• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
San Beda College of LawCase Analysis on the Different Perspective:Hegelian, Teleological, Historical and Utilitarian ConceptsIn Partial Fulfillment of the RequirementIn Legal Philosophy To be submitted to:Atty. DacanayBy:Michael Benjohn N. NievaMario Dexter S. PuruganaAdrian Espiritu
Table of Contents:
I.Utilitarianism
 
a.Review of the Conceptb.Facts of the caseMagno v. Court of AppealsCalalang v. Williamsc.Case AnalysisII.Hegelian Perspectivea.Review of the Conceptb.Facts of the caseStone v. MississippiIchong v. HernandezStar Paper Corporation v. Simbol et al.c.Case AnalysisIII.Teleologicala.Review of the Conceptb.Facts of the caseNavarro v. VillegasMagno v. Court of Appealsc.Case AnalysisIV.Historicala.Review of the Conceptb.Facts of the caseEjercito v. SandiganbayanGarcia v. Sandiganbayanc.Case Analysis
Bibliography:
Stone v. Mississippi, 101 U.S. 814 (1868)
 
Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil 155 (1957)Star Paper Corporation v. Ronald Simbol, Wilfreda Comia and Lorna Estrella, G.R. No. 164774,April 12, 2006Navarro v. City Mayor Antonio Villegas, G.R. No. L-31687, February 26, 1970Oriel Magno v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 96132, June 26, 1992Calalang v. Williams, 70 Phil. 726 (1970)Villanueva v. CA (427 SCRA 439)
UTILITARIANISM
is one of the schools of jurisprudence which espouses the doctrine that whatis useful is good and that determining consideration of right conduct is the usefulness of itsconsequences on the greatest happiness of the greatest of the greatest number in thecommunity. This, to the utilitarian, is the purpose and end of the law.
(Intro. To legal Philosophy by Pascual; 1989 ed. P. 137)
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...