SHARIAsource

The appellant sought to challenge the ruling of the Kutacane Shari'a Court, which, among other things:

1. declared the marriage of the parties to be lawful;
2. granted the respondent a divorce; and
3. evenly distributed the parties' assets.

The Court dismissed the appeal insofar as it did not overturn the lower court's decision to grant a divorce, but it was more specific in stipulating the assets of the parties and their distribution therein.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Lhoksukon Shari'a Court, which, among other things, granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra).

The Court dismissed the appeal, concurring with the lower court that the ongoing conflict between the parties constituted a sufficient reason for divorce, pursuant to arts 39(1) and (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 appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Bireuen Shari'a Court, which had refused to grant her an irrevocable divorce from the respondent, and ordered her to pay costs.

The Court concurred with the lower court, stating that the appellant had failed to prove she and the respondent had continuously quarrelled, per her submissions. Accordingly, the appellant had failed to establish a reason for divorce, as required by art 19(f) of Government Regulation No. 9 of 1975, and art 116(f) of the Compilation of Islamic Laws.

The Court affirmed the decision of the Bireuen Shari'a Court to grant the appellant a revocable divorce (talak satu raj'i), while ordering the appellant to pay to the respondent IDR 5 million in iddah (100-day period after divorce has been granted) maintenance, as well as (at least) IDR 500,000 per month in child support until the parties' child reached 21 years of age. It also stipulated the assets that were jointly that of the parties, and ordered the appellant to transfer half of them to the respondent.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Bireuen Shari'a Court (lower court), which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce. The Court concurred with the lower court, however, citing evidence of continued quarrelling between the two parties, as well as the fact that the parties had already been separated for two years. Therefore, it found the lower court was correct in granting the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra), pursuant to art 39(1) and (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 appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Lhokseumawe Shari'a Court, which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (thalak satu ba'in sughra).

The Court recounted how the respondent had left the appellant, and how the appellant had married another woman unbeknownst to the respondent. This, the Court believed, had made their marriage untenable. For the purposes of art 39(1) and (2) of Law No. 1 of 1974 on Marriage, the Court believed the lower court had found sufficient reason to grant the parties a divorce.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Sigli Shari'a Court (lower court), which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shugra).

The Court dismissed the appeal, concurring with the lower court that, based on the evidence produced before it, the parties had quarrelled from 2004-2007. It was even noted that the appellant had beaten the respondent, causing the parties to separate. The Court found that the preferred solution for the parties was to divorce.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Banda Aceh Shari'a Court (lower court), which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra).

The Court acknowledged that the appellant had endeavoured to reconcile with the respondent. Citing the opinion of ulama in Kitab Iqna' Juz II, however, it noted that it was compelled to grant the respondent a divorce because the respondent was adamant that she and the appellant could not reconcile their differences. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed.

The Bireuen Shari'a Court (lower court) had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shughra). The appellant unsuccessfully challenged the lower court's decision, the Court noting that marriage is not just an everyday agreement to live together as husband and wife, but a holy agreement that cannot be measured by the mistakes of one of the parties to it. Like the lower court, the Court in this instance was also convinced the marriage was irreparable and that divorce was the best option for both parties.

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka (Shri Lanka Prajatantrika Samajavadi Janarajaya/Ilankai Jananayaka Choshalichak Kutiyarachu), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Sri Lanka's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has some legal status. 

This Country Profile provides a basic overview of the legal history and institutional structures of the Lebanon Republic (Al Jumhuriyah al Lubnaniyah), based on research produced by GlobaLex at NYU Law School and the Library of Congress. Under Lebanon's Constitution, Islamic law (sharīʿa or fiqh) has no legal status. 

The Court upheld the appellant's claim that costs associated with the initial hearing were to be paid by the respondent (IDR 253,000). It also granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra), custody of the three children, and ordered the appellant to pay living and schooling expenses of the three children until they reach adulthood.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Bireuen Shari'a Court (lower court), which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shugra). The Court, however, dismissed the appeal, only effecting one minor change to the wording of point two in the decision of the lower court.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the lower court to grant the respondent a revocable divorce. The Court dismissed the appeal on the grounds that the appellant had not paid the relevant appeal fee at the time of signing the relevant notice of appeal.

The appellant sought to challenge the ruling of the Kualasimpang Shari'a Court which:

1. granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu ba'in sughra); and
2. granted the respondent custody of the parties' two children.

The Court dismissed the appeal, stating the ruling of the lower court was correct.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Jantho Shari'a Court, which, among other things, granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain shughra).

The Court found no flaw in the judgment of the lower court and, accordingly, dismissed the appeal.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Sigli Shari'a Court, which, among other things, granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra), and ordered the appellant to pay the respondent IDR 1,500,000 in maintenance (iddah).

The Court dismissed the appeal, reaffirming the decision of the lower court.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Bireuen Shari'a Court, which, among other things, granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra).

The Court found the judgment of the lower court to be sound and correct and, therefore, dismissed the appeal.

The appellant sought to challenge the decision of the Takengon Shari'a Court, which had granted the respondent an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra).

The Court dismissed the appeal, however, stating that it had considered the appellant's objections to the lower court's decision but saw no flaws in the lower court's reasoning.

The appellant requested that the Court order the Banda Aceh Shari'a Court to conduct an additional examination before passing its final judgment. The Court allowed this, however, the respondent was still granted an irrevocable divorce (talak satu bain sughra). The parties' child was also ordered to remain in the care and custody of the respondent.