Daily Archives: June 7, 2009

JOHAN MANGKU NEGARA (J.M.N.):Y. Brs. Prof. Zita Mohd Fahmi

JOHAN MANGKU NEGARA (J.M.N.)

Y. Bhg. Dato’ Seri Azahar Muda, Alagasan Gadigaselam, Siti Halimah Ismail, Hasnah Dato’ Mohammed Hashim, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Badariah Hassan, Ab. Rahim Md. Noor, Y. Brs. Dr. Nor Aliah Mohd Zahri, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Che Mohd Hashim Abdullah, Y. Brs. Dr. Salbiah Ismail, Badarudin Abd. Rahaman, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Bijaya Indera Syed Unan Mashri Syed Abdullah, Jamela Mohd Syed, Y. Brs. Dr. Shahnaz Murad, Y. Brs. Dr. Amar Singh H. Surjan Singh, Y. Brs. Prof. Zita Mohd Fahmi, Y.M. Prof. Dr. Raja Noor Zaliha Abd Rahman, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Sharifah Mastura Syed Abdullah, Y. Brs. Prof. Emiritus Abdullah Hassan, Ramli Putih, Johari Abdul Muid, Wong Sau Ngan, Saffie Bakar, Chong Thin Kiong, Yusof Abdul Rahman, Subramaniam AR. A. Nachiappan, Tan Kim Chan, Y. Bhg. Datuk Mustapha Ahmad S. Marican, Ibrahim Hamzah, Kwan Foh Kwai, Y. Bhg. Mej. Jen. Dato’ Ir. Mohd Salim Ali, Y. Bhg. Mej. Jen. Dato’Dr. Abd Razak Md Yusoff, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Muda Dato’ Abd Hadi A. Rashid, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Muda Dato’ Musa Omar, Y. Bhg. DCP Dato’ Syed Ismail Dato’ Haji Syed Azizan, Y. Bhg. DCP Dato’ Khalid Abu Bakar, Yong King Chew, Chee Biang Phan, Y. Brs. Dr. Osman @ Othman Minudin, Ramlee Bohani, Abdul Shariff Hamid, Wong Koon Mun, Lee Cheam Choon, Tan Bon You.

Advertisements

the divorce wife claim for muta’ah:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050845

 

According to the Syafie sect, the husband is incumbent to pay muta’ah to the wife when the divorce was effected. The husband also is incumbent to pay a maintenance to the wife during the eddah or waiting period.

 

According to the case of Che Pah’s, the divorce wife claimed for the muta’ah in addition to maintenance during the eddah period. They have been married for 43 years. The wife claimed that her husband harsh to her and her left the matrimonial home. Then the conciliation committe have been make to reconcile them but have been failed. The wife also did not go to the Kadi to make any report on what have been done by her husband. The learned chief kadi held that, according to the parties and the witnessed, the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance because she was nusyuz or recalcitrant but only entitled to get the muta’ah. The court order to the husband to pay RM 500 muta’ah.

 

In other case, Zahrah v. Saidon, the divorce wife claim for muta’ah in addition of maintenance during the eddah period. The husband in this case was admitted to divorce his wife on the ground that the incompatibility between them and there is no any default. The learned chief kadi held that, the wife is entitled to get muta’ah as the divorce was effected.

 

Likewise in the case Syed Bulat v Intan, the divorce wife claimed for muta’ah. The wife claimed that the husband was compell her to lend the husband money for his own use. The husband was admitted and as the divorce was effected, the wife is entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

Meanwhile in the case Normaidiah v Azhari, the both parties have been marriage to avoid the disciplinary actions between them. After marriage the wife did not fulfill her obligation as The wife including did not perform her household duty such as cooking, and washing clothes. The husband divorce her and pay for muta’ah towards her.

 

While in the case Zawiyah v. Roslan, the divorced wife claimed for muta’ah. The learned chief kadi stated that according to Islamic Law it is an obligation to pay a muta’ah on husband as the divorced was effected. A then the learned chief kadi stated the amount of muta’ah is based on the conditions of husband as he refferred to the Kitab Fathul Muin stated that the poor according to his means and the poor according to his means. The wife was entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

According to the relevant cases, Zarul must pay for the Zarina’s claim for muta’ah only and Zarina was not entitled to get the maintenance for eddah period, according to the ruling in the Che Pah’s case, where when the wife is nusyuz or recalcitrant, she was not entitled to get the muta’ah and she can only entitled to get the muta’ah payment.

 

[Marks earned: Zero Point Four (0.4) out of Twenty (20).

