Marriage is a sacred bond, everyone is entitled to determine their spouse. In this case the state does not limit the prospective married couple to be married to differences in culture, ethnicity, race, class, and citizenship. Marriage is a legal act that can cause legal consequences, it is of course a very important concern for the husband and wife couple. The legal consequences of marriage are not only in their familial relations, but also on the rights and obligations of each party, up to the property acquired during the marriage. This is what happened to Mrs. Ike Farida, the original Indonesian citizen who had never been released her citizenship and married a foreign man (Japan), related to their marriage, they never made a prenuptial agreement until finally Mrs. Ike Farida cannot own property in the form of land with the status of Land Ownership Right and Building Right. This is what happened in the case of Constitutional Court Decision No. 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015. Therefore, the authors are interested to lift a thesis entitled "DUE TO INTERMARRIAGE LAWS TO THE JOINT TREASURE ESPECIALLY IN THE LAND OWNERSHIP OF THE RIGHT." Awareness on the Constitutional Court's decision. Base on the problems, the authors will discuss two issues. First is the effect of mixed marriage law on common property, especially in the ownership of land before the verdict of the Constitutional Court No. 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015, the second effect of marriage agreement in mixed marriage, especially wife (Indonesian Citizen) after the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015. The data collected consists of secondary data. The basic research in this paper using research legislation (Statue Approach) and case studies (Case Approach). Furthermore, various analysis in this writing is done by using research of leather analysis that is by testing the quality of norms used in this research through the view of legal certainty, expediency, and justice. Accordingly, the authors conclude that article 29 section (1) has limited the time of marriage agreement in which the marriage agreement must be made at the time or before the marriage takes place, but after the submission of a request from Mrs. Ike Farida as the applicant in the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 69 / PUU-XIII / 2015 the judge granted the request of Mrs. Ike Farida for some of which the marriage agreement can be made at any time, not only at the time or before the marriage takes place.