San Beda College Alabang School of Law Alabang Hills Vilage, Muntinlupa City 1770 Philippines LEGAL PHILOSOPHY Atty. John R. Jacome, LL.B., STB-MA, MA Philosophy COURSE OUTLINE 1. WHAT IS LAW? 1. Herbert Lionel Hart: Concept of Law - O84 2. Jurgen Habermas: Rationality and Law 3. Thomas Aquinas: Scholastic Treatment of the Nature of Law 4, John Dworkin: Theory of Adjudication and Model of Rules eo, Mb Readings: Aquino, pp. 35-114; Bernardo, et.al., 1-30; Golding, et.al., 1-12; Tabucanon, 1-48. Cases: Sanidad vs. Comelec, 73 SCRA 333 The United Kingdom vs. Albania, 1949 I.C.J. 4 (The Corfu Channel Case) Marburry v. Madison, 5 US (1Cranch) 137 ~4¢aquine People vs. Pomar, 46 Phil. 440 Del Monte Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 131 SCRA 410 Asia Brewery vs. San Miguel Corporation, G-R. No. 103543, July 5, 1993 Republic of the Philippines vs. Meralco, G.R. 14314, November 15, 2002 Adong v. Cheong Seng Gee, 43 Phil. 43 Duran vs. Abad Santos, G.R. L-99, November 16, 1945 Il, NATURAL LAW: THE CLASSIC, SCHOLASTIC, ENLIGHTENMENT & POSTMODERN PHILOSOPHERS The Stoics: Jus Naturale 2. Plato on deal Law and the Republic 3. Aristotle on Rational Law 4. Thomas Aquinas on Natural Law 5. Immanuel Kant and the Enlightenment Philosophers on Natural Rights 6. Natural Law as the Law of Nations 2. Hugo Grotius ’b, William Blackstone Commentaries ¢. Jacques Maritain 7. John Finis: Natural Law and Natural Rights Readings: Bernardo, et.al, 60-102; Coquia, 198-244; Golding, et.al, 15-28, 287-299; Tabucanon, 111-116, 163-176, 188-190. Cases: Republic of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, July 21, 2003 ADMU vs. Capulong, G.R. No. 99327, May 27, 1993 Yamashita vs. Styer, G.R. No. L-128, December 19, 1945 Caraos vs. Daza, G.R. No. L-442, May 23, 1946 Tecson vs. Desiderio, Jr., G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004 US vs. Guendia, G.R. No. 1-12462, December 20, 1917 US vs. Santos, G.R. No. 1-127, September 10, 1917 People vs. Pomar, G.R. No. L-22008, November 3, 1924 In re: Columns of Amado Macasaet in Malaya, A.M. No. 07-09-13-SC, August 8, 2008 People vs. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 2000 Laurel vs, Misa, G.R. No. L-409, January 30, 1947 Manzanares vs. Moreta, G.R. No. -12306, October 22, 1918II. CIVIL LAW: ROMAN JURISTS TO CONTEMPORARY THINKERS 1 Justinian on Codification of Law 2. Cicero: De Legibus 3. John Locke on Private Property 4, Robert Nozick: Enlightenment Theory 5. Latin Maxims Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 102-128; Aquino, 198-220; Golding, et.al., 122-162. Cases: Kasilag vs. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 46623, December 7, 1939 Jain vs. IAC and People, G.R, No. L-63129, September 28, 1984 People vs. Hon. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 2000 IV. CRIMINAL LAW AND FAMILY LAW: CHRISTIAN & CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHERS 1. Augustine: Law, Order and the City of God 2. Aquinas on Crime and Punishment 3. Dietrich von Hildebrand: Personalism 4. Karol Wojtyla: Domestic/Family Philosophy 5, Michel Foucault: Discipline and Punish Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 129-153; Golding, et.al., 107-121, 207-235; Tabucanon, 49-110. Cases: Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601, January 19, 1999 Santos vs. CA and Bedia-Santos, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995 Estrada vs. Escritor, A.M, P-02-1651, August 4, 2006 People vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-S2, February 21, 1946 V. MERCANTILE LAW: FROM CUSTOMS TO LAW 1. Gerard de Malynes, Lex Mercatoria 2. Lord Mansfield: English Commercial Law 3. Adams Smith: The Wealth of Nations 4, Ayn Rand, Freedom of Production and Trade Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 154-169; Golding, et.al., 67-79. Cases: US vs, Tan Quingco Chua, G.R. No. L-13708, January 29, 1919 PNB vs. The National City Bank of New York, G.R. No. L-43596, October 31, 1936 ‘Compagnie Franco-Indochinoise vs. Deutschaft, G.R. No. L-1395, January 17, 1919 ‘VI. REMEDIAL LAW: THE EMPIRICAL PHILOSOPHERS 1. Francis Bacon's inductive Jurisprudence 2. David Hume’s on Presumptions, Probabilities and Exhuming the Evidence 3, Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Game of Doubt: Logical and Epistemological Considerations in Law Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 162-169; Aquino, 115-160; Golding, et.al., 163-176, 315-342. Cases: Apiag vs. Judge Cantero, A.M. No. MTJ-95-1070, February 12, 1997 Arianza vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-43352, February 28, 1978 VIL. POLITICAL LAW: REFORM, REVOLUTION, AND RESISTANCE 1. Niccolo Machiavelli: The Breach and Practice of Politics 2. Jeremy Bentham: The Panopticon 3. Thomas Hobbes on Sovereign Immunity4, John Locke: The State of Nature 5, Charles de Montesquieu: Doctrine of Separation of Powers 6. Thomas More on Republicanism, the Familial State and the Rule of Law 7. Jean Jacques Rousseau: Social Contract Theory 8, John Stuart Mill on Utilitarian Regime 9. John Rawls: A Theory of Justice Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 170-192; Aquino, 161-197; Tabucanon, 176-187; Golding, 179-286. Cases: Tolentino vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 148334, January 21, 2004 ‘The Province of North Cotabato vs. Philippine Peace Panel, G.R. Nos. 183591, et.al, October 14, 2008 Air Transportation Office vs. Sps. Ramos, G.R. No. 159402, February 23, 2011 David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006 Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2002 Vill. LABOR LAW: CAPITALISM, SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM 1. Max Weber: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism 2. Karl Marx: Critique and Prophetique 3. Marx and Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto 4. Joseph Stalin and Nicolai Lenin: Socialism. Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 194-203; Coquia, 164-173. Cases: Calalang vs. Williams, G.R. No. 47800, December 2, 1940 De Ramas vs. CAR and Ramos, G.R. No.L-19555, May 29, 1964 People vs. Lava, G.R. No. L-4974, May 16, 1969 People vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-6025, May 30, 1964 IX. LEGAL PHILOSOPHY SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT 1. The Teleological or Natural Law Theory 2. Legal Positivism a. David Hume: Legal Positivism b. Jeremy Bentham on the Principles of Morals and Legislation John Austin: The Province of Jurisprudence d. Hans Kelsen: Pure Theory of Law e. Thomas Hobbes: Legalism or “Rule by the Law” f. Herbert Hart: Rule of Recognition 8. Confucianism: Political Theory and Rectification of Names 3. The Interpretivist or Constructivist Theory a.Ronald Dworkin: Interpretivist Approach and “Best Fit Theory” 4, Realist or Pragmatist Theory a. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: The Path of the Law 5. Critical Legal Theory a. Roberto Unger: Hegemony, Deconstruction and Hermeneutics of Suspicion 6. The Historical Approach a. Freidrich Karl von Savigny: The Voltgeist b. Sir Henry Sumner Maine: Legal History Theory ©. G.W.F, Hegel: Dialectic Idealism and the Philosophy of Law 7. The Functional or Sociological Approach ‘a, William James: Law as a means to satisfy needs b. Emile Durkeim: Theory of Legal Change . Charles Louis Baron de Montesquieu: Adapting law to shifting conditions d. R. Von Jhering: Law as a method of ordering society e. Roscoe Pound: The scope and purpose of socio-logical jurisprudence 3£ Max Weber: Typology of Law & Roberto Mangeira Unger: Cultural Context Theory h. Eugen Ehrlich: The Living Law i. Talcott Parsons: Law as integrativist mechanism of social control j, John Rawls: The Sociological School 8. The Utilitarian Approach a. Jeremy Bentham: Felicific Calculus b. John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism, Law and Authority c. Henry Sidgwick: Act and Rule Utilitarianism 9. The Economic Approach a. Richard Posner: Economic Jurisprudence and Consequentialism 10. Legal Formalism or Conceptualism a. Jeremy Bentham: Originalism/Textualism or the Plain Meaning Approach b. Antonin Scalia: Contemporary Originalism 11. The Policy Science School a. Harold Lasswell and Myres Mcdougal: Legal Education and Public Policy 12. Legal Practice Theory a. Philip Bobbit: The Six Main Modalities Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 1-59; Coquia, 3-197; Golding, 13-89;Tabucanon, 117-162, 191-192. Cases: Sta, Maria vs. Lopez, G.R. No. L-30773, February 18, 1970 Vargas vs. Rilloraza, G.R. No. L-1612, February 26, 1948 Peralta vs. the Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-49, November 12, 1945 Estrada vs. Escritor, A.M, P-02-1651, August 4, 2006 Miranda vs. Abaya, G.R. No. 136351, July 28, 1999 Co Kim Cham vs. Valdez, G.R. No. L-5, September 17, 1945, Regala vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105938, September 20, 1996 Primicias vs. Fuguso, G.R. No. L-1800, January 27, 1948 Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No, 148560, November 19, 2001 Padua vs, Robles and Bay Taxi Cab, G.R. No. L-40486, August 29, 1975 Republic of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, July 21, 2003 X. POSTMODERNISM AND THE FUTURE OF LAW, 1 Feminist Philosophy 2. The “Other”: Anti-Discrimination Laws 3. Environmental Law and Ethics 4, The Philippine Legal Paradigm Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 204-256; Golding, et.al., 90-104, 300-312 Cases: Marcos vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 119976, September 18, 1995, Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No, 101083, July 30, 1993 Ang Ladlad LGBT Party vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 190582, Apri! 8, 2010 Cruz vs. Sec. of Environment & Natural Resources, G.R. No. 135385, December 6, 2000 OCA vs. Judge Floro, A.M. RTJ-99-1460, March 31, 2006 Imbong vs. Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014 REFERENCES: Aquino, Ranhilio. A Philosophy of Law: An Introduction to Lega! Philosophy, Central Book Supply, inc. Bernardo, Nicolo and Bernardo, Oscar. Philawsophia: Philosophy and Theory of Law, Rex Book Store, Inc. Coquia, Jorge. Readings in Legal Philosophy and Theory: Texts and Comments from Plato to McDougal, Rex Book Store, Inc. Golding, Martin and Edmundson, William. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of taw and Legal Theory, Blackwell Publishing. ‘Tabucanon, Gil Marvel. Legal Philosophy for Filipinos, Rex Book Store, Inc. 4