Philo Finals

Legal Theories
A. Interpretivist or Constructivist Theory

Proponent
Ronald Dworkin
Description
Interpretivism about law offers a philosophical explanation of how institutional practice, the legally
significant actions and practices of political institutions modifies legal rights and obligations.
Interpretivist Theory is SUBJECTIVE.

1. Subjective means looking at something with bias and is value laden.
2. They believe people make own choices and is not connected to laws of science or nature.
3. Studies tend to be done in greater detail and looks at culture and how people live their
lives, unlike Positivists who tend to look at general overview, Interpretivism has high validity
because it is a true representation and is trustworthy.
4. Theory represents what “ought to be” or normative.
Significance to the development of legal sysytems

Law as an interpretive concept designed to construct an internal, participants' view of a community's
legal practice. This constructive interpretation is meant to show that each community's legal practice
embodies principles and values drawn from the community's basic political morality. Moreover, this
interpretation both explains the existing elements of the legal record
(e.g., statutes, precedents, regulations, etc.), and justifies these elements by connecting them with a
defensible background political morality
Practical Use of the Theory

1. It is used for Judicial Review.
2. Interpretivism is a thesis about the fundamental or constitutive explanation of legal rights and
obligations
Criticism
Subjective
B. Get-Real Theory
----
C. The Critical Theory
Proponents
1. Roberto Mangabeira Unger
2. Alan Hunt
3. Robert W. Gordon
4. Duncan Kennedy
Description
The law is interconnected with social issues especially social biases. The laws established are for the
interest of the law-makers. The law has been imposed for the benefit of the privileged. The central
theme of critical legal theory is to doubt the prospect of uncovering a universal foundation of law based
on reason. The purpose of the theory is to challenge people to be socio-politically knowledgeable and
to mold the society by being critical about the legal system through “hermeneutics of suspicion”.
Significance to the development of legalsystems

Since it opens our minds regarding social biases and issues, it imposes a significant challenge for
everyone to reflect and envision structural arrangement which could create more opportunities for more
people in order for the law to be of benefit not only to the dominant group, but to everyone. This way,
we can help improve and develop our legal system.

Critical theory can be a guide for social action. It calls for investigation of the social order and
understanding of why collective needs go unmet but the existing power structure is maintained. Critical
theory asserts that through self-awareness people can transform society.
Criticisms
Critical theories are not without their critics. They fail to provide rational standards by which they
can justify themselves or show themselves to be "better" than other theories of knowledge, science,
or practice.
It involves the criticism of ideology, which is used to describe worldviews that solely reflect the
particularistic interests of powerful social groups while being presented as universally true or valid.
It does not offer any clear road map to political action, often explicitly reject any solutions because
this theory focuses on power structures.
D. Once-Upon-A-Time Approach
Proponents
1. Friedrich Karl Von Savigny
2. Henry Sumner Maine
3. George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
Description
History of Law as a study has its evolution.
It is connected to the development of civilizations and it operates in the wider context of Social
History.
Significance on the development of legal systems

 Broad historical-comparative method
 It is explicitly critical
 Intellectual Historians – study IDEAS
 ABSTRACT PROPOSITION – critical application
 Incorporating CULTURE, LIFE and HISTORY – make it concrete/definite.
 The brand of history in determining laws is to critique current conditions from a historical (and
comparative) perspective.

A historical view or understanding is important to fully appreciate how laws evolve and how laws are
created.
The revisions of the Philippine Constitution shows that the law must be read on the basis of historic
struggles of the Filipino People.
Criticism
This theory is criticized for its tendency to have exclusive love for one's country leading to
xenophobia, ethnic cleansing, discrimination on immigrants, racial superiority, separatist
movements, and opposition to globalization.
E. Functional or Sociological Approach

Proponents
1. ----
Description
The law is both means of social control and progress. This approach looks into a law as a social
phenomenon, as a measure of social trends and reengineering. Ideally in this approach, the law should
balance the diverse interests and institutions of society and promote progressive national policies.

