terminate kontrak tetap ada
- Hak untuk withhold performance tetap ada
- Hak untuk bunga tetap ada

**Komentar Resmi:**

1. **What constitutes force majeure:**

   **YES - Force Majeure:**
   - War, civil war, revolution
   - Natural disasters (earthquake, flood, hurricane)
   - Government acts (embargo, expropriation)
   - Strikes (if beyond control)
   - Pandemic (COVID-19)

   **NO - Not Force Majeure:**
   - Economic hardship
   - Market fluctuations
   - Inability to obtain financing
   - Supplier's failure (unless also force majeure)
   - Business strategy changes

2. **Burden of proof:**
   - Pihak yang claim force majeure harus membuktikan
   - Standard: Beyond reasonable doubt

3. **Examples:**

   **Example 1: War**
   ```
   A agrees to deliver goods to B in country X.
   War breaks out in country X, making delivery impossible.
   → Force majeure ✅
   → A excused from performance
   ```

   **Example 2: Economic hardship (NOT force majeure)**
   ```
   A agrees to buy oil at USD 100/barrel.
   Oil price drops to USD 50/barrel.
   A claims force majeure due to economic hardship.
   → NOT force majeure ❌
   → A must perform
   ```

   **Example 3: Pandemic**
   ```
   A agrees to perform services in country X.
   Government lockdown prevents A from traveling.
   → Force majeure ✅
   → A excused during lockdown period
   ```

**Aplikasi untuk Klausul Force Majeure:**

```
KLAUSUL FORCE MAJEURE YANG VALID:

"Force majeure means events beyond the reasonable control of a party,
including but not limited to:
- Acts of God (earthquake, flood, etc.)
- War, terrorism, civil unrest
- Government acts (embargo, expropriation)
- Pandemic or epidemic
- Strikes (not caused by the party)

Economic hardship, market fluctuations, and inability to obtain
financing are NOT force majeure."

KLAUSUL FORCE MAJEURE YANG INVALID:

"Force majeure includes:
- Business strategy changes ❌
- Market conditions ❌
- Economic hardship ❌
- Inability to obtain financing ❌"

→ Invalid karena bukan truly beyond control
```

**Yurisprudensi:**

- **Seadrill v. Tullow [2018] EWHC 1640:**
  - Economic hardship bukan force majeure
  - Market conditions bukan force majeure

- **Tandrin v. Aero, 600 F.3d 592 (2010):**
  - 2008 financial crisis bukan force majeure
  - Inability to obtain financing bukan force majeure

- **ICC Arbitration Case No. 5953 (1989):**
  - Gulf War adalah force majeure
  - Excuse performance during war

**Precedent Nasional:**

- **Indonesia:** Pasal 1244, 1245 KUH Perdata
- **France:** Force majeure doctrine
- **Germany:** § 275 BGB (Impossibility)
- **UK:** Frustration doctrine

---

### **ARTICLE 7.4.13 - PENALTY CLAUSES**

**Teks Lengkap:**
```
Article 7.4.13
(Penalty clauses)

(1) Where the contract provides that a party who does not perform is 
    to pay a specified sum to the aggrieved party for such 
    non-performance, the aggrieved party is entitled to that sum 
    irrespective of its actual harm.

(2) However, notwithstanding any agreement to the contrary, the 
    specified sum may be reduced to a reasonable amount where it is 
    grossly excessive in relation to the harm resulting from the 
    non-performance and to the other circumstances.
```

**Penjelasan:**

**Ayat (1) - Liquidated Damages:**
- Jika kontrak menetapkan jumlah tertentu untuk non-performance
- Pihak yang dirugikan berhak atas jumlah tersebut
- **Tanpa perlu membuktikan kerugian aktual**

**Ayat (2) - Reduction of Excessive Penalty:**

**Unsur-unsur:**
1. **Grossly excessive:** Sangat berlebihan
2. **In relation to:**
   - Harm resulting from non-performance
   - Other circumstances

**Notwithstanding any agreement:**
- Meskipun para pihak setuju
- Pengadilan tetap dapat mengurangi
- Tidak dapat dikecualikan

**Komentar Resmi:**

1. **Distinction: Liquidated damages vs Penalty:**

   **Liquidated Damages (Valid):**
   - Genuine pre-estimate of loss
   - Reasonable in relation to anticipated harm
   - Purpose: Compensation

