SHARIAsource

The parties were married on 18 January 1985. They had lived in Central Java for about 20 years before moving to a rental property in Sukajadi until they separated. They had two children and had been married for 25 years. Since 2010, however, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant:

1. would become unnecessarily angry on a regular basis;
2. was temperamental;
3. had frequently physically assaulted the plaintiff;
4. had carried on an extra-marital affair with another woman; and
5. had neglected the plaintiff and failed to provide her with financial support.

In 2015, after yet another argument, the parties decided to separate. They had remained apart for a year at the time of the proceeding. Familial attempts to make the parties reconcile had been unsuccessful and, having concluded that the parties' differences were irreconcilable, the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

Despite the defendant's absence from court, 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 Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties.

The parties were married on 12 June 2010 and had two children. Since December 2014 the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because, the plaintiff submitted, the defendant:

1. had failed to provide financially for the plaintiff and their child;
2. frequently embarrassed the plaintiff on social media;
3. frequently contacted other women on his mobile phone; and
4. frequently said he would marry another woman.

Problems escalated and, on 10 December 2015, the plaintiff decided that she could no longer cope with the defendant's behaviour. After separating from the defendant for the past two months leading up to the proceeding, the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

Despite the defendant's absence from court, 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 Compilation of Islamic Laws, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties.

The parties were married on 4 November 2012 and had one child. The plaintiff submitted that the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome by 2013 because the defendant:

1. rarely returned home;
2. had not disclosed his many debts to the plaintiff; and
3. had been unnecessarily suspicious of the plaintiff for no apparent reason.

The parties had subsequently been separated since 18 March 2015, during which time the defendant had not provided the plaintiff with any financial support. The plaintiff submitted that she had concluded she had no other option but to irrevocably divorce the defendant (talak satu ba'in sughro).

Despite the defendant's absence, 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, acceded to the plaintiff's request on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 27 December 2012 and had their first and only child on 31 January 2013. Six months into their marriage, however, the parties had begun to quarrel regularly. The plaintiff submitted that the cause of the conflict was the defendant's lack of responsibility as a husband in terms of providing enough financially to meet the parties' daily needs. The plaintiff also submitted that the defendant was unmotivated in his employment and that she had to assist to make ends meet. Furthermore, the defendant did not assist the plaintiff in looking after their child while the plaintiff was busy or cooking, and when the parties would argue, the defendant would often leave the matrimonial home, sometimes for up to two weeks at a time.

Problems escalated on 20 December 2013 when the defendant failed to provide enough to meet the parties' domestic needs, and the plaintiff was hesitant to seek assistance from her parents. When the plaintiff sought to discuss this with the defendant, the parties argued and the defendant then left the matrimonial home, unbeknownst to the plaintiff. The defendant never returned, nor did he contact the plaintiff or provide her with financial assistance to help rear their child.

The plaintiff sought to pay the necessary fee ('iwadh) for the court to grant her a divorce from the defendant (talak satu khul'i). The court noted that the defendant's failure to attend court had rendered mediation futile. It also noted that the defendant's conduct specifically repudiated their marriage as he had failed to provide the plaintiff with financial support, and failed to care for the plaintiff for more than six months (conduct envisaged by figures 2 and 4 of the parties' marriage contract). Accordingly, by virtue of art 116(g) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the plaintiff was permitted to divorce the plaintiff for breach of their marriage vows by paying a fee ('iwadh) of IDR 10,000.

The applicant's parents and two of the applicant's siblings had already passed away. Another of the applicant's siblings was a retired primary school teacher who had some financial savings, but whose failing health had meant she had been placed in hospital care, as well as that of the applicant. As her primary caregiver, the applicant sought to acquire power of attorney over her ailing sibling's financial affairs.

The court, pursuant to art 51(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, and art 107 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, found that the applicant was fit and proper to become guardian of her ailing sibling. Accordingly, it granted the applicant the necessary power of attorney.

The parties were married on 11 February 2012. Then, in March 2012, the plaintiff left the defendant's parents' home, where she had been living with the defendant, unable to cope with the poor way in which the defendant was treating her. The plaintiff submitted that the defendant would often leave her for several days without saying where he was going, and that the defendant only once provided her with the necessary financial support from the time they were married. Moreover, the plaintiff's attempts to keep the marriage on foot, hoping the defendant's attitude would change, had been in vain. Accordingly, pursuant to art 19(b) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 116(b) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra) on the grounds that the parties had been apart for more than two years.

The applicant submitted that, since 2014, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome. This was due to the fact that the respondent was never content with the monthly sum of money with which she was provided by the applicant (IDR 3 million), and, more specifically, in mid-May 2014, the respondent had requested IDR 6 million, an amount the applicant could not afford. Despite being summonsed formally, the respondent failed to appear in court. The court, 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, granted the applicant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties had three children, one of whom had passed away prior to the proceeding. Since 2013, the parties' marriage had been disharmonious after the defendant had had an extra-marital affair and married this other woman in December 2013. In addition, the defendant's unemployment meant he was unable to provide the plaintiff and their children with any financial support, and the money he did have he would spend on his new wife, rather than paying back debts he had with other people. As a result, the parties had lived separately since January 2014. Accordingly, 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, granted the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.