The sociological approach has been used to recognize and advance the rights and interests of marginal
groups, mainly the Bill of Rights of the underprivileged, over the power wielded by the State.

----
Criticism
-----
F. Economic Approach
Proponents
1. Judge Richard Posner
2. Ronal H. Coase
3. Gary Becker
Description
The purpose of law is to increase the balance of happiness in the society through wealth maximization
– in law, there is always an attached appropriations but its main thinking of having this approach is to
balance the societies and the people’s happiness through wealth or money

Inherent power of the government (taxation). If there is no money from the public, we cannot propel to
become a progressive society. We regulate the money from the people in order to attain happiness –
development of our legal system. It is used for social development

 4Ps – elevating those people who are financially challenged. It is a law that uplifts the economic
livelihood of the disadvantaged sector of our economy [taxation law – tax is the lifeblood of the
economy].
 Understanding the consumer protection act – rights of consumers
Criticism
1. One-sided paying of taxes. Only the government maximizes but in the part of the people who
pay taxes, there is nothing to maximize.
2. Lesser revenue generation
3. Those who benefit are those who are already rich.
4. The rich enjoy more freedom compared to the poor ones
5. Unbalanced application of Distributive justice and Equitable justice
G. Forms and Fundamental Approach

Proponents
1. Christopher Columbus Langdell
2. Louis Sullivan
3. Jeremy Bentham
Description
 It holds that the law is a strict science governed by formal axioms, legal principles, and rules of
logic.
 It is also refferee to as "textualism" or the "plain meaning" approach to the law and "originalism"
or the "original meaning" approach to the Constitution.

 Legal forms and other formal aspects are to be found all over the law, in all of its institutional,
methodological, preceptive, systematic and other reality.

The obedience to the simple meaning of legal rules served purposes we correlate with the rule of law. It
raises the possibility that those who are accountable to the law will know what behavior the law
tolerates or forbids.
Criticisms
a) It doesn't dwell on the extrinsic aids, it merely focuses on the intrinsic view of the law itself.
b) It constrains a judge from DECIDING OR giving opinions on the law should be or should
mean other than what it says or does.
c) Originalism or formalism says that judges should only "interpret" not "construct".
d) Some judges' decisions are raw as it is based on the law itself, and without dwelling or those
found outside the language of the law.
H. Practice Theory
Proponents
1. Pierre Bourdieu
2. Philip Bobbit
Description
Practice Theory explains society and culture as the result of structure and individual
Structures- products of historical practices which are constantly reproduced and transformed by
historical practices per se.
A legal theory that refers to the law as an autonomous realm of thought and practice in which people
are capable of “neutrality” and “objectivity” in judgment and decision-making.

6 main modalities
1. Historical - in determination of what is the intent of the framers we must look or trace its
historical basis prior to the creation of such law. It is therefore significant in the legal systems to look
into the matters that are indispensable ininterpreting a law.
2. Textual - in the construction of a statute or law in our legal system, it must be construed in its
plain text without ambiguity in order to identify the subject matter or the object of law in itsentirety.
3. Structural - to be able to understand or interpret such kind oflaw, a certain structure in
the creation of such must be followedsimply as if it can be understood by all.
4. Doctrinal - applying rules generated by precedent where jurisprudence decided by the Supreme
Court isapplicable to the same crime committed.
5. Ethical or moral - although it was said that the law is harsh but it is still the law, such must also do
notdegrade nor destroy persons morality. Thereupon, offenders or violators of such law must be given
penalty or sanction that commensurate to his actions.
6. Prudential - seeking to balance the costs and benefits of a particular rule taking into consideration
thepossible effects whether it will be beneficial or detrimental.

