Legal Discovery and Relationship in the Context of Settlement of Civil Intellectual Property Rights Cases in the Medan District Court
Keywords:
Legal Discovery, Legal Reasoning, Intellectual Property Rights, Medan District CourtAbstract
Background: Legal discovery and reasoning are core processes that determine the accuracy and fairness of law application in court. Although these two concepts have been central to legal theory, their application in the context of civil intellectual property (IPR) cases in the Medan District Court still faces various challenges.
Objectives: This paper aims to examine the theoretical concepts of legal discovery and reasoning, describe the process of their application in Medan District Court decisions, and identify the challenges faced by judges.
Methods: This research uses a qualitative method with a literature review approach and content analysis of court decisions. Data were collected from legal textbooks, scientific journals, and 35 Medan District Court decisions in 2023-2024 regarding IPR cases (trademarks, copyrights, and patents).
Results: The results of the study indicate that: (1) legal discovery in Medan involves searching for written legal sources (the 2014 Intellectual Property Law, the Civil Code), unwritten (the legal principles of "justice" and "conformity to the needs of society"), and decisions of the North Sumatra High Court as persuasive guides; (2) the most frequently used methods of reasoning are teleological (65%) and systemic (25%) reasoning, accompanied by literal reasoning (10%) in cases with clear rules; (3) major challenges include unclear rules on proving trademark similarity, lack of access to an integrated database of IPR decisions, and judges' lack of understanding of modern IPR issues such as digital content.
Conclusions: This study concludes that it is necessary to improve the capacity of judges in the discovery and reasoning of IPR law and refine legal sources to improve the quality of decisions at the Medan District Court.
Downloads
References
Cardozo, B. N. (1921). The Nature of the Judicial Process. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Fuller, L. L. (1964). The Morality of Law. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Jhering, R. v. (1877). Der Zweck im Recht (Vol. 1). Leipzig: Breitkopf & Härtel.
Kelsen, H. (1967). Pure Theory of Law (Trans. M. Knight). Berkeley: University of California Press.
Abdul Rahman Maulana Siregar. (2018). Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Pengujian Undang-undang Terhadap Undang-Undang Dasar Tahun 1945.
Law of the Republic of Indonesia Number 28 of 2014 concerning Intellectual Property Rights.
Lestari, D. (2023). Penelaran hukum untuk konten digital di Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Teknologi, 8(2).
Mahfud MD, M. (2020). Hukum Hak Kekayaan Intelektual di Indonesia. Jakarta: Lexicon Media.
Medan District Court Decision Number 12/Pdt.G/2023/PN Medan.
Medan District Court Decision Number 45/Pdt.G/2024/PN Medan.
Medan District Court Decision Number 78/Pdt.G/2023/PN Medan.
Mertokusumo, S. (2019). Penelitian Hukum: Metode dan Teknik. Yogyakarta: Gadjah Mada University Press.
North Sumatra High Court Decision Number 89/K/Pdt/2022/PT SU.
Pratama, A. (2024). Tantangan hakim dalam penemuan hukum HKI di Sumatera Utara. Makalah Seminar Hukum Daerah, 12–13 April 2024, Medan.
Rahardjo, S. (2018). Ilmu Hukum: Konsep dan Proses. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.
Regulation of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number 3 of 2021 concerning Trademark Registration.
Soekanto, S. (2019). Ilmu Hukum Nasional. Jakarta: Raja Grafindo Persada.
Sari, R. (2023). Penelaran hukum dalam putusan kasus merek dagang di Medan. Jurnal HKI Sumatera, 5(1), 34–51.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). (2022). Guide to Intellectual Property Law for Digital Content. Geneva: WIPO.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Medi Islamta Sembiring, Abdul Rahman Maulana Siregar, Meina Alvionita Br. Purba (Author)
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
