PRESIDENT Joko Widodo (Jokowi) was requested to concentrate to the destiny of 1000’s of workers and households of PT Polo Ralph Lauren Indonesia who’re threatened with dropping their jobs. This occurred due to the Polo Ralph Lauren model dispute, the case is at the moment within the evaluation (PK) stage on the Supreme Court docket (MA).
They consider the Supreme Court docket’s resolution will hurt workers and their households. As a result of, one of many judges who tried it had made an hostile resolution in a case that was additionally associated.
Additionally learn: Afraid of Shedding Their Jobs, A whole bunch of Polo Ralph Lauren Staff Complain to the Supreme Court docket
“We additionally hope that President Joko Widodo, whose (workplace) is subsequent to this constructing (MA), will hear our aspirations, hear our complaints,” stated PT Polo Ralph Lauren Indonesia consultant, Janli Sembiring, to journalists, in entrance of the MA Constructing, Central Jakarta, Friday (17/5).
The case in query is the PK case of PT Manggala Putra Perkasa Quantity 10 PK/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2024 and Fahmi Babra Quantity 15 PK/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2024. They demanded that Supreme Choose Rahmi Mulyati get replaced as decide within the case. As a result of the Supreme Court docket decide’s earlier resolution on the cassation and PK ranges was thought of detrimental to PT Polo Ralph Lauren Indonesia.
“Is it tough to switch one Choose Rahmi with so many different Supreme Court docket justices?” he stated.
Additionally learn: Model Dispute, Polo Ralph Lauren Staff Ask the Supreme Court docket to Change the Composition of Judges
Janli stated that his occasion didn’t belief the integrity of Supreme Choose Rahmi Mulyati, who thought of his resolution to be detrimental to the pursuits of workers.
“As a result of we do not belief Choose Rahmi, as a result of he has already dealt with this case. It is unattainable for him to appropriate his resolution,” continued Janli.
One of many instances determined by Choose Rahmi was PK PT Polo Ralph Lauren Indonesia Quantity 9 PK/Pdt.Sus-HKI/2024. The decision was in favor of MHB.
Additionally learn: Polo Model Dispute, PT Polo Ralph Lauren Staff Apprehensive About Shedding Their Jobs
Janli felt unusual concerning the resolution. He additionally thought of the choice to be legally flawed, as a result of from the beginning MHB didn’t personal the Polo by Ralph Lauren model. This may be seen from resolution quantity 140/Pdt.G/1995 Jkt Pst on web page 10. In addition to on the decision web page, the place there is no such thing as a phrase “Polo” and no phrase “by”.
“How come somebody (MHB) who solely has photocopy proof and the precise model is just Ralph Lauren and has been deleted, not Polo By Ralph Lauren, can delete the Polo Ralph Lauren model which has been formally registered with the DJKI (Directorate Normal of Mental Property)? Can we test it from “In 1986 we already had the Polo Ralph Lauren model and it was official, it might be eliminated with solely photocopy proof and it was strongly suspected to be pretend,” defined Janli.
“Can he (Choose Rahmi) learn that call 140 of 1995? There it’s clear on web page 10 and the ruling that the mark that was beforehand registered was Ralph Lauren, not Polo by Ralph Lauren and that has additionally been eliminated by court docket order, how can somebody who would not “Having the Polo by Ralph Lauren model for a very long time following which deciding to personal Polo by Ralph Lauren is sort of unusual,” he added, accompanied by authorized representatives from LQ Indonesia Legislation Agency and Quotient TV, Putra Hendra Giri.
Additionally learn: Corruption Eradication Committee Information Enchantment In opposition to Hasbi Hasan’s Verdict
Other than that, the choice additionally abolished dozens of PT Polo Ralph Lauren Indonesia manufacturers. This, stated Janli, is similar as eager to kill the enterprise of the corporate the place they work.
“We’re difficult the authorized counsel of the opposing occasion, we aren’t legal professionals, we don’t perceive the regulation. However we’re difficult the constructive authorized debate. We as people who find themselves not authorized individuals also can learn clearly what’s written there (resolution 140 of 1995) is Ralph Lauren and it has been deleted, not Polo by Ralph Lauren. This resolution is inconsequential and legally flawed,” he defined.
“The opposing occasion is attempting to construct an opinion that our motion has nothing to do with the trademark dispute lawsuit. After all there’s a connection, as a result of this considerations the lives of many individuals, the staff who this firm helps,” continued Janli. (Z-8)
#Polo #Ralph #Lauren #Staff #Complain #President #Joko #Widodo
