SHARIAsource

The parties were married on 22 February 2010 and had one child. Initially, the parties' marriage was harmonious. By August 2015, however, it had become quarrelsome because, the applicant submitted, the respondent constantly expressed a desire to return to her parents' home in Sulawesi. In October 2015, the respondent left the applicant for no apparent reason. She had also ceased all communications with the applicant. The applicant, feeling the marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant him a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i).

The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that, on the facts, the applicant had produced sufficient reasons to be granted a divorce. Moreover, that the parties' marriage could not realise the purpose of marriage as contained in the Qur'an, Surah Ar-Rum, verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, despite the respondent's absence from court, the court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 7 April 2008 and had two children. Initially, the parties' marriage was harmonious. By March 2009, however, it had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant:

1. had carried on an extra-marital affair with another woman;
2. did not have permanent employment; and
3. had verbally and physically abused the plaintiff.

After physically abusing the plaintiff in February 2012, the defendant left the parties' home. Familial attempts to make the parties reconcile had also been unsuccessful. The plaintiff, feeling the marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that, on the facts, the applicant had produced sufficient reasons to be granted a divorce. Moreover, that the parties' marriage could not realise the purpose of marriage as contained in the Qur'an, Surah Ar-Rum, verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, the court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 20 April 2011 and had one child. As early as May 2011, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant had frequently:

1. hit, slapped, and kicked the plaintiff;
2. emotionally abused the plaintiff; and
3. threatened the parties' child, making the plaintiff left feeling debilitated and miserable.

After physically abusing the plaintiff in September 2015, the defendant left the parties' home and returned his parents' home. The plaintiff, feeling the marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that, on the facts, the applicant had produced sufficient reasons to be granted a divorce. Moreover, that the parties' marriage could not realise the purpose of marriage as contained in the Qur'an, Surah Ar-Rum, verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, the court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 10 July 2000 and had one child. Initially, the parties' marriage was harmonious. By September 2003, however, it had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant:

1. was not transparent with his finances, only earning enough to support himself;
2. had physically and emotionally abused the plaintiff; and
3. had disrespected the plaintiff's older sister, calling her a crazy widow ('janda gila').

Problems escalated in September 2005 resulting in the plaintiff leaving the defendant and returning to her parents' home. The parties had remained separated for the next 10 years and 10 months. The plaintiff, feeling the marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that, on the facts, the applicant had produced sufficient reasons to be granted a divorce. Moreover, that the parties' marriage could not realise the purpose of marriage as contained in the Qur'an, Surah Ar-Rum, verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, the court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 4 January 2014 and had one child. Initially, the parties' marriage was harmonious. By December 2014, however, it had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant:

1. frequently failed to return home, for no apparent reason;
2. refused to acknowledge the parties' child as his; and
3. failed to provide the plaintiff with sufficient financial support.

Problems escalated in June 2015 resulting in the defendant leaving the plaintiff. The parties had remained separated since. The plaintiff, feeling the marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acknowledged that, on the facts, the applicant had produced sufficient reasons to be granted a divorce. Moreover, that the parties' marriage could not realise the purpose of marriage as contained in the Qur'an, Surah Ar-Rum, verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, the court acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 10 September 2007 but had no children. The plaintiff's father had acted as the marriage guardian (wali nikah), and the dowry (mahar) had been IDR 2 million and a prayer instrument. Since the beginning of 2008, however, the marriage had been disharmonious, primarily because the defendant would frequently leave the matrimonial home, even for up to one year at a time. On 3 January 2013, the defendant left for Java in search of employment, never to return. While the plaintiff had waited for three years and six months for the defendant to return, realising that the purpose of marriage, as prescribed in Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, had been frustrated, the plaintiff filed an application for a judicial divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

The court acknowledged that the information provided by the plaintiff's two witnesses corroborated with the plaintiff's submissions, and that the defendant had not returned home for over three years. The purpose of marriage, as prescribed in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, that being to create an everlasting and joyful family, was no longer feasible. Pursuant to art 19(b) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(b) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court acceded to the plaintiff's application on the grounds that the parties had been separated for more than two years.