It could provide a clear causal basis (in the form of relatively non mysterious processes such
asimitation, training, and sanctioning) for the institution and maintenance of social or cultural
patterns exercising normative authority over individual performances, this would seem to constitute
genuine philosophical progress.
Criticisms
Given only a rule, the possibility always remains open to follow the rule in deviant ways. One
might then try to specify how the rule is to be interpreted, but any such interpretation
would itself be another rule open to deviant application.
I. Austin's Theory of Law
Proponents
1. Jeremy Benthan - father of modern utilitarianism
2. Justice Wendell Holms Jr.
3. Hans Kelsen proponent
Description
 A state shall be governed by commands given by a sovereign person and that sanctions are
important for every command.
 Austin's theory of law or the positive law school of thought would recognize the law maker's
command as legitimate. Questions about the law's morality or immorality is not important.
 Austin’s theory somehow defines that the law is a duty or obligation laid down by a competent or
legitimate authority and such disobedience may lead into imposing of such sanctions.

 The divine law is the highest law in the world. The divine law is the foundation of the laws
created by governments. In other words, divine law is supreme over other laws.
 Austin laid down many of his propositions as deduced from English law as it was during his time.

 The command from certain group of people could be promulgated to adapt to changes in society.
 According to Austin’s the law is command so one of the laws stated is divine law commanded by
God to his people then the government must create or created the laws in accordance with the
command of divine law or by the law of God. No other law is supreme than this divine law. in
creating the law of the government all are base in this divine law.
Criticisms
It disregards the fact that foundation of law lies in common consciousness of the people which
manifests themselves in customs. Hence, it overlooks Customary law which has always been
extensively respected and followed.
It fails to give morality its due.
J. H. L. A. Hart's Theory of Law

Proponent
Herbert Lionel Adolphous Hart
Description
Law is a system of “social rules.” Tribal societies, being closely knit and related, started first with a
“regime of primary rules” (rules of conduct) where the sanctions for misbehaviors were made through
indeterminate means of social pressure and conformity.

Essential to Hart's theory then is a system of "primary" and "secondary" rules. This is essentially his
positivism.
1. Primary rules repress activities that make it impossible for persons to live in proximity. It
lays down what may be done and what may not be done, and for many, law is a set of primary
rules.
2. Secondary rules we now see are "meta-rules", rules on rules, and in a sense are more
basic than the "object rules" the primary rules, because they prescribe how primary rules are
generated and recognized.
Criticisms
 Dwarkin pointed out that legal system does not comprise only rules but it consists of
principles also. So to call the legal system of rules is not proper. Sometimes those principles
are more important than those rules.
 Hart also failed to provide a true character of law, but this contribution noteworthy as a
bridge-builder of Natural Law to Positivism through Semi sociological School of law.
K. Habermas' Theory of Law

Proponent
Jurgen Habermas
Description
Norms should be a rational consensus in which lawmakers must be able to justify their existence. In the
Structure of Linguistics, Habermas argues that human interactions are symbolically mediated on the
basis of the use of language through speech. He argues that communicative actions do not imply that all
the claims are accepted or that no one or more of them will be rejected. According to him, the
acceptability of legal argumentation is determined by the quality of the discourse in which a position is
defended.
If all parties involved can reach an agreement on a norm in the ideal speech situation, that norm is
considered rationally formed.
On a philosophical level, Habermas posits an intimate connection between law and morality, whereby
he maintains that law, even in highly rationalized societies, retains a critical normative dimension.

Jurgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action serves as a theory of communication for
development and social change.

a possibility of advocatory agreements on behalf of those who are not present, since the criterion of
normative validity is that in a rational discourse all 'those affected' could have agreed.
Criticism
Weber ’ s theory of law that morality and legality are distinct issues , and that each is better off
without the other.
Normative Rightness may be subjected to immediate changes. As norms change rapidly from time
to time, perception of what is right may change too.
AUSTIN’S THEORY
I. A description of the theory
- A state shall be governed by commands given by a sovereign person and that
sanctions are important for every command.
- Legal positivism – Command theory of law. Law is the command of the sovereign
backed with a sanction in the event of a non-compliance.
- There is one supreme person or authority will give orders to everyone and the
society shall follow and shall be subjected to sanctions.
- Austin's theory of law or the positive law school of thought would recognize the law
maker's command as legitimate. Questions about the law's morality or immorality is
not important.
- Austin’s theory somehow defines that the law is a duty or obligation laid down by a
competent or legitimate authority and such disobedience may lead into imposing of
such sanctions.
II. Proponents
- Jeremy Benthan – father of modern utilitarianism
- Justice Wendell Holms Jr.
- Hans Kelsen proponent
III. Significance to the development of legal systems

