ERROR IN PERSONA DALAM PENOLAKAN GUGATAN NAFKAH MADIYAH PADA PERKARA PERCERAIAN DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANDUNG (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 4678/PDT.G/2022/PA.BADG)

Faruq Zakiy Madaniy, S.H., NIM.: 23203011118 (2025) ERROR IN PERSONA DALAM PENOLAKAN GUGATAN NAFKAH MADIYAH PADA PERKARA PERCERAIAN DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANDUNG (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 4678/PDT.G/2022/PA.BADG). Masters thesis, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA.

Preview	Text (ERROR IN PERSONA DALAM PENOLAKAN GUGATAN NAFKAH MADIYAH PADA PERKARA PERCERAIAN DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANDUNG (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 4678/PDT.G/2022/PA.BADG)) 23203011118_BAB-I_IV-atau-V_DAFTAR-PUSTAKA.pdf - Published Version Download (12MB) | Preview
	Text (ERROR IN PERSONA DALAM PENOLAKAN GUGATAN NAFKAH MADIYAH PADA PERKARA PERCERAIAN DI PENGADILAN AGAMA BANDUNG (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 4678/PDT.G/2022/PA.BADG)) 23203011118_BAB-II_sampai_SEBELUM-BAB-TERAKHIR.pdf - Published Version Restricted to Registered users only Download (14MB) | Request a copy

Abstract

Maintenance is an obligation that must be fulfilled by the husband during the marriage period. If the husband fails to fulfill this obligation, he has been negligent in performing his duties as a husband and is obliged to pay for the maintenance he has neglected during the marriage. In Islamic law and legislation in Indonesia, this can be sued through religious courts, either separately or together with a divorce lawsuit as explained in Article 86 of Law Number 7 of 1989 concerning religious courts. However, in practice, there are various dynamics that cause such lawsuits to be rejected, as occurred in the Decision Number 4678/Pdt.G/2022/PA.Badg by the Bandung City Religious Court, where the claim for maintenance submitted by the wife was rejected on the grounds of error in persona. This research is a field research with a case approach conducted through a study of the decision, interviews with judges, and an examination of legal literature and related regulations. This research is descriptive-analytical using Gustav Radbruch's legal ideals theory and the concept of judges' ex officio rights as an analytical framework. The aim is to examine the legal considerations used by judges in rejecting claims for māḍiyah maintenance and the reasons for using the concept of error in persona in this case. The research findings indicate that the judges assess that the claim for post-divorce maintenance is inadmissible because it is considered to have been resolved in the previous divorce proceedings and was not filed concurrently, leading to a legal subject error. In addition, the judges also did not exercise their ex officio right to establish post-divorce maintenance obligations, even though normatively this is permissible. This rejection highlights the tension between the values of justice, legal certainty, and utility, which should be the basis for considerations in judges' rulings in religious courts.

Share this knowledge with your friends :

Actions (login required)

View Item