   **Penalty (May be reduced):**
   - Not a genuine pre-estimate
   - Grossly excessive
   - Purpose: Punishment/deterrence

2. **Test for "grossly excessive":**

   **Factors to consider:**
   - Ratio of penalty to actual loss
   - Ratio of penalty to contract value
   - Nature of breach
   - Legitimate interest of aggrieved party
   - Bargaining power of parties

   **Guidelines:**
   - Ratio < 2x: Generally reasonable
   - Ratio 2x-5x: May be reasonable depending on circumstances
   - Ratio 5x-10x: Likely excessive
   - Ratio > 10x: Grossly excessive

3. **Examples:**

   **Example 1: Reasonable liquidated damages**
   ```
   Contract value: USD 1 million
   Liquidated damages: USD 100,000 (10% of contract value)
   Actual loss: USD 80,000
   Ratio: 1.25x
   → Reasonable ✅
   → Enforceable
   ```

   **Example 2: Excessive penalty**
   ```
   Contract value: USD 100,000
   Penalty: USD 1 million (10x contract value)
   Actual loss: USD 10,000
   Ratio: 100x
   → Grossly excessive ✅
   → May be reduced to USD 20,000-50,000
   ```

   **Example 3: Late payment penalty**
   ```
   Payment due: USD 10,000
   Penalty: 10% per day
   After 30 days: USD 30,000 penalty (300% of principal)
   → Grossly excessive ✅
   → May be reduced to reasonable interest rate (e.g., 12% per annum)
   ```

**Aplikasi untuk Penalty Clauses:**

```
TEST UNTUK PENALTY REDUCTION:

1. Is it grossly excessive?
   - Penalty: USD 74 million
   - Actual loss: USD 5-10 million
   - Ratio: 7.4x - 14.8x
   → YES, grossly excessive ✅

2. Reduction to reasonable amount:
   - Actual loss: USD 5-10 million
   - Reasonable penalty: 1.5x - 2x actual loss
   - Reduced penalty: USD 7.5-20 million
   → Reduce from USD 74M to USD 10-20M

EXAMPLE: Late payment penalty 10% per hari
- 10% per hari = 3,650% per tahun
- Reasonable interest: 12% per tahun
- Ratio: 304x
→ Grossly excessive ✅
→ Reduce to 12% per annum
```

**Yurisprudensi:**

- **Cavendish v. Makdessi [2015] UKSC 67:**
  - Penalty USD 74M vs Loss USD 5-10M
  - Ratio: 7.4x - 14.8x
  - Held: Penalty, but upheld (controversial)
  - Under UNIDROIT: Would be reduced

- **ICC Arbitration Case No. 8486 (1996):**
  - Penalty 50x actual loss
  - Held: Grossly excessive
  - Reduced to 5x actual loss

- **ParkingEye v. Beavis [2015] UKSC 67:**
  - Penalty GBP 85 vs Loss GBP 0-5
  - Ratio: 17x - ∞
  - Held: Upheld (UK only)
  - Under UNIDROIT: Would be reduced

**Precedent Nasional:**

- **Indonesia:** Pasal 1246, 1249 KUH Perdata
- **France:** Article 1231-5 Code Civil
- **Germany:** § 343 BGB
- **UK:** Penalty doctrine (Dunlop Test, Cavendish Test)

---

### **ARTICLE 7.1.6 - EXEMPTION CLAUSES**

**Teks Lengkap:**
```
Article 7.1.6
(Exemption clauses)

A clause which limits or excludes one party's liability for 
non-performance or which permits one party to render performance 
substantially different from what the other party reasonably expected 
may not be invoked if it would be grossly unfair to do so, having 
regard to the purpose of the contract.
```

**Penjelasan:**

**Scope:**
- **Limitation clauses:** Membatasi liability
- **Exclusion clauses:** Mengecualikan liability
- **Performance variation clauses:** Mengubah performance secara substansial

**Test: "Grossly unfair"**

**Factors:**
1. **Purpose of the contract:** Tujuan kontrak
2. **Nature of the clause:** Jenis klausul
3. **Bargaining power:** Kekuatan tawar-menawar
4. **Reasonable expectations:** Ekspektasi yang wajar

