Conceptual Reconstruction of Directors' Responsibilities in Limited Liability Company Bankruptcy Based on Fiduciary Duty and Business Judgment Rule

Hendro Widodo; Evita  Isretno Israhadi

doi:10.47134/jcl.v3i3.1.5870

Authors

Hendro Widodo Universitas Borobudur
Evita Isretno Israhadi Universitas Borobudur

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.47134/jcl.v3i3.1.5870

Keywords:

Directors' Responsibilities, Limited Liability Company Bankruptcy, Fiduciary Duty, Business Judgment Rule, Corporate Governance, Insolvency Law

Abstract

The dynamics of directors' responsibilities in the bankruptcy of limited liability companies present complex normative problems due to the disharmony between the corporate law regime and bankruptcy law. Corporate law emphasizes managerial discretion through the principles of fiduciary duty and the business judgment rule, while bankruptcy law is more oriented towards protecting the collective interests of creditors. This paradigm difference gives rise to ambiguity in determining the limits of directors' responsibilities, especially when the company is in a phase of financial distress or approaching insolvency. This study aims to analyze the doctrinal conflict that occurs between fiduciary duty, the business judgment rule, and the bankruptcy regime, and to formulate a conceptual reconstruction that can create a balance between director protection and legal accountability. The research method used is normative legal research with a statutory, conceptual, and analytical approach, through a study of Law Number 40 of 2007 concerning Limited Liability Companies and Law Number 37 of 2004 concerning Bankruptcy and Suspension of Debt Payment Obligations, as well as an analysis of legal doctrine and the development of corporate governance theory. The research findings identify normative disharmony as the root cause of uncertainty in the standards for assessing directors' responsibilities. The proposed conceptual reconstruction includes a reinterpretation of fiduciary duty toward a stakeholder-sensitive approach through the concept of dual fiduciary obligation, a repositioning of the business judgment rule as a process-based evaluation, and the development of an integrative model for corporate governance and insolvency governance. The formulation of new standards, such as threshold liability, a safe harbor for restructuring decisions, and an early warning governance mechanism, is expected to provide more balanced legal certainty. This research provides theoretical contributions to the development of the doctrine of directors' responsibilities and normative recommendations for future regulatory harmonization.

References

Ababil, M. A. (2025). Perlindungan kreditur dalam sistem kepailitan Indonesia: Antara norma hukum dan kenyataan. Juris Humanity: Jurnal Riset dan Kajian Hukum Hak Asasi Manusia, 4(1), 38–53.

Agustina, L. W. (2025). Prinsip-prinsip etika bisnis dan penerapannya. CV Eureka Media Aksara.

Alifya, A. R. (2024). Pengaruh cognitive bias dalam pengambilan keputusan terhadap dunia bisnis. Jurnal Humaniora dan Sosial Sains, 1(3), 329–335.

Arafat, M., & (penulis tidak lengkap). (2026). Tanggung jawab direksi–komisaris pasca serangan siber: Fiduciary duty dan business judgment rule. Equality: Journal of Law and Justice, 3(1), 26–49.

Arifin, A. P. (2025). Penerapan prinsip fiduciary duty untuk mewujudkan good corporate governance dalam perseroan terbatas. Journal of Contemporary Law Studies, 2(2), 173–184.

Budhiyono, B. S. (2025). Penerapan business judgment rule sebagai perlindungan hukum direksi dalam pengambilan keputusan berbasis manajemen risiko. UNES Law Review, 8(1), 304–316.

De Valerie, A., & (penulis tidak lengkap). (2024). Penerapan asas fiduciary duty dalam tanggung jawab direksi pada perseroan terbatas. Journal of Law, Education and Business, 2(1), 373–379.

Fatahillah, F., & (penulis tidak lengkap). (2023). Perbandingan konsep hukum kepailitan Amerika (Chapter 11) dan hukum kepailitan Indonesia. Jurnal USM Law Review, 6(3), 1262–1278.

Ibrahim, M. A. (2023). Analisis hukum atas peran dan tanggung jawab direktur nominee dalam perseroan terbatas. Jurnal Hukum Statuta, 3(1), 44–52.

Idris, F. A. (2026). Kepailitan sebagai instrumen pengembalian kekayaan: Studi literatur terhadap hukum kepailitan di Indonesia. JOSH: Journal of Sharia, 5(1), 103–119.

Judijanto, L. T. (2025). Perbandingan sistem hukum perdata dan common law dalam perlindungan data pribadi di Indonesia. Sanskara Hukum dan HAM, 4(1), 161–170.

Khairiyyah, L. H. (2025). Kepastian hukum business judgment rule dalam memberikan perlindungan hukum bagi direksi perseroan. Jurnal USM Law Review, 8(3), 2038–2055.

Kiemas, A. M. (2023). Redefining bankruptcy law: Incorporating the principle of business continuity for fair debt resolution. Rechtsidee, 11(2), 10–21.

Mondayri, S., & (penulis tidak lengkap). (2022). Analisis pengaruh good corporate governance, intellectual capital, dan arus kas operasi terhadap financial distress. Jurnalku, 2(1), 25–43.

Nima, I. M. (2024). Tanggung jawab direksi dalam perseroan terbatas: Implementasi prinsip good corporate governance (GCG). Indonesian Journal of Law and Justice, 1(4), 9.

Prakasa, A. W. (2025). Doktrin fiduciary duty: Peranannya sebagai pedoman pengurusan perseroan terbatas oleh direksi. Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum, 3(2), 241–247.

Rachman, A. R. (2025). Pengantar good corporate governance. Tohar Media.

Sihombing, A. R. (2025). Analisis komparatif business judgment rule Indonesia dan Malaysia dalam melindungi direksi dari gugatan pertanggungjawaban keputusan bisnis. Jurnal Media Akademik (JMA), 3(12).

Suhartanto, F. P., & (penulis tidak lengkap). (2024). Perbandingan sistem hukum civil law dan common law. Konsensus: Jurnal Ilmu Pertahanan, Hukum dan Ilmu Komunikasi, 1(3), 72–83.

Wardani, D. S. (2023). Perlindungan direksi terhadap keputusan bisnis melalui penerapan prinsip business judgment rule di Amerika Serikat, Jepang, dan Indonesia. Dharmasisya: Jurnal Program Magister Hukum FHUI, 2(3), 8.