Unraveling the ambiguity of the commonality element in Indonesian class action litigation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51749/injurlens.v6i1.151Keywords:
Commonality; Legal Certainty; Civil Procedure LawAbstract
The meaning of commonality in Class Action (CA) lawsuits in Indonesia, which remains abstractly formulated, leaves room for judges to interpret it differently, potentially leading to "disparities in rulings and legal uncertainty." This research aims to compare the regulation of CA in Indonesia and the United States, specifically regarding the concept of commonality, and to formulate a more concrete and applicable concept for the Indonesian legal system. The normative legal research used in this study employs a legislative and comparative law approach. Based on the study, this research found that in the United States, commonality has developed more clearly through jurisprudence by emphasizing a single core issue (common contention) and the dominance of a shared issue (predominance), unlike Indonesia, which still lacks a definite standard. From this condition, this research takes a firm position that commonality should not be merely interpreted as a general similarity, but rather as a unity of substantive issues that can be proven and resolved collectively in a single decision. On this basis, it is necessary to formulate a norm that is "concrete, measurable, and operational" so that the CA mechanism can truly provide legal certainty.
Downloads
References
Brogaard, J., Le, N., Nguyen, D. D., & Sila, V. (2024). Does Shareholder Litigation Risk Cause Public Firms to Delist? Evidence from Securities Class Action Lawsuits. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 59(4), 1726–1759. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022109023000571
Carroll, M. (2024). The Mismatched Goals of Bankruptcy and Mass Tort Litigation. Jotwell: J. Things We Like, 1.
Choi, A. H., & Spier, K. E. (2022). Class Actions and Private Antitrust Litigation. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 14(3), 131–163. https://doi.org/10.1257/mic.20200059
Chouaibi, S., Chouaibi, J., & Rossi, M. (2022). ESG and corporate financial performance: the mediating role of green innovation: UK common law versus Germany civil law. EuroMed Journal of Business, 17(1), 46–71. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-09-2020-0101
Cui, X., Han, J., Kim, J. B., & Qi, B. (2024). Federal judge ideology, securities class action litigation, and stock price crash risk. Accounting and Finance, 64(4), 4131–4155. https://doi.org/10.1111/acfi.13299
Eriksen, E. O. (2023). Three modes of administrative behaviour: differentiated policy implementation and the problem of legal certainty. Journal of European Public Policy, 30(12), 2623–2642. https://doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2022.2125047
Fuad, Z., Darma, S., & Muhibbuthabry, M. (2022). Wither Qanun Jinayat? The legal and social developments of Islamic criminal law in Indonesia. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2053269
Hong, N. N. T., & Le, M. K. N. (2026). Class Actions in Environment Disputes: Lessons from the United States and Prostects in Vietnam. PRAWO i WI??, 60(1), 661–683. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.36128/s10xbz09
Indonesia, M. A. R. (2025). Ringkasan Eksekutif Laporan Tahunan 2025.
Kang, D., & Hong, S. E. (2025). Legal education reform and medical litigation: Improved access but delayed justice in plastic surgery malpractice cases in South Korea. PLOS ONE, 20(5 May), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0323059
Kaya, S., & ?ahin-?engül, E. (2024). Global Class Actions: Towards a Blockchain-Based Dispute Resolution System. Journal of Consumer Policy, 47(1), 21–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-023-09553-8
Kurniawan, I. D., Septiningsih, I., Handayani, F., & Ikrimah, A. (2025). Formal Requirements for Class Action Lawsuits in Environmental Cases in Indonesia: Problems and Solutions. Journal of Law, Environmental and Justice, 3(1), 79–103. https://doi.org/10.62264/jlej.v3i1.114
Laguerre, R. A. (2022). Minding employee pay equality policy perceptions. In Industrial and Organizational Psychology (Vol. 15, Number 1, pp. 73–75). https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2021.139
Levitin, T. (2021). Doubt no more. Columbia Law Review, 121(4), 1289–1326.
Liyew, E. B. (2024). Accused persons’ speedy trial rights in Ethiopia’s criminal proceedings: theory and practice. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2024.2360171
Lloyd, M. (2023). Swimming against the Current: The Ninth’s Cicuit’s Incorrect Jettisoning of the De Minimis Rule in Class Action Certification. BCL Rev. E. Supp., 64, 68–83.
Luppi, B., & Parisi, F. (2010). Judicial creativity and judicial errors: an organizational perspective. Journal of Institutional Economics, 6(1), 91–98. https://doi.org/10.1017/s174413740999018x
Marzuki, P. M. (2008). Penelitian Hukum. Kencana Prenada Media.
