AKIBAT HUKUM UTANG DALAM PERKAWINAN (Studi Komparasi Putusan Pengadilan Negeri Kota Semarang Nomor 145/Pdt.G/2005/PN.Smg, Putusan Pengadilan Tinggi Semarang Nomor 205/Pdt/2006/PT.Smg dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung Nomor 1904 K/Pdt/2007)

IRA FITRIA, Dr. Tata Wijayanta, S.H., M.Hum.

2013 | Tesis | S2 Magister Kenotariatan

Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis penafsiran hakim mengenai utang dalam perkawinan dan menganalisis penyelesaian perselisihan terkait utang dalam perkawinan menurut putusan pengadilan. Jenis penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian yuridis normatif, yang menggunakan data sekunder bersumber dari bahan hukum primer, bahan hukum sekunder dan bahan hukum tersier. Cara pengumpulan data dalam penelitian ini yaitu dengan metode dokumentasi, sedangkan alat pengumpulan data menggunakan studi dokumen. Data diperoleh dianalisis dengan menggunakan analisis isi (content analysis) dan analisis komparasi (comparative analysis). Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa di Pengadilan Negeri (PN) hakim berpendapat utang yang terjadi untuk keperluan suami-istri, sehingga menjadi tanggung jawab bersama. Di Pengadilan Tinggi (PT) hakim berpendapat pada bukti saksi dan kuitansi, istri tidak terbukti nyata mengetahui utang suami, maka utang hanya menjadi tanggung jawab suami. Di Mahkamah Agung (MA), hakim berpendapat berdasarkan bukti, utang terjadi selama perkawinan. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian disimpulkan bahwa penafsiran hakim mengenai utang dalam perkawinan menurut putusan PN didasarkan utang yang terjadi untuk keperluan suami-istri, sehingga menjadi tanggung jawab bersama. Hal ini karena utang terjadi selama perkawinan yang tanpa perjanjian kawin. Penafsiran hakim menurut putusan PT didasarkan tidak adanya bukti autentik istri menyetujui utang yang dilakukan suaminya maka utang hanya menjadi tanggung jawab suami. Menurut putusan MA didasarkan fakta bahwa utang terjadi selama perkawinan berlangsung maka segala pinjaman menjadi tanggung jawab suami-istri. Penyelesaian perselisihan terkait utang dalam perkawinan menurut putusan PN yaitu utang menjadi tanggung jawab suami-istri. Penyelesaian utang menurut putusan PT yaitu hanya suami yang berkewajiban membayar utang. Menurut putusan MA, utang yang terjadi menjadi tanggung jawab suami-istri. Oleh karena itu disarankan hakim dalam memutus perkara sebaiknya tidak hanya mendasarkan pada ketentuan undang-undang saja dan hakim memutus perkara diperbolehkan menurut keyakinan hakim, namun harus dilandasi dengan dasar hukum yang kuat.

This research is aimed at analyzing the interpretation of judges regarding debt in marriage and analyzing the dispute resolution regarding debt in marriage based on the verdicts. The research belongs to a juridical normative research, which employed secondary data taken from primary law materials, secondary law materials and tertiary law materials.Data were collected by employing documentary method, while the instrument of collecting data was document study. The obtained data were analyzed using content analysis and comparative analysis. The research result indicates that the judge of the District Court was of the opinion that the debt was designated for the needs of the married couple so that it became a shared responsibility. The judge of the High Court was of the opinion that according to the evidences of witness and receipt, the wife was not really proven to know her husband’s debt so that it became the husband’s responsibility only. The judge of the Supreme Court was of the opinion that based on the evidence, the debt occurred during the period of marriage. Based on the research result, it can be concluded that the interpretation of judge regarding the debt in marriage according to the verdict of the District Court is based on the debt is designated for the needs of the married couple so that it become a shared responsibility. This is because the debt occurred during the period of marriage without a prenuptial agreement. The interpretation of judge according the verdict of the High Court is based on the absence of authentic evidence that the wife agreed on the debt taken by her husband so that the debt become the husband’s responsibility. Meanwhile, the verdict of the Supreme Court is based on the fact that the debt occurred during the period of marriage so that any loan becomes the responsibility of the married couple. The dispute resolution regarding the debt in marriage, according the verdict of the District Court, is that the debt becomes responsibility of the married couple. According to the verdict of High Court, the debt settlement belongs to the obligation of the husband only. According the verdict of the Supreme Court, the existing debt becomes the responsibility of the married couple. Therefore, it is suggested that in handing down the case the judge should not only based on the provisions of the law and the judge is allowed to hand down the case according to the judge’s conviction which must be based on the strong legal basis.

Kata Kunci : utang, perkawinan, penafsiran hakim, putusan pengadilan.