SHARIAsource

The parties were married on 26 October 1988 and had three children. After 22 years, however, their marriage had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant frequently:

1. owed others money, unbeknownst to the plaintiff;
2. sold the parties' personal property, unbeknownst to the plaintiff;
3. stole money from the plaintiff; and
4. left the parties' home in the afternoon without saying anything, only to return in the middle of the night.

On 30 December 2010, when the plaintiff inquired with the defendant as to the parties' personal property that the defendant had sold, the defendant had become enraged. As a result, the parties had slept in separate beds for the past five years and three months, during which time they had not been physically intimate, nor had the defendant provided the plaintiff with any financial support. He had, however, provided the parties' children with spending money. The parties attempts to reconcile through consultation and deliberation had been unsuccessful.

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) and of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 8 January 2006 and had two children. After their marriage, they lived in a rental property in Medan for a year. They then moved to the defendant's parents' home for a year, before living in another rental property. The plaintiff submitted that the parties had quarrelled since the beginning of 2007 because the defendant had not worked to meet the parties' domestic financial needs.

In July 2013, problems escalated after the defendant had an extra-marital affair with another woman. This caused the plaintiff to return to her parents' home. The defendant followed suit and returned to his own parents' home as well. The parties had remained separate for the past two years and seven months. Around January 2015, the defendant and his parents attended the plaintiff's parents' home in order for the defendant to orally divorce the plaintiff and draft a statement of divorce.

In acceding to the plaintiff's request for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra), the court noted that the parties had breached the mandate contained in arts 33 and 34 of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, art 3 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, and verse 21 of Al-Rum (The Byzantines) of the Qur'an. Moreover, the plaintiff had proven that the parties' marriage was irreparable, making divorce the only feasible course. The court, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 31 March 2011, after which they had lived with the respondent's parents for almost two and a half years. In August 2013, however, the parties separated after their marriage had become quarrelsome. The applicant submitted that this was because the respondent had no apparent reason for not wanting to live with the applicant's parents at a time when the applicant had to take care of his elderly parents. The applicant submitted that the parties' marriage was no longer joyful, peaceful, hopeful and loving (bahagia, sakinah, mawadah dan rohmah) based on one almighty God (Ketuhanan Yang Maha Esa). The parties' disagreement and subsequent quarrelling had also prevented them from conceiving a child. Accordingly, the applicant 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, arts 19(f) and 22 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. The court handed down its verdict despite the respondent's absence from court.

The parties were married on 13 October 2014. They lived with the plaintiff's parents for nine months, the first seven of which, the plaintiff submitted, had been harmonious. Since May 2015, however, their marriage had become quarrelsome. The plaintiff submitted that this was because the defendant's wage was insufficient to provide for his family meaning that the parties would have to rely on the plaintiff's parents to meet their daily needs. Moreover, that the defendant refused to look for additional employment to supplement his income. In July 2015, after problems between the parties escalated, the defendant left the plaintiff to live with his own parents. The parties had remained separated for the six months leading up to the proceeding.

The court acceded to the plaintiff's application, acknowledging that the parties' marriage was beyond repair. 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 bain sughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The court acceded to the plaintiff's decision to withdraw her application for divorce as the parties had reconciled their differences.

The parties were married on 6 August 2013. The applicant submitted that after one month living with the respondent's parents, the parties were still yet to consummate their marriage. The applicant submitted that the marriage had been arranged and that the parties did not love one another. Consequently, in September 2013, the applicant had left the respondent, returning to his parents' home. He had remained with his parents for the past two years and four months.

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 applicant's request. It granted him a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i) pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and arts 116(f) and 118 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 30 April 2014. They had lived at the plaintiff's home for one year and four months but had no children. The plaintiff submitted an application for divorce on the grounds that:

1. since August 2015 the parties had frequently quarrelled; and
2. the cause of their quarrelling was that the defendant had neglected his duty to provide the plaintiff with financial support.

As a result, in August 2015, the defendant had returned to his parents' home and the parties had remained separated for five months.

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 granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shughro) pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) and of the Compilation of Islamic Laws on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 3 December 2002 and had one child. They had lived with the defendant's parents for seven years and three months. The plaintiff submitted an application for divorce on the grounds that:

1. since March 2010 the parties had begun to quarrel frequently; and
2. the cause of their quarrelling was that the defendant had turned to gambling, drinking and playing billiards, neglecting his spousal responsibilities in the process.

