FUNGSI UNDANG-UNDANG PKDRT NO.23 TAHUN 2004 BAGI HAKIM DALAM KASUS PERCERAIAN SEBAB KDRT (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 0803 Pdt.G/2020/PA.Bks)

Hypatia, Salwa (2024) FUNGSI UNDANG-UNDANG PKDRT NO.23 TAHUN 2004 BAGI HAKIM DALAM KASUS PERCERAIAN SEBAB KDRT (STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 0803 Pdt.G/2020/PA.Bks). Sarjana (S1) thesis, Universitas Islam 45 Bekasi.

	Text Pendahuluan.pdf Download (1MB)
	Text BAB 1.pdf Download (306kB)
	Text BAB 2.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (310kB) | Request a copy
	Text BAB 3.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (197kB) | Request a copy
	Text BAB 4.pdf Restricted to Repository staff only Download (327kB) | Request a copy
	Text BAB 5.pdf Download (151kB)
	Text Daftar Pustaka.pdf Download (204kB)

Abstract

This thesis research aims to find out what considerations are used by the panel of judges in deciding case number 0803/pdt. G/2020/PA.Bks. As well as knowing whether or not there is relevance of the PKDRT Law number 23 of 2004 with the KHI in the decision. This study uses qualitative research methods. Namely normative legal research in the form of document studies, namely by using secondary data sources in the form of regulations, legislation, court decisions, legal theories, and opinions of legal scholars. Through a statute approach and a study on judgments. The source of secondary data or primary legal material in the family law research angle, and the decision used is decision number 0803/pdt. G/2020/PA.Bks. The result of the judge's consideration in deciding case number 0803/pdt. G/2020/PA. Bks is a review of Islamic Fiqh on Qaul ulama in the book Ghoyatul Maram which is taken over as the opinion of the judges, that "if a wife's hatred for her husband has peaked, then the judge can impose her husband's talaq with one talaq" and in the qaidah fiqh in the book "Al-Ashbah wa al-nadlor" page 60 "rejection (destructive influence) must take precedence over expecting the coming of benefits/goodness" and KHI Article 116 (d) and (f). Since the PKDRT Law is not included in the legal basis used by the scope of religious courts, it can be concluded that there is no relevance between the KHI and the PKDRT Law No. 23 of 2004 to the decision.

Actions (login required)

View Item