DANA ASURANSI SEBAGAI HARTA BERSAMA DAN HARTA PRIBADI (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Agama Batusangkar dan Mataram)

Syamsud Dhuha, S.H., NIM.: 20203011013 (2022) DANA ASURANSI SEBAGAI HARTA BERSAMA DAN HARTA PRIBADI (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Agama Batusangkar dan Mataram). Masters thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (DANA ASURANSI SEBAGAI HARTA BERSAMA DAN HARTA PRIBADI (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Agama Batusangkar dan Mataram)) 20203011013_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (3MB) | Preview
	Text (DANA ASURANSI SEBAGAI HARTA BERSAMA DAN HARTA PRIBADI (Studi Putusan Pengadilan Agama Batusangkar dan Mataram)) 20203011013_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (5MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

The practice of determining insurance funds is still much debated, both among practitioners and academics. The decision on whether the insurance fund becomes joint property or becomes personal property is still incompatible in giving consideration. As the decision of the Batusangkar Religious Court No 624/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Bsk states that the insurance fund is a joint property. In contrast to the decision of the Mataram Religious Court No 270/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Mtr, in its legal considerations, the insurance fund is declared as personal property. To answer this problem, there is a problem formulation in this study, namely first, why there is a difference in the status of insurance funds between the decisions of the Batusangkar and Mataram Religious Courts, secondly, how are the values of justice, expediency and legal certainty of the decisions of the Batusangkar and Mataram Religious Courts. This type of research is library research, namely legal research carried out by examining library materials as the basic material for research. The approach used in this research is using a normative approach. This study focuses on the decision of the Batusangkar Religious Court Number 624/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Bsk and the decision of the Mataram Religious Court 270/Pdt.G/2020/PA.Mtr, because in view of the determination of insurance funds there is still a disparity in the decision by the judge. Furthermore, the theory used to analyze is Gustav Radbruch's theory of legal goals, justice, expediency and legal certainty. The results showed that the difference in the status of insurance funds in the decisions of the Batusangkar and Mataram Religious Courts was due to different types of insurance because each type of insurance has its own benefits. The decision of the Batusangkar Religious Court as the object of the lawsuit belongs to the category of voluntary insurance where the benefits of claiming insurance funds after the death of the Insurer are partly the rights of the widow/widower and the remaining part becomes the rights of the designated heirs or heirs. As for the decision of the Mataram Religious Court, there are two types of insurance, namely mandatory insurance and voluntary insurance. Judging from the justice theory of Gustav Radbruch, the decision of the Batusangkar Religious Court has fulfilled the aspect of justice when viewed from the benefits of the status of voluntary insurance funds, so that the elements of justice and expediency have been achieved in the decision. The Mataram Religious Court's decision in its decision did not present an element of justice because the panel of judges only considered the Supreme Court's Jurisprudence and did not look further at the status of the insurance funds contained in the case, because there were voluntary insurance funds whose benefits were not only for the wife but for other heirs. Therefore, the decision only fulfills the element of legal certainty and does not present elements of justice and legal benefits.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item