Category Archives: WORLD CLASS HIGHER EDUCATION USIM LAW UNDERGRADUATE

the husband apply that the house :World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050612

Yes, the civil court have the jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslims. It has been proved by two leading cases which the civil court has preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian. The case is Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khatthum and Boto v Jaafar.

In Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khalthum, the spouses had bought a matrimonial home for RM50,000. The husband contribute RM40,000 and the wife RM10,000. The house was named under the wife. After the dissolution of marriage or divorce, the husband apply that the house to be divided equally among them. The wife was not agree to this claims. The court held that the asset must be divided equally among them.
In Boto v Jaafar, the husband and wife was marry in 1966. During the subsistence of marriage, they was bought a house, a piece of land, four fishing boats and one fish stall. The husband run a fishing business. After the divorce, the wife was claim the Harta Sepencarian.

Salleh Abas CJ held that the assets must be divided among them although the wife was not contribute to bought that assets. The wife was give an indirect contribution as she responsible to keep the peace of mind of to her husband to run the fishing business with proper sense. The court held that one-third of the assets was divide to the plaintiff and two-third for the defendant. The one-third division is for the indirectly contribution by the plaintiff to support the plaintiff’s fishing business.
[Marks earned: Zero (0) out of Eleven(11)]

Advertisements

The husband contribute RM40,000:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050612

Yes, the civil court have the jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslims. It has been proved by two leading cases which the civil court has preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian. The case is Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khatthum and Boto v Jaafar.

In Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khalthum, the spouses had bought a matrimonial home for RM50,000. The husband contribute RM40,000 and the wife RM10,000. The house was named under the wife. After the dissolution of marriage or divorce, the husband apply that the house to be divided equally among them. The wife was not agree to this claims. The court held that the asset must be divided equally among them.
In Boto v Jaafar, the husband and wife was marry in 1966. During the subsistence of marriage, they was bought a house, a piece of land, four fishing boats and one fish stall. The husband run a fishing business. After the divorce, the wife was claim the Harta Sepencarian.

Salleh Abas CJ held that the assets must be divided among them although the wife was not contribute to bought that assets. The wife was give an indirect contribution as she responsible to keep the peace of mind of to her husband to run the fishing business with proper sense. The court held that one-third of the assets was divide to the plaintiff and two-third for the defendant. The one-third division is for the indirectly contribution by the plaintiff to support the plaintiff’s fishing business.
[Marks earned: Zero (0) out of Eleven(11)]

Civil Court judges that is not have a back ground: World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050624

Civil court have no jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslim since Shariah Court have the power to divide the said property by the court consideration and discrection. The Court have a power to order division of harta sepencarian as it’s stated on section 58 of IFLA 1984. This section provide the power of court to exercising for division of the property. Clause (4) of the section also give the power to the court to take into consideration the contribution made by the parties during marriage and also the need of the minor children of the marriage. This section clearly illustrated to us that the Syariah Court have enough jurisdiction to make sure that the harta sepencarian will be devided equally among the both parties.

In article 121 (1) A of Federal Constitution also provide the power of Syariah Court in order to give judgment in the case without any interference from civil court. Since our country have the unique law that consist of two court the jurisdiction of each court should not be have any interference by the other court. The jurisdiction of Syariah Court is to give a muslim an opportunity to be tried in Islamic law esspecially in family matters. The power of Syariah Court to settle any dispute among Muslim should not be interfere by any other parties. The amendment of article 121 of Federal Constitution give a big effect to the jurisdiction of Syariah Court to give the judgment. This article avoid the power of Civil Court to re-examined the Syariah Court judgement. It is also give a rise that the Syariah Judges may make their judgment accordingly to Hukum Syarak without any hesitate that their judgment will be re-examination by the Civil Court judges that is not have a back ground of Islamic Law.

[Marks earned: Four point Five (4.5) out of 11 marks]

their judgment will be re-examination:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

their judgment will be re-examination:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050624

 

Civil court have no jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslim since Shariah Court have the power to divide the said property by the court consideration and discrection. The Court have a power to order division of harta sepencarian as it’s stated on section 58 of IFLA 1984. This section provide the power of court to exercising for division of the property. Clause (4) of the section also give the power to the court to take into consideration the contribution made by the parties during marriage and also the need of the minor children of the marriage. This section clearly illustrated to us that the Syariah Court have enough jurisdiction to make sure that the harta sepencarian will be devided equally among the both parties.