The parties were married on 26 May 2013 and had one child. The plaintiff's older brother had acted as the marriage guardian (wali nikah), and the dowry (mahar) had been the cash value of 3.35 grams of gold. Since 25 July 2014, however, the marriage had been disharmonious. The plaintiff submitted that this was because the defendant left in search of employment, never to return, and without leaving a forwarding address. Realising that the purpose of marriage, as prescribed in Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, had been frustrated, the plaintiff filed an application for a judicial divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra).

The court acknowledged that the information provided by the plaintiff's two witnesses corroborated with the plaintiff's submissions, and that the defendant had not returned home, nor had he provided a forwarding address. The purpose of marriage, as prescribed in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, that being to create an everlasting and joyful family, was no longer feasible. Pursuant to art 19(b) and (f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(b) and (f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court therefore acceded to the plaintiff's application on the grounds that the parties had been separated for more than two years, and ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on an undisclosed date and had no children. In June 2015, the defendant left the plaintiff and returned to his parents' home. The plaintiff submitted that the defendant's conduct was in violation of figures (2) and (4) of the parties' marriage vows (taklik talak). The plaintiff, therefore, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce for a fee (talak satu khul'i).

Despite the defendant's absence, the court, pursuant to art 116(g) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds that the defendant had repudiated the parties' marriage vows. The court also cited Ar-Rum verse 21 from the Qur'an, as well as art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, regarding the supposed tranquility of marriage.

The parties were married on 11 September 2015 but never had a wedding reception because, following their marriage, they both returned to their respective parents' homes. The applicant submitted that after he and the respondent's parents exchanged vows (ijab kabul) the respondent's parents left suddenly for no apparent reason. Moreover, that the respondent had taken her belongings back to her parents' home before the parties' marriage ceremony. The applicant believed, therefore, that the parties' marriage was untenable and requested that the court grant him a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i).

Despite the respondent's absence from court, the court, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the applicant's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict. It also acknowledged that revocable divorce is regulated in art 118 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 1 June 2001. They had lived together in the plaintiff’s parents’ home and had one child (aged 11). The plaintiff submitted that, initially, the marriage had been harmonious. By January 2011, however, it had become quarrelsome because the defendant:

1. had had an extra-marital affair and a clandestine marriage (nikah siri);
2. had not contributed financially to the marriage with the plaintiff;
3. often hit the plaintiff when the parties would argue.

Problems escalated in January 2012 culminating in the plaintiff leaving the defendant. The plaintiff claimed that the circumstances had caused the marriage to deteriorate irreparably, and requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bai’in shughra).

The court found that the marriage was irreparable and could no longer fulfil the purposes of marriage as envisaged in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974, and that the plaintiff’s claim satisfied the requirements of art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974, in conjunction with art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. The court granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu Ba’in Sughra) and ordered her to pay costs (IDR 506,000).

The parties were married on 4 April 1998. Since October 2011, however, they had begun to quarrel regularly. The applicant submitted that this was because, for 13 years of marriage, the parties had not been able to conceive a child. Problems had escalated and, in November 2011, the parties separated.

In his claim, the applicant submitted that the dire state of the parties' marriage meant that the purpose of marriage, as envisaged by Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, was no longer feasible. As a counterclaim, the respondent sought IDR 4.5 million for iddah (100-day period after divorce has been granted) and mut'ah (divorce compensation) in the form of a 23 karat gold necklace weighing 5.8 grams.

The court noted the purpose of marriage as contained in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, as well as verse 21 of surat Ar-Ruum in Al-Qur'an. It then went on to find that ongoing conflict between the parties satisfied the legitimate reason requirement to grant a divorce, per art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, the court granted the applicant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i), but ordered the applicant to pay to the respondent her iddah and mut'ah demands.

The parties were married on 2 March 2015. At the time of their marriage the plaintiff was a widow and the defendant a widower. Their marriage had been harmonious for one year and three months, but by July 2016 it had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant could not accept the plaintiff's three children from her first marriage.

In August 2016 problems escalated, resulting in the plaintiff returning to her parents' home. The parties had remained separated for one month and two weeks approaching the proceeding. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been unsuccessful and the plaintiff, believing the parties' marriage was beyond repair, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughro).

Despite the defendant's absence, the court, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict. The court also cited Ar-Rum verse 21 from the Qur'an, as well as art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, regarding the supposed tranquility of marriage.

The parties were married on 19 June 2013. The plaintiff submitted that, prior to their marriage, the parties knew little about each other and that the marriage was arranged by their parents. The parties never consummated their marriage and, on 25 June 2014, the defendant left the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba’in sughra).

