%A NIM.: 19103060069 Rizki Mutiara Bahari
%O Dr. Malik Ibrahim, M. Ag.
%T PEMBAGIAN HARTA BERSAMA (STUDI KOMPARASI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 288 K/AG/2010 DENGAN PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG NO. 266 K/AG/2010)
%X This study is motivated by differences in legal interpretation in the division of
marital property after divorce in Indonesia. Although it has been regulated under
Law Number 1 of 1974 and the Compilation of Islamic Law (KHI), judicial
practice shows inconsistencies, particularly in Supreme Court Decisions No. 288
K/AG/2010 and No. 266 K/AG/2010. These differences lie in how judges interpret
Article 97 of the KHI, namely whether the division must be carried out equally or
can be adjusted based on the contributions of the parties. This situation raises
issues concerning fairness in the distribution of joint assets after divorce, thus
necessitating a comparative study to understand the legal reasoning behind the
judges’ considerations in both decisions.
This research employs a normative legal research method with a comparative
juridical approach. The nature of the research is descriptive-analytical and
comparative, aiming to describe and analyze legal provisions concerning joint
property and their application in Supreme Court decisions. The data used consist
of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, which are analyzed
qualitatively through a normative juridical approach. This study focuses on
comparing Decision No. 288 K/AG/2010 and No. 266 K/AG/2010 to assess the
consistency of legal application and its conformity with principles of justice.
The results of the study indicate that there are two different approaches to the
division of joint assets. Decision No. 288 K/AG/2010 emphasizes legal certainty
through equal division (½ : ½) after deducting joint debts, while Decision No. 266
K/AG/2010 prioritizes substantive justice by considering the contributions of the
parties, resulting in an unequal division (¾ for the wife and ¼ for the husband).
This difference demonstrates that the two decisions are not contradictory, but
rather reflect the application of different concepts of justice, namely formal justice
and proportional justice, in accordance with the circumstances of each case.
%K Putusan Mahkamah Agung No. 288 K/AG/2010 dan No. 288
K/AG/2010, Harta Bersama, Keadilan
%D 2026
%I UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
%L digilib77950