BOILERPLATE CONTRACT; A PERSPECTIVE FROM INDONESIAN LAWS AND REGULATIONS

Abstract

There were many boilerplate contracts in practice. The main issue is that it leaves no room for
negotiation. Scholars used to argue that the boilerplate contract was bad for consumer
protection. This research aims to elaborate that either a boilerplate contract can be legally and
commercially acceptable from the perspective of Indonesian laws and regulations or not. The
researcher conducted a comparative legal study from two common law countries: the United
Kingdom and Singapore. This research is normative legal research, using secondary data,
mainly primary legal sources. Data were obtained through literature research using google
machine, with main keywords are "standard," "boilerplate," and "adhesion," combined with
"contract." Collected data were reviewed using content analysis to obtain only the most relevant
data. Data used for the final analysis were data from the United Kingdom, Singapore, and
Indonesia. The final analysis was conducted using a qualitative approach with a comparative
approach. The discussion proved that boilerplate contracts could and shall not be generally
considered as legally or commercially acceptable. It must consider whether the "crucial" terms
and conditions have been fairly informed or presented before the contract's conclusion. They
can be performed without changing the real meaning of the transaction. The researcher finally
concluded that Indonesian law on consumer protection that regulated the boilerplate contract
needs to be amended.