The court found that the parties' marriage could no longer fulfil the purpose of marriage, as stipulated in art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974, in conjunction with art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Moreover, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba’in shugra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict, and ordered her to pay court costs (IDR 391,000).

The parties were married on 12 May 2012 and had one child. The plaintiff submitted that, since 2014, the marriage had become disharmonious because:

1. the parties quarrelled regularly, their differences seemingly irreconcilable;
2. the defendant was dishonest with the plaintiff;
3. the defendant often gambled; and
4. the defendant did care for the plaintiff's children from her first marriage.

Problems escalated and, in February 2015, the plaintiff left the matrimonial home after yet another dispute. The plaintiff believed that divorce was the only feasible option remaining.

The court conceded that the purpose of marriage, as envisaged in surat Ar-Rum verse 21, art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, being a peaceful, hopeful and loving (sakinah, mawaddah dan rahmah) household, was no longer feasible. Accordingly, pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 21 May 2015. They had lived with the plaintiff's parents for the duration of their marriage. Despite having already consummated the marriage the parties had no children. The plaintiff submitted that, since June 2015, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome. This was a result of the defendant:

1. not wanting to work to meet their financial needs, forcing the plaintiff to work; and
2. tricking the plaintiff into providing him with money to purchase a car in order to start up his own car rental business, only to then leave the plaintiff after she had provided him with money.

The parties had remained separated for the past seven months leading up to the proceeding.

Acknowledging that the parties' marriage was irreparable, for the purposes of art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the Court acceded to the plaintiff's request. Despite the defendant's absence, the court, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) and of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 30 August 2006. For the first six months of their marriage they lived in Balikpapan, before relocating to Blitar for one year and nine months. Initially, the marriage was harmonious. After moving to Blitar to live with the defendant's parents, however, the marriage had become quarrelsome because the defendant would frequently leave the home in the afternoon and return in the middle of the night intoxicated. The plaintiff also submitted that the defendant would physically assault her on a regular basis. In 2007, the defendant verbally divorced the plaintiff three times, one in Balikpapan, and twice in Blitar. For the duration of the marriage, the defendant had failed to provide the plaintiff with any money, the parties having to rely on the plaintiff's father for financial support. The plaintiff submitted that, unable to cope with the defendant's treatment of her, she had decided to return to her parents' home in Balikpapan. She requested that the court grant her a divorce for a fee (talak satu khul'i).

Pursuant to art 116(g) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request, noting that the plaintiff had established that the defendant had neglected his spousal obligations, and breached his marriage vows (taklik talak). The court also acknowledged that the parties' marriage was no longer a peaceful, hopeful and loving domestic life, as envisaged by art 1 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

Chapters on nominate contracts (endowment, sales, options, barter/ mu‘āwaḍa, hire and lease, partnerships -shirka, muzāra‘a, musāqāt, muḍāraba-, reward/ju‘āla, deposit, fungible and non-fungible loan, agency, financial and personal guaranty, assignment, settlement, pledge, gift), shuf‘a, wills, inheritance, marriage and divorce, mahr, and alimony took almost all of its substance from prominent Shi’i fiqh treatises. Other chapters (classification of properties, easement, usufruct, general rules of obligations and contracts, nationality, registration of civil status, domicile, engagement, guardianship, and evidence) are mainly influenced by Swiss and French Civil Codes and Swiss Code of Obligations.

The parties were married on 19 May 2013 and had no children. The applicant submitted that, since December 2013, the marriage had become quarrelsome primarily because of the parties' frequent differences of opinion. Problems escalated on 8 February 2014, resulting in the parties separating.

Due to the ongoing conflict between the parties, pursuant to art 39 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court granted the applicant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i).

The applicant submitted that the parties' marriage had recently become quarrelsome. This was the result of their lack of compatibility, that from the beginning of their marriage the parties had lived separately, and that the applicant and respondent had already agreed to separate. The court, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the applicant's request for a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i) on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties.

The parties were married on 15 February 2001 but had been living separately for the past 11 years and six months. Their marriage had begun to deteriorate in August 2002 because, according to one witness, the defendant had failed to provide his family with sufficient financial support.

Despite the defendant's absence from court, the court granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra), pursuant to art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, on the grounds of ongoing conflict.