 

JOHAN SETIA MAHKOTA (J.S.M.): Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Rujhan Mustafa

JOHAN SETIA MAHKOTA (J.S.M.)

Blawan Embayau, Misri Barham, Aminah A.fF. Musally, Ngoo Kong Hua @ Ngoo Kong Hee, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Mustaffa Haji Saman, Yeoh Gim Bee, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Mohd. Fauzi Hj. Ramlan, Y.A.A. Tuan Haji Mohamad Haji Abdullah, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Rujhan Mustafa, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Mohd Jamidan Abdullah, Y. Bhg. Datin Noriah Hashim, HajiYussoff Dohab, Zainal Abidin Arshad, Alwi Haji Ibrahim, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Tarmedi Hj. Omar, Alainal Hasani Md. Noor, Haji Abd Rashid Ngah, Raslin Abu Bakar, Y. Bhg. Datuk Maznah Hj. Abdul Ghani, Y. Bhg. Datuk Godfrey Gregory Joitol, Y. Bhg. Datuk Sam Mannan @ Sham, Abdullah Kassim, Haji Dr. Ismail Haji Ahmad, Razak Drahman, Lim Kim Hoe, Y. Bhg. Datuk Wira Hj. Rashid Redza Hj. Md. Saleh, Hithaya Jeevan Narayanasamy, Yap Kok Seng, Chin Phaik Yoong, Hawazain Shaari, Dr. Hajah Che Fatimah Haji Awang, Jamilah Baharom, Lee Han Lim, Patricia Yoon Moi, Y. Bhg. Datin Asariah Mior Shaharuddin, Che Ab. Rahim Haji Nik, Borhan Sidik, Mariam Mas Yaacob, Y. Bhg. Datuk Chua Kim Hing @ Kim Hing b. Ah Fong, Mohd Arpan Shari, Nik Aziz Hj. Nik Hussain, Y. Brs. Dr. Mohd Akbar Md. Said, Y. Brs. Dr. Soh Chee Seng, Haji Idris Ismail, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Jailani Md. Yunos, Y. Brs. Dr. Zaidun Kamari, Y. Brs. Prof. Ir. Dr. Siti Hamisah Tapsir, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Normah Mohd Noor, Y. Brs. Prof. Dr. Osman Ali, Mohd Mahyidin Mohd Mustakim, Zakaria A. Samad, Y. Bhg. Datin Noor Izzah Mansor, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Teo Chiang Kok, Gurdial Singh Kartar Singh, Y. Brs. Dr. Chua Wan Tiong, Haji Jamaluddin Mohd Isa, Syed Ahmad Nazri Syed Kamaruzaman, Haji Abdul Shukor Mohsin, Haji Markum Haji Ghazali, Laksamana Pertama Nasaruddin Othman, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Haji Mohd Affendy Abdullah, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Jeyabalan C. Sinnadurai, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Dr. William Rangit Stevenson, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Mohamed Batcha, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’Ir. Abdul Nasser Ahmad, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Pahlawan Mohd Razif Haji Idris, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Khamsan Ngari, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Dato’ Pahlawan Amzah Sulaiman, Laksamana Pertama Khairuddin Khalid, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Pertama Datuk Yahya Hashim, Y. Bhg. Laksamana Pertama Dato’ Mohd Noh Lebai Mahat, Y. Bhg. Jen. Dato’ Khairul Bakri Mustaffa, Y. Bhg. Jen. Dato’ Sukur Haminudin, Y. Bhg. Brig. Jen. Dato’ Ackbal Haji Abdul Samad, Y. Bhg. Jen. Dato’ Mohd Sulong, SAC I Shabudin Abdul Wahab, Y. Bhg. SAC I Dato’ Osman Haji Salleh, Y. Bhg. SAC I Dato’ Zamri Yahya, SAC II Haji Zakaria Haji Yusof, SAC II Tan Kok Liang, SAC II Dr. Hashim Haron, Yong Vui Seng, Lam Tiang Chong, Y. Bhg. Datuk Howard Bahat @ Alex Martin, Timbon @ Herbert Lagadan, Y. Bhg. Dato’ Mohd Hadzir Hj. Ismail, YB Dato’ Mohd Shamsudin Lias, YB Mohd Tajudin Abdullah, Ong Chong Swen, William Liaw Wah Fong.

The court order to the husband:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050845

 

According to the Syafie sect, the husband is incumbent to pay muta’ah to the wife when the divorce was effected. The husband also is incumbent to pay a maintenance to the wife during the eddah or waiting period.

