PENGINGKARAN JANJI MENIKAHI DALAM PERSPEKTIF MAQASID SYARI’AH (ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 17/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Kds dan NOMOR 5/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Bms)

Nur Nabilah, NIM.: 19103050015 (2023) PENGINGKARAN JANJI MENIKAHI DALAM PERSPEKTIF MAQASID SYARI’AH (ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 17/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Kds dan NOMOR 5/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Bms). Skripsi thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (PENGINGKARAN JANJI MENIKAHI DALAM PERSPEKTIF MAQĀṢID SYARĪ’AH (ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 17/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Kds dan NOMOR 5/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Bms)) 19103050015_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (3MB) | Preview
	Text (PENGINGKARAN JANJI MENIKAHI DALAM PERSPEKTIF MAQĀṢID SYARĪ’AH (ANALISIS PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN NOMOR 17/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Kds dan NOMOR 5/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Bms)) 19103050015_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (3MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Occasionally the decisions made by the panel of judges in determining similar cases are not the same as the results of their decisions. The cases in Judgment Number 5/Pdt.G/2019/PN.Bms and Number 17/Pdt.G/2016/PN.Kds are the same type of case, namely about the breaking of a promise to marry. However, the results of the decisions of the two cases are different, the panel of judges of the Banyumas District Court decided the case as a tort case, while the panel of judges of the Kudus District Court decided the case as a default case. This has led to a big question regarding the difference in the results of decisions in similar types of cases. The type of research conducted by the author is normative legal research with a literature study. The author uses maqāṣid sharī'ah theory as a perspective to explore the Religious Court Decision. This is based on the reasoning that maqāṣid syarī'ah is the core of the establishment of sharia which is oriented towards the realization of the benefit of mankind. There are five objectives of Islamic law including maintaining religion (hifẓ al-dīn), maintaining the soul (hifẓ al-nafs), maintaining the intellect (hifẓ al-'aql), maintaining offspring (hifẓ al-nasl), and maintaining property (hifẓ al-māl). The author discovers that In Decision No. 5/Pdt.G/2019/Pn.Bms, the panel of judges decided the case as a case of tort by referring to Article 1365 BW and Supreme Court Jurisprudence number 3191 K/Pdt/1984 in this case because the Plaintiff suffered material and immaterial losses in the form of shame and loss of chastity due to the defendant's behavior. Meanwhile, Decision number 17/Pdt.G/Pn.Kds decided the case as a default case based on Article 1233 of the Civil Code, in this case the Plaintiff suffered material losses in the form of dependents for child care costs from pregnancy to birth and immaterial losses due to pregnancy outside a legal marriage. when the legal basis used by the judge in deciding a case is different, the resulting decision will also be different, even though the case decided is similar. The judge's decision in these two similar cases has partially fulfilled the benefits of the parties. It is said to be partial because each case only fulfills some of the five elements of maqāṣid syarī'ah

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item