Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The principle of Limited Liability constitutes one of the fundamental pillars of corporate law, providing protection to shareholders by limiting their liability to the amount of capital they have invested in the company. This principle aims to encourage investment and promote economic growth by ensuring legal certainty for investors. However, in practice, the principle is often abused through the use of corporate entities as instruments to evade legal obligations, commit fraud, commingle personal and corporate assets, or cause harm to creditors and other third parties. Such circumstances have led to the development of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine as a corrective mechanism against the misuse of corporate legal personality. This study aims to analyze the limitations of the Limited Liability principle and examine the implications of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine within Indonesian corporate law. The research employs a normative juridical method using both statutory and conceptual approaches. Legal materials were collected through library research, including legislation, legal doctrines, scholarly literature, and relevant court decisions. The findings indicate that the principle of limited liability is not absolute. Indonesian Company Law provides exceptions that allow shareholders and corporate organs to be held personally liable in cases involving abuse of corporate form, undercapitalization, commingling of assets, or unlawful acts. The application of the piercing the corporate veil doctrine serves to balance investor protection, legal certainty, and creditor interests. Therefore, a more comprehensive regulatory framework is necessary, encompassing the codification of indicators of corporate misuse, the development of technical guidelines for judges, and harmonization with good corporate governance principles, to ensure consistent application of the doctrine and strengthen corporate accountability within the Indonesian legal system.
Keywords
Article Details
Copyright (c) 2026 Handika Faqih Nugroho, Kristiani Virgi Kusuma Putri, Allytha Choula
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Afridi, Ahmad. “Corporate Liability and the Concept of Limited Liability.” International Journal of Law and Policy 3, no. 10 (October 30, 2025): 37–57. https://doi.org/10.59022/ijlp.386.
Ardi, Nuzula Syafrial. “PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PT TERHADAP PENGGUNAAN ASET PT UNTUK KEPENTINGAN PRIBADI OLEH PEMEGANG SAHAM.” Perspektif 23, no. 1 (January 31, 2018): 45. https://doi.org/10.30742/perspektif.v23i1.634.
Bainbridge, Stephen M. Stephen M. Bainbridge. New York: Foundation Press, 2002.
Cahn, Andreas, and David C. Donald. Comparative Company Law. Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316888971.
Agus Budiarto. Kedudukan Hukum dan Tanggung Jawab Pendiri Perseroan Terbatas. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia, 2009.
Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 (Court of Appeal).
Darmawan, Akmal Budi. “Batasan Perlindungan Hukum Perseroan Terbatas Dalam Perspektif Piercing the Corporate Veil: (Analisis Putusan Pengadilan No. 47/Pdt.G/2021/PN. Mtr).” Rewang Rencang : Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis 6, no. 4 (2025): 4.
Davies, Paul L. Gower and Davies’ Principles of Modern Company Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2008.
Davies, Paul L., and Sarah Worthington. Gower’s Principles of Modern Company Law. 11th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2021.
Blumberg, Phillip I. The Law of Corporate Groups: Procedural Problems in the Law of Parent and Subsidiary Corporations. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1983.
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel R. Fischel. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law. Jakarta: Kencana, 1991.
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel R. Fischel. “Limited Liability and the Corporation.” The University of Chicago Law Review 52, no. 1 (1985): 89–117. https://doi.org/10.2307/1599572.
Fuady, Munir. Hukum Perusahaan Dalam Paradigma Hukum Bisnis. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2010.
G. Henn, Harry, and John R. Alexander. Laws of Corporations and Other Business Enterprises. St. Paul: West Publishing Co, 1983.
Gelb, Harvey. “Piercing the Corporate Veil-The Undercapitalization Factor.” Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 59, no. 1 (1982): 1.
Hansmann, Henry, and Reinier Kraakman. “The Essential Role of Organizational Law.” The Yale Law Journal 110, no. 3 (2000): 387–440. https://doi.org/10.2307/797521.
Hameed, Irshad. “The Doctrine of Limited Liability and the Piercing of the Corporate Veil in the Light of Fraud: A Critical Multi-Jurisdictional Study.” Amsterdam, 2013.
Harahap, M. Yahya. Hukum Perseroan Terbatas. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2016.
Herdian, Irma Sylviyani. “Penerapan Piercing the Corporate Veil Terhadap Direksi Perusahaan Asuransi Dalam Investasi Beresiko Tinggi Yang Mengandung Conflict of Interest.” Jurnal Hukum Saburai 5, no. 2 (2020): 256. https://jurnal.saburai.id/index.php/hkm/article/view/1288.