 

According to the case of Che Pah’s, the divorce wife claimed for the muta’ah in addition to maintenance during the eddah period. They have been married for 43 years. The wife claimed that her husband harsh to her and her left the matrimonial home. Then the conciliation committe have been make to reconcile them but have been failed. The wife also did not go to the Kadi to make any report on what have been done by her husband. The learned chief kadi held that, according to the parties and the witnessed, the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance because she was nusyuz or recalcitrant but only entitled to get the muta’ah. The court order to the husband to pay RM 500 muta’ah.

 

In other case, Zahrah v. Saidon, the divorce wife claim for muta’ah in addition of maintenance during the eddah period. The husband in this case was admitted to divorce his wife on the ground that the incompatibility between them and there is no any default. The learned chief kadi held that, the wife is entitled to get muta’ah as the divorce was effected.

 

Likewise in the case Syed Bulat v Intan, the divorce wife claimed for muta’ah. The wife claimed that the husband was compell her to lend the husband money for his own use. The husband was admitted and as the divorce was effected, the wife is entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

Meanwhile in the case Normaidiah v Azhari, the both parties have been marriage to avoid the disciplinary actions between them. After marriage the wife did not fulfill her obligation as The wife including did not perform her household duty such as cooking, and washing clothes. The husband divorce her and pay for muta’ah towards her.

 

While in the case Zawiyah v. Roslan, the divorced wife claimed for muta’ah. The learned chief kadi stated that according to Islamic Law it is an obligation to pay a muta’ah on husband as the divorced was effected. A then the learned chief kadi stated the amount of muta’ah is based on the conditions of husband as he refferred to the Kitab Fathul Muin stated that the poor according to his means and the poor according to his means. The wife was entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

According to the relevant cases, Zarul must pay for the Zarina’s claim for muta’ah only and Zarina was not entitled to get the maintenance for eddah period, according to the ruling in the Che Pah’s case, where when the wife is nusyuz or recalcitrant, she was not entitled to get the muta’ah and she can only entitled to get the muta’ah payment.

 

[Marks earned: Zero Point Four (0.4) out of Twenty (20).

 

according to the parties and the witnessed:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050845

 

According to the Syafie sect, the husband is incumbent to pay muta’ah to the wife when the divorce was effected. The husband also is incumbent to pay a maintenance to the wife during the eddah or waiting period.

 

According to the case of Che Pah’s, the divorce wife claimed for the muta’ah in addition to maintenance during the eddah period. They have been married for 43 years. The wife claimed that her husband harsh to her and her left the matrimonial home. Then the conciliation committe have been make to reconcile them but have been failed. The wife also did not go to the Kadi to make any report on what have been done by her husband. The learned chief kadi held that, according to the parties and the witnessed, the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance because she was nusyuz or recalcitrant but only entitled to get the muta’ah. The court order to the husband to pay RM 500 muta’ah.

 

In other case, Zahrah v. Saidon, the divorce wife claim for muta’ah in addition of maintenance during the eddah period. The husband in this case was admitted to divorce his wife on the ground that the incompatibility between them and there is no any default. The learned chief kadi held that, the wife is entitled to get muta’ah as the divorce was effected.

 

Likewise in the case Syed Bulat v Intan, the divorce wife claimed for muta’ah. The wife claimed that the husband was compell her to lend the husband money for his own use. The husband was admitted and as the divorce was effected, the wife is entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

Meanwhile in the case Normaidiah v Azhari, the both parties have been marriage to avoid the disciplinary actions between them. After marriage the wife did not fulfill her obligation as The wife including did not perform her household duty such as cooking, and washing clothes. The husband divorce her and pay for muta’ah towards her.

 

While in the case Zawiyah v. Roslan, the divorced wife claimed for muta’ah. The learned chief kadi stated that according to Islamic Law it is an obligation to pay a muta’ah on husband as the divorced was effected. A then the learned chief kadi stated the amount of muta’ah is based on the conditions of husband as he refferred to the Kitab Fathul Muin stated that the poor according to his means and the poor according to his means. The wife was entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

According to the relevant cases, Zarul must pay for the Zarina’s claim for muta’ah only and Zarina was not entitled to get the maintenance for eddah period, according to the ruling in the Che Pah’s case, where when the wife is nusyuz or recalcitrant, she was not entitled to get the muta’ah and she can only entitled to get the muta’ah payment.

 

[Marks earned: Zero Point Four (0.4) out of Twenty (20).

 

on what have been done by her husband:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050845

 

According to the Syafie sect, the husband is incumbent to pay muta’ah to the wife when the divorce was effected. The husband also is incumbent to pay a maintenance to the wife during the eddah or waiting period.