Meilany, D. (2024). Gugatan Perwakilan Kelompok (Class Action) tentang Pencemaran Air Pada Sungai Kalundang. Savana: Indonesian Journal of Natural Resources and Environmental Law, 1(2), 109–121. https://doi.org/10.25134/savana.v1i2.211
Mu’in, F., Faisal, F., Fikri, A., Asnawi, H. S., & Nawawi, M. A. (2023). the practice of substitute heirs in indonesian religious court: Restricted Interpretation. Al-Ahwal: Jurnal Hukum Keluarga Islam, 16(1), 141–157. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.14421/ahwal.2023.16107
Oderkerk, M. (2025). 16. Methods of Comparative Legal Research: How to Set Up and Carry Out a Comparative Legal Research Project. Uncovering European Private Law: A Student Handbook, 312–341. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0448.16
Patel, P., Pinkert, M., & Lyons, P. (2023). Gatekeeping & Class Certification: The Eleventh Circuit’s Stringent Approach to Admitting Expert Evidence in Support of Class Certification. U. Miami L. Rev., 78(4), 1062–1083.
Pradnyana, D. P. W. J. (2025). Analisis Komparatif Perkembangan Gugatan Class Action Dalam Perkara Lingkungan Di Indonesia, Australia Dan Amerika Serikat. Kertha Semaya: Journal Ilmu Hukum, 13(12), 2779–2800. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.24843/KS.2025.v13.i12.p05
Sellers, M. N. S. (2022). The Rule of Law in the United States of America. American Journal of Comparative Law, 70(1 S), i26–i38. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcl/avac023
Shcherbanyuk, O., Gordieiev, V., & Bzova, L. (2023). Legal nature of the principle of legal certainty as a component element of the rule of law. Juridical Tribune, 13(1), 21–31. https://doi.org/10.24818/TBJ/2023/13/1.02
States, S. C. of the U. (n.d.). General Telephone Co. of the Southwest v. Falcon, 457 U.S. 147 (1982). 1982.
States, S. C. of the U. (1997). Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997).
States, S. C. of the U. (2011). Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338 (2011).
States, S. C. of the U. (2013). Comcast Corp. v. Behrend, 569 U.S. 27 (2013).
States, S. C. of the U. (2016). Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 577 U.S. 442 (2016).
Sudiarawan, K. A., Karunian, A. Y., Mangku, D. G. S., & Hermanto, B. (2022). Discourses on Citizen Lawsuit as Administrative Dispute Object: Government Administration Law Vs. Administrative Court Law. Journal of Indonesian Legal Studies, 7(2), 449–486. https://doi.org/10.15294/jils.v7i2.60166
Susilo, E., Din, M., Suhaimi, & Mansur, T. M. (2024). Justice Delayed, Justice Denied: A Critical Examination of Repeated Suspect Status in Indonesia. Hasanuddin Law Review, 3(3), 342–357. https://doi.org/10.20956/halrev.v10i3.6088
Susilo, E., Mohd, D., Suhaimi, & Mansur, T. M. (2025). Access To Justice?: an Effective Pretrial Model To Guarantee the Right To Defense for Suspects in Indonesia. Jurnal Hukum Dan Peradilan, 14(1), 317–350.
Taylor, W. K. (2025). The unintended consequences of increased access to justice. Law and Society Review, 59(4), 665–688. https://doi.org/10.1017/lsr.2025.10044
Viapiana, F., VAN DIJK, F., & Diephuis, B. (2023). Pressure on judges: How managerialisation and evolving professional standards affect judges’ autonomy, efficiency and stress. Onati Socio-Legal Series, 13(S1), S347–S385. https://doi.org/10.35295/OSLS.IISL.1672
Wang, Q., Cheng, C. S. A., Lian, Q., & Liu, C. Z. (2022). Law firm market share and securities class action litigation outcomes. Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 84, 596–609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2020.10.013
Wantu, F., Muhtar, M. H., Putri, V. S., Thalib, M. C., & Junus, N. (2023). Eksistensi mediasi sebagai salah satu bentuk penyelesaian sengketa lingkungan hidup pasca berlakunya undang-undang cipta kerja. Bina Hukum Lingkungan, 7(2), 267–289.
Wardhani, L. T. A. L., Noho, M. D. H., & Natalis, A. (2022). The adoption of various legal systems in Indonesia: an effort to initiate the prismatic Mixed Legal Systems. Cogent Social Sciences, 8(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2022.2104710
Whalen-Bridge, H. (2019). Court backlogs: balancing efficiency and justice in Singapore. International Journal of the Legal Profession, 26(1), 879–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/09695958.2018.1490298
Zimmerman, A. S. (2022). The Class Appeal. The University of Chicago Law Review, 89(6), 1419–1514.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Erwin Susilo, Nahdhah Nahdhah, Dharma Setiawan Negara
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Injurlens is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License
Articles in Injurlens are Open Access articles published under the Creative Commons CC BY-NC-SA License This license permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work and source is properly cited. Any derivative of the original must be distributed under the same license as the original.