**Komentar Resmi:**

1. **What is "grossly unfair":**

   **Grossly unfair:**
   - Limitation to trivial amount (e.g., 0.1% of contract value)
   - Exclusion of fundamental obligations
   - One-sided clauses in standard form contracts
   - Clauses that defeat the purpose of the contract

   **Not grossly unfair:**
   - Reasonable limitation (e.g., contract value)
   - Exclusion of consequential damages (if reasonable)
   - Mutual limitations

2. **Examples:**

   **Example 1: Trivial limitation (grossly unfair)**
   ```
   Contract value: USD 1 million
   Limitation of liability: USD 100
   Ratio: 0.01%
   → Grossly unfair ✅
   → Clause cannot be invoked
   ```

   **Example 2: Reasonable limitation**
   ```
   Contract value: USD 1 million
   Limitation of liability: USD 1 million (contract value)
   → Not grossly unfair ✅
   → Clause can be invoked
   ```

   **Example 3: One-sided exclusion (grossly unfair)**
   ```
   Standard form contract:
   - Supplier's liability: Excluded
   - Customer's liability: Unlimited
   → Grossly unfair ✅
   → Exclusion cannot be invoked
   ```

**Aplikasi untuk Limitation Clauses:**

```
TEST UNTUK GROSSLY UNFAIR:

Mitchell v. Finney scenario:
- Purchase price: GBP 201.60
- Actual loss: GBP 61,000
- Limitation: GBP 201.60 (refund only)
- Ratio: 0.33% of actual loss

Analysis:
1. Purpose of contract: Buy seeds for farming
2. Limitation defeats purpose: Cannot recover crop loss
3. Grossly unfair: YES ✅
→ Limitation clause cannot be invoked
→ Full damages: GBP 61,000

Photo Production v. Securicor scenario:
- Contract value: GBP 8,000/year
- Actual loss: GBP 615,000
- Limitation: Effectively zero
- Ratio: 0%

Analysis:
1. Purpose: Security services
2. Limitation defeats purpose: No liability for security failure
3. Grossly unfair: YES ✅
→ Under UNIDROIT: Clause cannot be invoked
→ Full damages: GBP 615,000
```

**Yurisprudensi:**

- **Mitchell v. Finney [1983] 2 AC 803:**
  - Limitation 0.33% of loss
  - Held: Unreasonable under UCTA 1977
  - Under UNIDROIT: Grossly unfair

- **Photo Production v. Securicor [1980] AC 827:**
  - Limitation effectively zero
  - Held: Upheld (old law)
  - Under UNIDROIT: Grossly unfair

**Precedent Nasional:**

- **Indonesia:** Pasal 1365, 1366 KUH Perdata
- **UK:** UCTA 1977, Consumer Rights Act 2015
- **EU:** Directive 93/13/EEC (Unfair Terms)
- **US:** UCC § 2-719 (Failure of essential purpose)

---

## 📊 RINGKASAN ARTIKEL PENTING

| Article | Topik | Aplikasi | Precedent |
|---------|-------|----------|-----------|
| **1.7** | Good faith | Klausul unconscionable | Uber v. Heller |
| **3.2.7** | Gross disparity | Arbitrase, penalty | Cavendish, Uber |
| **7.1.6** | Exemption clauses | Limitation of liability | Mitchell, Photo Production |
| **7.1.7** | Force majeure | FM clauses | Seadrill, Tandrin |
| **7.4.13** | Penalty clauses | Excessive penalties | Cavendish, ParkingEye |

---

## 🎯 CARA MENGGUNAKAN DATABASE INI

### **UNTUK ANALISIS KLAUSUL:**

**Step 1: Identifikasi jenis klausul**
```
Contoh: Klausul arbitrase dengan biaya tinggi
→ Relevan: Article 3.2.7 (Gross disparity)
```

**Step 2: Terapkan test**
```
1. Excessive advantage? Check ratio biaya vs penghasilan
2. Unjustifiably? Check bargaining power
3. Unfair advantage? Check dependence, economic distress
```

**Step 3: Tentukan remedy**
```
- Avoid clause (batalkan)
- Adapt clause (modifikasi)
- Claim damages (ganti rugi)
```

---

**Powered by:**  
🧠 LegalMind AI v1.1.1 + Maya Wisdom  
📅 11 November 2025  
📚 UNIDROIT Principles 2016 - Complete Database

═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
**© 2025 LegalMind AI - Comprehensive Legal Database**
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