 

According to the case of Che Pah’s, the divorce wife claimed for the muta’ah in addition to maintenance during the eddah period. They have been married for 43 years. The wife claimed that her husband harsh to her and her left the matrimonial home. Then the conciliation committe have been make to reconcile them but have been failed. The wife also did not go to the Kadi to make any report on what have been done by her husband. The learned chief kadi held that, according to the parties and the witnessed, the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance because she was nusyuz or recalcitrant but only entitled to get the muta’ah. The court order to the husband to pay RM 500 muta’ah.

 

In other case, Zahrah v. Saidon, the divorce wife claim for muta’ah in addition of maintenance during the eddah period. The husband in this case was admitted to divorce his wife on the ground that the incompatibility between them and there is no any default. The learned chief kadi held that, the wife is entitled to get muta’ah as the divorce was effected.

 

Likewise in the case Syed Bulat v Intan, the divorce wife claimed for muta’ah. The wife claimed that the husband was compell her to lend the husband money for his own use. The husband was admitted and as the divorce was effected, the wife is entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

Meanwhile in the case Normaidiah v Azhari, the both parties have been marriage to avoid the disciplinary actions between them. After marriage the wife did not fulfill her obligation as The wife including did not perform her household duty such as cooking, and washing clothes. The husband divorce her and pay for muta’ah towards her.

 

While in the case Zawiyah v. Roslan, the divorced wife claimed for muta’ah. The learned chief kadi stated that according to Islamic Law it is an obligation to pay a muta’ah on husband as the divorced was effected. A then the learned chief kadi stated the amount of muta’ah is based on the conditions of husband as he refferred to the Kitab Fathul Muin stated that the poor according to his means and the poor according to his means. The wife was entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

According to the relevant cases, Zarul must pay for the Zarina’s claim for muta’ah only and Zarina was not entitled to get the maintenance for eddah period, according to the ruling in the Che Pah’s case, where when the wife is nusyuz or recalcitrant, she was not entitled to get the muta’ah and she can only entitled to get the muta’ah payment.

 

[Marks earned: Zero Point Four (0.4) out of Twenty (20).

 

but have been failed:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050845

 

According to the Syafie sect, the husband is incumbent to pay muta’ah to the wife when the divorce was effected. The husband also is incumbent to pay a maintenance to the wife during the eddah or waiting period.

 

According to the case of Che Pah’s, the divorce wife claimed for the muta’ah in addition to maintenance during the eddah period. They have been married for 43 years. The wife claimed that her husband harsh to her and her left the matrimonial home. Then the conciliation committe have been make to reconcile them but have been failed. The wife also did not go to the Kadi to make any report on what have been done by her husband. The learned chief kadi held that, according to the parties and the witnessed, the wife is not entitled to get the maintenance because she was nusyuz or recalcitrant but only entitled to get the muta’ah. The court order to the husband to pay RM 500 muta’ah.

 

In other case, Zahrah v. Saidon, the divorce wife claim for muta’ah in addition of maintenance during the eddah period. The husband in this case was admitted to divorce his wife on the ground that the incompatibility between them and there is no any default. The learned chief kadi held that, the wife is entitled to get muta’ah as the divorce was effected.

 

Likewise in the case Syed Bulat v Intan, the divorce wife claimed for muta’ah. The wife claimed that the husband was compell her to lend the husband money for his own use. The husband was admitted and as the divorce was effected, the wife is entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

Meanwhile in the case Normaidiah v Azhari, the both parties have been marriage to avoid the disciplinary actions between them. After marriage the wife did not fulfill her obligation as The wife including did not perform her household duty such as cooking, and washing clothes. The husband divorce her and pay for muta’ah towards her.

 

While in the case Zawiyah v. Roslan, the divorced wife claimed for muta’ah. The learned chief kadi stated that according to Islamic Law it is an obligation to pay a muta’ah on husband as the divorced was effected. A then the learned chief kadi stated the amount of muta’ah is based on the conditions of husband as he refferred to the Kitab Fathul Muin stated that the poor according to his means and the poor according to his means. The wife was entitled to get the muta’ah.

 

According to the relevant cases, Zarul must pay for the Zarina’s claim for muta’ah only and Zarina was not entitled to get the maintenance for eddah period, according to the ruling in the Che Pah’s case, where when the wife is nusyuz or recalcitrant, she was not entitled to get the muta’ah and she can only entitled to get the muta’ah payment.

 

[Marks earned: Zero Point Four (0.4) out of Twenty (20).