In order to create a balance of relations between each other in society, it is necessary to have legal protection of one's rights in social life. It is the duty of the state to provide legal protection for the rights of the people and will also ensure that every implementation and rule is based on justice, as well as regulate restrictions in the interests of the public, nation and state. However, this is still not implemented in society, so the community is not satisfied with the rules. As in the case in the Syar'iyah Bireuen Court where the judge rejected the case for reconvencing and convention. Meanwhile, in the Syar'iyah Jantho Court, the judge accepted the reconvencing and contingency suit. This difference in judgment is highly irrelevant because the case is both a case of consecration of a lawsuit. The problem in this study is how the syar'iyah court has implemented a legal interpretation of the denial of the plaintiff's reconception suit and the convention suit. The research methodand method used are empirical juridical with a statute approach, and a comparison or comprative approach. The data sources are library research or literature research and field research. The results showed that there was a legal interpretation of the rejection of the plaintiff's suitand the convention suit according to the judge that any oarng who filed a suit could file his suit whether it was a merger of suits or not. The reason the judges have refused to file a lawsuit may be seen when the evidence of the parties not fulfilling the cretria of the evidence submitted is not in accordance with the wishes of the judge at trial. Therefore, if in the reconvencing and convention the initial plaintiff withdraws his suit, it may be dismissed by one of the parties if there is an agreement by one of the parties, but if there is no agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant then there-existence is still examined and resumed according to the procedures in force in the Syar'iyah Court.