I.G. Rai Widjaja. Hukum Perusahaan: Undang-Undang dan Peraturan Pelaksanaan di Bidang Usaha. Jakarta: Kesaint Blanc, 2006.
Institute, Legal Information. “Limited Liability.” Cornell Law School, 2023. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/limited_liability.
Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832.
Ireland, P. “Limited Liability, Shareholder Rights and the Problem of Corporate Irresponsibility.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 34, no. 5 (September 1, 2010): 837–856. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/ben040.
Isfardiyana, Siti Hapsah. “Tanggung Jawab Direksi Perseroan Terbatas Dalam Pelanggaran Fiduciary Duty.” PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) 2, no. 1 (2015): 168–191. https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n1.a10.
Justia US Law. “Kinney Shoe Corporation, a New York Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lincoln M. Polan, Defendant-Appellee.” Justia US Law, 1991.
Kandiyas, Yusticia Ardi, Ermanto Fahamsyah, and Aan Efendi. “Prinsip Hukum Perseroan Terbatas Pada Perusahaan Perseroan Daerah.” Jurnal Syntax Admiration 4, no. 7 (July 25, 2023): 913–927. https://doi.org/10.46799/jsa.v4i6.652.
Kasiani, and Weppy Susetyo. “ANALISIS PARAMETER PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL ATAS KOLABORASI PEMEGANG SAHAM MAYORITAS DAN DIREKSI DALAM PENYELEWENGAN ASET PERSEROAN TERBATAS” 16, no. 1 (2026): 114–128. https://ejournal.unisbablitar.ac.id/index.php/supremasi/article/view/5644.
Khairandy, Ridwan. Perseroan Terbatas: Doktrin, Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, Dan Yurisprudensi. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press, 2014.
Kraakman, Reinier, et al. The Anatomy of Corporate Law: A Comparative and Functional Approach. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Penemuan Hukum: Sebuah Pengantar. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2014.
Nindyo Pramono. Hukum PT Go Public dan Pasar Modal. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi, 2013.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media, 2017.
Pound, Roscoe. The Spirit of the Common Law. Boston: Marshall Jones Company, 1921.
Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] 2 AC 415.
OECD. G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance 2023. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1787/ed750b30-en.
Puranto, Henny Yunita. “Juridical Review of Companies and Limited Liability Companies.” Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum 13, no. 3 (December 28, 2022): 262–271. https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v13i3.6086.
Rudhi Prasetya. Perseroan Terbatas: Teori dan Praktik. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2011.
“Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 PK/N/2007,” n.d.
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1427 K/PDT/2009 (n.d.).
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 28 PK/Pdt/2012 (n.d.).
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 89 PK/PDT/2010. (n.d.).
Putusan PT Jakarta Nomor 260/PDT/2018/PT DKI (n.d.).
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Hukum Progresif: Sebuah Sintesa Hukum Indonesia. Jakarta: Kompas, 2009.
Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22 (House of Lords).
Rodliyah, Rodliyah, Any Suryani, and Lalu Husni. “Konsep Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi (Corporate Crime) Dalam Sistem Hukum Pidana Indonesia.” Journal Kompilasi Hukum 5, no. 1 (February 9, 2021): 191–206. https://doi.org/10.29303/jkh.v5i1.43.
Thompson, Robert B. “Piercing the Corporate Veil: An Empirical Study.” Cornell Law Review 76, no. 5 (1991): 1036–1074.
Widiatno, Men Wih. “Penerapan Piercing the Corporate Veil Dalam Menilai Pertanggungjawaban Pribadi Pendiri Perseroan Terbatas Perorangan.” Forum Ilmiah Indonusa 19, no. 1 (2022): 118–136. https://ejurnal.esaunggul.ac.id/index.php/Formil/article/view/5161.
Widjaja, Gunawan. Risiko Hukum Pemilik, Direksi & Komisaris PT: Piercing the Corporate Veil: Memberlakukan Tanggung Jawab Pribadi Pemegang Saham, Direksi & Dewan Komisaris Menurut UU PT No. 40 Thn 2007. Jakarta: Niaga Swadaya, 2008.
Woolfson v Strathclyde Regional Council, 1978 SLT 159 (House of Lords).