As a result of the parties' quarrelling, the plaintiff had left the defendant for her parents' home in March 2010 and the parties had remained separated for five years and nine months.

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 granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shughro) pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) and of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 23 June 2006, after which time they had lived in Malang until 2011. From there they had moved to the defendant's parents' home in Sidomulyo, Wonoasri, where they had stayed until 2012, before moving to the plaintiff's parents' home in Banyukambang, Wonoasri until April 2015. The parties had one child (aged 6).

The plaintiff submitted that, since January 2015, the parties had begun to quarrel regularly. More specifically, the plaintiff submitted that on one occasion the defendant had returned home from Malang to find that the plaintiff herself had not yet returned home from work. The defendant telephoned the plaintiff to inquire as to her whereabouts, however, the plaintiff's mobile phone was out of battery. When the plaintiff returned home the defendant became angry and hit the plaintiff in front of the parties' child. In April 2015 the defendant left the matrimonial home where he had remained for the nine months leading up to the proceeding. During those nine months the parties had attempted to reconcile their differences but to no avail.

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 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 court acknowledged that, based on the facts of the preceding interlocutory decision, the parties' marriage had been quarrelsome since May 2015. This was because the defendant had failed in his spousal duties to the plaintiff, resulting in the plaintiff returning to live with her parents. Accordingly, 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 for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The court acknowledged that, based on the facts of the preceding interlocutory decision, the parties' marriage had been quarrelsome since April 2015. This was because the respondent had demanded that the applicant spend beyond his means. Moreover, the respondent had often asked the applicant for a divorce. Despite the respondent'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 applicant's request for a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i) on the grounds of ongoing conflict. The court also ordered the applicant to pay to the respondent IDR 500,000 for iddah (three-month period after divorce has been granted).

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that, since the enactment of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage and Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975 on the Implementation of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, divorce as initiated by a husband (thalak) must be conducted before the local religious court/shari'a court.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that divorce must be granted to a plaintiff who establishes, on the facts, the existence of ongoing irreconcilable conflict.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence pertains to divorce applications. It states that parents can be elevated as witnesses, and the information they provide can be reconciled with that provided by the defendant's witnesses.

This Supreme Court jurisdiction states that divorce can be granted where a marriage is marred by irreconcilable ongoing conflict, to the extent that, with the approval of both the families of both parties, the parties are no longer co-existing under the same roof.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that, pursuant to art 76 of Law No. 7 of 1989 on the Religious Judiciary, and arts 19(f) and 22(2) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, witness information regarding conflict between parties to a divorce application can be provided by familial witnesses.

This Supreme Court jurisprudence states that a wife filing for divorce from her husband should not always be declared nusyuz (disobedient). A divorce application submitted by a wife is not evidence of a wife's disobedience, therefore a husband can be ordered by the court to provide his wife with financial support for the first three months following the parties' divorce (nafkah iddah). This is to ensure that the wife can carry out iddah, for the purpose of, among other things, cleansing her womb of her husband's seed (istibra'). This is also in the interests of the husband.

The parties were married on 20 March 2015, after which time they had lived with the plaintiff's parents until August 2015. While the parties had already consummated their marriage they had no children. In September 2015, the parties had separated after the defendant left the plaintiff to go on a motorcyle tour of Bali. Since the defendant's departure, the parties had remained separated for eight consecutive months, during which time the defendant had not contacted the plaintiff, nor provided her with any financial support. The defendant's conduct was in direct contravention of his marriage vows (taklik talak). The plaintiff, therefore, requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce for a fee (talak satu khul'i) of IDR 10,000.

Despite the defendant's absence from court, 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's conduct had contravened his marriage vows.

The parties were married on 14 September 2009 and had an 8 year old child. The plaintiff submitted that the marriage had been harmonious until February 2010, after which time it had begun to deteriorate because the defendant rarely provided her with any financial support, rarely worked, and then, in April 2010, left her without any notice. The plaintiff's subsequent attempts to ascertain the whereabouts of the defendant were unsuccessful. Having concluded that the defendant was an irresponsible husband, the plaintiff 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, as well as art 19(f) and (b) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) and (b) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, and that the parties had been separated for more than two consecutive years.