The parties were married on 26 June 2010. Initially, the marriage had been harmonious. The applicant submitted, however, that, since around 8 February 2013, his relationship with the respondent had become strained because:

1. the respondent often left the house for no apparent reason and unbeknownst to the applicant;
2. the respondent often quarrelled with the applicant's parents;
3. the respondent was resistant to advice and if the applicant counselled her, the respondent would become angry and suicidal; and
4. the applicant wanted a child while the respondent was infertile and would regularly visit a shaman.

Accordingly, since that date, the parties had lived separately.

Due to ongoing conflict between the parties, pursuant to 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 parties were married on 27 February 2009. The plaintiff submitted that by June 2009, however, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome. This was the result of the lack of responsibility the defendant had shown his family, including not providing the plaintiff and their child with enough financial support to meet their daily needs.

Problems escalated in June 2014 as the defendant continued to provide the plaintiff with insufficient financial support. This triggered the plaintiff to instigate an argument with the defendant, resulting in the defendant leaving the matrimonial home. The parties had remained separated since.

The court found that ongoing conflict between the parties, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, was sufficient reason to grant the plaintiff an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra).

The parties were married on 21 August 1998 and had remained happily married for 16 years. Since July 2012, however, they had begun to quarrel regularly because, the applicant submitted, the parties had been unable to conceive a child. As a result, the parties had separated in June 2014. The applicant submitted that a divorce was the only feasible option.

The court acceded to the applicant's request for a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i), pursuant to art 37 of the elucidation 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.

The parties were married on 31 July 2009 and had one child. Due to adverse economic conditions in Indonesia, the plaintiff had relocated to Hong Kong in 2011 for work. In 2013, the plaintiff returned to Indonesia for three weeks, where she discovered the defendant had frivolously spent the money the plaintiff had sent home. This caused the plaintiff and defendant to fight and argue, having already lived apart for approximately two years.

The court acceded to the plaintiff's application for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughro) on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, pursuant to the elucidation of 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 parties were married on 4 March 2001 and had two children. The plaintiff submitted that while the marriage had been harmonious initially, by December 2003 it had become quarrelsome because:

1. the defendant had failed to provide for his family; and
2. the parties frequently had differing opinions.

Problems escalated and, by July 2014, the parties were sleeping separate beds. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been in vain and the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

On the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 22 July 2007 and had one child. The plaintiff submitted that while the marriage had been harmonious initially, by January 2013 it had become quarrelsome because of:

1. the parties' differing opinions regarding domestic affairs; and
2. inadequate finances.

Problems escalated in October 2014 resulting in the parties separating, the plaintiff leaving the matrimonial home. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been in vain and the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

On the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 5 December 2010 and had one child. The plaintiff submitted that, since January 2012, the parties marriage had become quarrelsome. This was because the defendant:

1. had failed to provide for the plaintiff financially;
2. seldom came home, for no apparent reason; and
3. prioritised his parents over the plaintiff.

Problems escalated and, by June 2014, the parties had separated. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been in vain and the plaintiff requested that the court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

Despite the defendant's absence from court, on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 2 December 2013 but had no children. The plaintiff submitted that, since March 2014, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome. This was because the defendant:

1. had failed to provide for his family; and
2. often came home in the middle of the night for no apparent reason.

Problems escalated and, by April 2014, the parties had separated. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been in vain and the plaintiff requested that the Court grant her an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

Despite the defendant's absence from court, on the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, the court acceded to the plaintiff's request, pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The parties were married on 9 October 1993 and had three children. Initially, their marriage had been harmonious, however, since July 2011, the respondent had become angry and frustrated with the applicant because the applicant had failed to provide her with sufficient financial support. As a scavenger (pemulung), the applicant would bring home, at most, IDR 50,000 per day. The respondent had returned to her parents' home in Jember and the applicant to Bali. The parties had not communicated since October 2012.

Pursuant to art 19(b) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, in conjunction with art 116(b) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, the court granted the applicant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i) on the grounds that the parties had been separated for more than two consecutive years, without any communication.

The respondent had worked in Taiwan from 2007-2013, returning every three years at the completion of a work contract. The parties had quarrelled over how the appellant used money the respondent would send to the appellant from Taiwan, and, since 2013, the parties had not lived together or communicated whatsoever.

The court upheld the decision of the lower court to grant the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra), finding on the facts that the parties' marriage was indeed irreparable for the purposes of art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116 of the Compilation of Islamic Laws. Accordingly, it directed the appellant to pay costs.

The parties were married on 9 February 2005 but had no children. The plaintiff submitted that, by October 2009, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because the defendant:

1. had failed to provide for his family;
2. would physically beat the plaintiff.

Problems escalated and, by September 2013, the parties had separated after the defendant left the matrimonial home. Familial efforts to make the parties reconcile had been in vain and the plaintiff requested that the court grant him a revocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra).

On the grounds of ongoing conflict between the parties, the court, 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, acceded to the plaintiff's request.

The parties were married on 6 June 1988, after which they lived with the plaintiff's parents and had three children. From December 2012, the parties' marriage had become quarrelsome because the defendant struggled to meet the family's financial needs. In January 2013 the parties separated and remained separated for the 11 months leading up to the divorce proceeding.

Despite the defendant's absence from court, the court was satisfied that the plaintiff had met the evidentiary burden contained in art 39(2) of Law No. 1 of 1974. Pursuant to art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws, it therefore acceded to the plaintiff's request for an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in shughra) on the grounds of ongoing conflict.