Yessira Dianita. “Penerapan Prinsip Piercing the Corporate Veil Terhadap Pelanggaran Fiduciary Duty.” Politika Progresif : Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Humaniora 2, no. 3 (September 30, 2025): 72–79. https://doi.org/10.62383/progres.v2i3.2529.
References
Afridi, Ahmad. “Corporate Liability and the Concept of Limited Liability.” International Journal of Law and Policy 3, no. 10 (October 30, 2025): 37–57. https://doi.org/10.59022/ijlp.386.
Ardi, Nuzula Syafrial. “PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PT TERHADAP PENGGUNAAN ASET PT UNTUK KEPENTINGAN PRIBADI OLEH PEMEGANG SAHAM.” Perspektif 23, no. 1 (January 31, 2018): 45. https://doi.org/10.30742/perspektif.v23i1.634.
Bainbridge, Stephen M. Stephen M. Bainbridge. New York: Foundation Press, 2002.
Cahn, Andreas, and David C. Donald. Comparative Company Law. Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316888971.
Agus Budiarto. Kedudukan Hukum dan Tanggung Jawab Pendiri Perseroan Terbatas. Bogor: Ghalia Indonesia, 2009.
Adams v Cape Industries plc [1990] Ch 433 (Court of Appeal).
Darmawan, Akmal Budi. “Batasan Perlindungan Hukum Perseroan Terbatas Dalam Perspektif Piercing the Corporate Veil: (Analisis Putusan Pengadilan No. 47/Pdt.G/2021/PN. Mtr).” Rewang Rencang : Jurnal Hukum Lex Generalis 6, no. 4 (2025): 4.
Davies, Paul L. Gower and Davies’ Principles of Modern Company Law. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2008.
Davies, Paul L., and Sarah Worthington. Gower’s Principles of Modern Company Law. 11th ed. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2021.
Blumberg, Phillip I. The Law of Corporate Groups: Procedural Problems in the Law of Parent and Subsidiary Corporations. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1983.
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel R. Fischel. The Economic Structure of Corporate Law. Jakarta: Kencana, 1991.
Easterbrook, Frank H., and Daniel R. Fischel. “Limited Liability and the Corporation.” The University of Chicago Law Review 52, no. 1 (1985): 89–117. https://doi.org/10.2307/1599572.
Fuady, Munir. Hukum Perusahaan Dalam Paradigma Hukum Bisnis. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2010.
G. Henn, Harry, and John R. Alexander. Laws of Corporations and Other Business Enterprises. St. Paul: West Publishing Co, 1983.
Gelb, Harvey. “Piercing the Corporate Veil-The Undercapitalization Factor.” Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 59, no. 1 (1982): 1.
Hansmann, Henry, and Reinier Kraakman. “The Essential Role of Organizational Law.” The Yale Law Journal 110, no. 3 (2000): 387–440. https://doi.org/10.2307/797521.
Hameed, Irshad. “The Doctrine of Limited Liability and the Piercing of the Corporate Veil in the Light of Fraud: A Critical Multi-Jurisdictional Study.” Amsterdam, 2013.
Harahap, M. Yahya. Hukum Perseroan Terbatas. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2016.
Herdian, Irma Sylviyani. “Penerapan Piercing the Corporate Veil Terhadap Direksi Perusahaan Asuransi Dalam Investasi Beresiko Tinggi Yang Mengandung Conflict of Interest.” Jurnal Hukum Saburai 5, no. 2 (2020): 256. https://jurnal.saburai.id/index.php/hkm/article/view/1288.
I.G. Rai Widjaja. Hukum Perusahaan: Undang-Undang dan Peraturan Pelaksanaan di Bidang Usaha. Jakarta: Kesaint Blanc, 2006.
Institute, Legal Information. “Limited Liability.” Cornell Law School, 2023. https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/limited_liability.
Jones v Lipman [1962] 1 WLR 832.
Ireland, P. “Limited Liability, Shareholder Rights and the Problem of Corporate Irresponsibility.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 34, no. 5 (September 1, 2010): 837–856. https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/ben040.
Isfardiyana, Siti Hapsah. “Tanggung Jawab Direksi Perseroan Terbatas Dalam Pelanggaran Fiduciary Duty.” PADJADJARAN Jurnal Ilmu Hukum (Journal of Law) 2, no. 1 (2015): 168–191. https://doi.org/10.22304/pjih.v2n1.a10.
