LEGAL TECHNIQUE and LOGIC

Assignment No. 1
1. What is Categorical Syllogism? Explain.
Is a deductive argument consisting of three categorical propositions that together contain
exactly three terms, each of which occurs in exactly two of the constituent propositions. It is
said to be in standard form when its premises and conclusion are all standard-form
categorical propositions and are arranged in a specified standard order.
Arrangement: major premise, minor premise and conclusion
Major Term – Predicate of the conclusion (major premise)
Minor Term – Subject of the Conclusion (minor premise)
Middle Term – Does not occur in the conclusion, appearing instead in both premises

2. What is a proposition in a Categorical Syllogism is? Explain.

A proposition in a Categorical Syllogism is simply a statement about the relationship
between categories. It states whether one category or categorical term is fully contained
within another or is completely separate.

3. What are four main grammatical Parts of a Proposition? Briefly explain each.
A. Subject – about whom something asserts or denies
B. Predicate – what assert or deny
C. Copula – conjunct both subject and predicate terms. Copula will be negative or
affirmative.

4. Distinguish between the Major Premise and the minor Premise in a Categorical Syllogism
The premise in which the minor term appears will be called the minor premise while the
premise in which the major term appears will be called the major term.

5. What are the rules of Categorical Syllogism? Explain each. Give an example to illustrate each
rule.
a. There must be only three terms in a syllogism – the minor, major and middle term.
b. Conclusion will follow the weaker premise -
c. No conclusion follows two negative premises
d. No conclusion follows from two simple particular premises
e. No negative conclusions follows from two affirmative premises

6. What are the forms of proposition? Explain each. Give an example to illustrate each form.

Assignment No. 2 (Based on the Article of Paul M. Perrel)

1. Explain the Doctrine of Stare Decisis
 Latin phrase “stare decisis” which literally translates as “to stand by decided matters”
 The decision of a higher court within the same provincial jurisdiction acts as binding
authority on a lower court within that jurisdiction.
*Ratio decidendi (reason of deciding) – the material facts of the case plus the decision
thereon.
2. Explain why the Doctrine of Stare Decisis is said to Promote the stability and Certainty in the
Law
 If a group cases involves the same point, the parties expect the same decision.
 3. Explain why the Doctrine of Stare Decisis is said to be related with Justice and Fairness
 If there are two similar individuals in similar circumstances, they are treated the
same.
4. Explain how the application of the doctrine of stare decisis is related to hierarchy of the
courts.
 It is imperative for lawyers to note the rank of a certain court in the hierarchy of
courts because: (a) Higher ranking courts is not bound to follow the decisions of
lower courts; and (b) because some courts do not apply the rule of stare decisis with
respect to their own prior decisions.
5. What legal reasoning and arguments may lawyers raise in the event that the legal precedent
does not favor their case? Explain each legal reasoning and argument.
A. The lawyer can argue that the precedent case does not stand for the legal proposition for
which it has been cited.
B. The lawyer can argue that while the precedent case does articulate the legal proposition
for which it has been cited, nevertheless the proposition was obiter dicta (things said by
the way)
C. The lawyer can argue that while the precedent does stand for the legal proposition for
which it has been cited, the case has been effectively overruled by a decision of a high
court or by the introduction of a new statute.
D. The lawyer can argue that while the precedent case does stand for the legal proposition
for which it has been cited, the case at bar is different; that is, the case are factually
distinguishable.
E. Where the case being relied upon has a built in public policy factor, the lawyer who
wishes to distinguish the case may argue that public policy has changed and while the
legal principle of the precedent case is still good law, it is distinguishable because of the
change of circumstances.
F. The lawyer can argue that while the precedent case does stand for the legal proposition
for which it has been cited, there is another precedent of equal weight which stands for
the opposite proposition.
6. What legal techniques may lawyers employ if there are no binding precedents applicable to
their case? Explain each technique.
A. He/she may rely on a non-binding precedent from another jurisdiction
B. He/she may form a legal argument from first principles.
C. He/she can go beyond first principles and instead develop an argument that the decided
cases have evolved to a general principle which covers immediate case
7. In your opinion, does our adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis promote justice?

Chapter 1 of the Reference Book

1. Logic
 is the study of the principles and methods of good reasoning
 it is a science of reasoning, which aims to determine and lay down the criteria of good
(correct) reasoning and bad (incorrect) reasoning.
2. Legal Reasoning
 Is what we use when we apply laws, rules and regulations to particular facts and
cases
 It is what we use when we interpret constitutions and statutes
 It is what we use when we balance fundamental principles and policies
 It is what we use when we evaluate evidences, and make judgments to render legal
decisions
3. Argument
 Is a claim put forward and defended with reasons.
 Is a group of statements in which one statement is claimed to be true on the basis of
another statement/s.
 Conclusion – The statement that is being claimed to be true
 Premise – The statement that serves as the basis or support of the conclusion
 Explanation v Argument
Explanation is an attempt to show why something is the case, while an argument is an
attempt to show that something is the case.
4. Conditional Statement (not an argument)
 Contains an if-then relationship
 It is made up of two basic components:
Antecedent – if clause
Consequent – then-clause
5. Components of Legal Reasoning
A. Issue
 Any matter of controversy or uncertainty
 A point in dispute, in doubt, in question, or simply up for discussion or consideration
B. Rule (What legal rules governs the issue?)
Three parts:
i. A set of elements, collectively called a test
ii. A result that occurs when all the elements are present ( and the test is thus satisfied)
iii. A casual term that determines whether the result is mandatory, prohibitory,
discretionary, or declaratory
C. Fact (What are the facts that are relevant to the rule cited?)
 Material Facts – facts that fit the elements of the rule
D. Analysis (How applicable are the facts to the said rule?)
 To show the link between the rules and the facts
E. Conclusion (What is the implication of applying the rule to the given facts?)
 The ultimate end of legal argument.
 It is what the facts, the rules and the analysis of the case amount to.
6. Criteria in evaluating Legal Reasoning
 Truth and Logic
i. Presentation of facts which pertains to the question of truth; and
ii. Inference (deriving a legal claim or judgment from the given laws and facts) which
pertains to the question of logic.