<![CDATA[The Religious Courts only have the authority to adjudicate defaults that occur in the realm of sharia economics between fellow Muslims, provided that they meet the provisions of the absolute competence of Article 49 of Law Number 3 of 2006 Concerning Amendments to Law Number 7 of 1989 Concerning Religious Courts. Conversely, the District Court is authorized to try defaults that are not related to sharia economics, in accordance with the provisions in the Civil Code. The existence of overlapping authority, such as sharia economic cases filed in the District Court, causes the court to exceed the applicable absolute competence (exceeding power), so that the lawsuit must be rejected. These findings emphasize the importance of enforcing material and territorial limits in the examination of default cases, to ensure legal certainty and prevent errors in determining the court forum. Therefore, this research aims to examine the limits of authority (absolute and relative competence) possessed by the Religious Courts and Civil Courts in receiving, examining, and deciding default cases. The approach applied is a juridical-normative approach by utilizing the study of legislation and conceptual approaches related to the theory of court competence, with the formulation of the problem of what are the limits of authority of the Religious Courts and Civil Courts in accepting, examining and adjudicating default. Keywords: Authority, Religious Courts, Civil Courts, Default]]>