Justia US Law. “Kinney Shoe Corporation, a New York Corporation, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Lincoln M. Polan, Defendant-Appellee.” Justia US Law, 1991.
Kandiyas, Yusticia Ardi, Ermanto Fahamsyah, and Aan Efendi. “Prinsip Hukum Perseroan Terbatas Pada Perusahaan Perseroan Daerah.” Jurnal Syntax Admiration 4, no. 7 (July 25, 2023): 913–927. https://doi.org/10.46799/jsa.v4i6.652.
Kasiani, and Weppy Susetyo. “ANALISIS PARAMETER PIERCING THE CORPORATE VEIL ATAS KOLABORASI PEMEGANG SAHAM MAYORITAS DAN DIREKSI DALAM PENYELEWENGAN ASET PERSEROAN TERBATAS” 16, no. 1 (2026): 114–128. https://ejournal.unisbablitar.ac.id/index.php/supremasi/article/view/5644.
Khairandy, Ridwan. Perseroan Terbatas: Doktrin, Peraturan Perundang-Undangan, Dan Yurisprudensi. Yogyakarta: FH UII Press, 2014.
Kraakman, Reinier, et al. The Anatomy of Corporate Law: A Comparative and Functional Approach. 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017.
Mertokusumo, Sudikno. Penemuan Hukum: Sebuah Pengantar. Yogyakarta: Cahaya Atma Pustaka, 2014.
Nindyo Pramono. Hukum PT Go Public dan Pasar Modal. Yogyakarta: Penerbit Andi, 2013.
Marzuki, Peter Mahmud. Penelitian Hukum. Edisi Revisi. Jakarta: Kencana Prenada Media, 2017.
Pound, Roscoe. The Spirit of the Common Law. Boston: Marshall Jones Company, 1921.
Prest v Petrodel Resources Ltd [2013] UKSC 34, [2013] 2 AC 415.
OECD. G20/OECD Principles of Corporate Governance 2023. Paris: OECD Publishing, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1787/ed750b30-en.
Puranto, Henny Yunita. “Juridical Review of Companies and Limited Liability Companies.” Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum 13, no. 3 (December 28, 2022): 262–271. https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v13i3.6086.
Rudhi Prasetya. Perseroan Terbatas: Teori dan Praktik. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2011.
“Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 11 PK/N/2007,” n.d.
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 1427 K/PDT/2009 (n.d.).
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 28 PK/Pdt/2012 (n.d.).
Putusan Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia Nomor 89 PK/PDT/2010. (n.d.).
Putusan PT Jakarta Nomor 260/PDT/2018/PT DKI (n.d.).
Rahardjo, Satjipto. Hukum Progresif: Sebuah Sintesa Hukum Indonesia. Jakarta: Kompas, 2009.
Salomon v A Salomon & Co Ltd [1897] AC 22 (House of Lords).
Rodliyah, Rodliyah, Any Suryani, and Lalu Husni. “Konsep Pertanggungjawaban Pidana Korporasi (Corporate Crime) Dalam Sistem Hukum Pidana Indonesia.” Journal Kompilasi Hukum 5, no. 1 (February 9, 2021): 191–206. https://doi.org/10.29303/jkh.v5i1.43.
Thompson, Robert B. “Piercing the Corporate Veil: An Empirical Study.” Cornell Law Review 76, no. 5 (1991): 1036–1074.
Widiatno, Men Wih. “Penerapan Piercing the Corporate Veil Dalam Menilai Pertanggungjawaban Pribadi Pendiri Perseroan Terbatas Perorangan.” Forum Ilmiah Indonusa 19, no. 1 (2022): 118–136. https://ejurnal.esaunggul.ac.id/index.php/Formil/article/view/5161.
Widjaja, Gunawan. Risiko Hukum Pemilik, Direksi & Komisaris PT: Piercing the Corporate Veil: Memberlakukan Tanggung Jawab Pribadi Pemegang Saham, Direksi & Dewan Komisaris Menurut UU PT No. 40 Thn 2007. Jakarta: Niaga Swadaya, 2008.
Woolfson v Strathclyde Regional Council, 1978 SLT 159 (House of Lords).
Yessira Dianita. “Penerapan Prinsip Piercing the Corporate Veil Terhadap Pelanggaran Fiduciary Duty.” Politika Progresif : Jurnal Hukum, Politik Dan Humaniora 2, no. 3 (September 30, 2025): 72–79. https://doi.org/10.62383/progres.v2i3.2529.