Abstract

This paper explains how arbitration functions in the Indonesian legal system. The purpose of this study is to determine whether there is a legal remedy that can be made by law to reach a final decision based on the principle of final and binding. This study aims to study the way sharia arbitration bodies handle economic disputes. The research method used is juridical-normative, using descriptive qualitative analysis. The results showed that, as an extra-judicial institution governed by international law that has been ratified by the Indonesian government, arbitration helps complement the Indonesian judicial system. And the absence of a legal remedy for a final award in accordance with the principles of final and binding And the absence of legal remedies for a final decision in accordance with the principle of finality and binding is one of the advantages of settlement through arbitration compared to the court, In conclusion arbitration is more effective in resolving sharia insurance disputes based on the principle of simple, fast, and cheap justice according to the mandate of the Law.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.