 

In article 121 (1) A of Federal Constitution also provide the power of Syariah Court in order to give judgment in the case without any interference from civil court. Since our country have the unique law that consist of two court the jurisdiction of each court should not be have any interference by the other court. The jurisdiction of Syariah Court is to give a muslim an opportunity to be tried in Islamic law esspecially in family matters. The power of Syariah Court to settle any dispute among Muslim should not be interfere by any other parties. The amendment of article 121 of Federal Constitution give a big effect to the jurisdiction of Syariah Court to give the judgment. This article avoid the power of Civil Court to re-examined the Syariah Court judgement. It is also give a rise that the Syariah Judges may make their judgment accordingly to Hukum Syarak without any hesitate that their judgment will be re-examination by the Civil Court judges that is not have a back ground of Islamic Law.

 

[Marks earned: Four point Five (4.5) out of 11 marks]

 

 

 

which the civil court has preside :World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050612

Yes, the civil court have the jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslims. It has been proved by two leading cases which the civil court has preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian. The case is Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khatthum and Boto v Jaafar.

In Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khalthum, the spouses had bought a matrimonial home for RM50,000. The husband contribute RM40,000 and the wife RM10,000. The house was named under the wife. After the dissolution of marriage or divorce, the husband apply that the house to be divided equally among them. The wife was not agree to this claims. The court held that the asset must be divided equally among them.
In Boto v Jaafar, the husband and wife was marry in 1966. During the subsistence of marriage, they was bought a house, a piece of land, four fishing boats and one fish stall. The husband run a fishing business. After the divorce, the wife was claim the Harta Sepencarian.

Salleh Abas CJ held that the assets must be divided among them although the wife was not contribute to bought that assets. The wife was give an indirect contribution as she responsible to keep the peace of mind of to her husband to run the fishing business with proper sense. The court held that one-third of the assets was divide to the plaintiff and two-third for the defendant. The one-third division is for the indirectly contribution by the plaintiff to support the plaintiff’s fishing business.
[Marks earned: Zero (0) out of Eleven(11)]

has been proved : USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050612

Yes, the civil court have the jurisdiction to preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian among Muslims. It has been proved by two leading cases which the civil court has preside over claims for Harta Sepencarian. The case is Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khatthum and Boto v Jaafar.

In Roberts @ Kamarulzaman v Umi Khalthum, the spouses had bought a matrimonial home for RM50,000. The husband contribute RM40,000 and the wife RM10,000. The house was named under the wife. After the dissolution of marriage or divorce, the husband apply that the house to be divided equally among them. The wife was not agree to this claims. The court held that the asset must be divided equally among them.
In Boto v Jaafar, the husband and wife was marry in 1966. During the subsistence of marriage, they was bought a house, a piece of land, four fishing boats and one fish stall. The husband run a fishing business. After the divorce, the wife was claim the Harta Sepencarian.

Salleh Abas CJ held that the assets must be divided among them although the wife was not contribute to bought that assets. The wife was give an indirect contribution as she responsible to keep the peace of mind of to her husband to run the fishing business with proper sense. The court held that one-third of the assets was divide to the plaintiff and two-third for the defendant. The one-third division is for the indirectly contribution by the plaintiff to support the plaintiff’s fishing business.
[Marks earned: Zero (0) out of Eleven(11)]

the court held, the case retried:World Class Higher Education in Malaysia: USIM Third Year LAW Undergraduate

 

Sample answer by USIM LAW undergraduate 1050617

This case is about the husband pronouce talaq to his wife by saying “I divorced you. I divorced you. I divorced you”. The issue here whether the pronouncement of 3 Talaq at once, can consider as 3 talaqs or one talaq only. According to Hanafi sect, it fell under 1 talaq, but Shafii sect, 3 talaq. But, in this case, the Husband alleged that he is had induced by Black Magic. So, it is not under his proper sense. The Syariah Court held that talaq is consider as 3 talaq but they appealed to appeal court. The court give judgement that the lower court must determined on the influenced by the Black Magic and must trial with witness. So, the court held, the case retried before another kadi/judge.
[Marks earned: One Point Four (1.4) out of Ten]