- The divine law is the highest law in the world. The divine law is the foundation of the
laws created by governments. In other words, divine law is supreme over other laws.
- Austin laid down many of his propositions as deduced from English law as it was
during his time. The credit goes to Austin for opening a new era approach.
- Austin was intimate to great thinkers and philosophers of his time like Benthan and
Hill and he wiped out many false notions which had obscured the true meaning of
law and legal terms.
- Austin's classification and analysis of the concepts of English law has served as a
guide for better English analytical jurists.
- Austin's theory attains the notion of simplicity consistency and clarity of exposition.
Austin's method is described as characteristic of English jurisprudence.
- Austin's theory was widely accepted in English and American jurisprudence. Later on
his theory received increasing attention and respect from the Continent and
Germans.
- Later Analytical theories have improved upon Austin's theory and have given a more
practical and logical basis. Jurists like Salmond and Gray have improved upon it and
considerably modified the analytical positivist approach. The Vienna school of law is
the outbreak of Austin's theory.
- Even the defects of Austin's theory is the constant source of illumination; for his
errors are often the mis-statement of truths of central importance for the
understanding of law and society.
- Austin as a jurist kept himself free from the rival political ideologies of nationalism
and internationalism. Even one of the great critics, Olivecrona, also acknowledges
him as the pioneer of modern positivist approach to law. Thus, Austin made great
contribution to jurisprudence.
- The theory acts as a foundation for those who are interested in law to understand the
nature of it so that it could be later used to re-shape relations according to the
modern societal needs.
IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

- The command from certain group of people could be promulgated to adapt to
changes in society
- Significance to the development of the legal system. According to Austin’s the law is
command so one of the laws stated is divine law commanded by God to his people
then the government must create or created the laws in accordance with the
command of divine law or by the law of God. No other law is supreme than this
divine law. in creating the law of the government all are base in this divine law.
V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

- Austin talks about the Divine Law and Human Law. He also talks about that
legislation should be based in Divine Law. So we can use Austin's Theory in
imposing penalties whether the crime committed is mala in se or mala prohibita.
- It represents a continuing manifestation of our commitment, in this respect at least,
to the Austinian or positivist concept of law. Under this view, it can be created only
by the state. It can flow from no other source (Caltex Philippines Inc. v Customs
Arrastre Service, G.R. No. L-26632 May 29, 1970).
VI. Criticism on the theory

- When Austin said that sovereign is the creator of laws, he disregards the fact that
foundation of law lies in common consciousness of the people which manifests
themselves in customs. Hence, it overlooks Customary law which has always been
extensively respected and followed. Personal laws like Muslim law and Hindu law,
existed long before sovereign began to legislate. So far, these laws were not only
acknowledged but followed with immense devotion.
- Law making powers are dispersed in many modern societies and it is difficult to
identify a "sovereign" in Austin's sense. - Positive law has the disadvantage of
obscuring the normative character of the law which derives from our intuitive moral
realism about social forms.
- Threats do not give rise to obligations. If they did, there would be no essential
difference between a gunman's threat and an ordinary piece of legislation.
- The most influential criticisms of legal positivism all flow, in one way or another, from
the suspicion that it fails to give morality its due. A theory that insists on the facticity
of law seems to contribute little to our understanding that law has important functions
in making human life go well, that the rule of law is a prized ideal, and that the
language and practice of law is highly moralized. Accordingly, positivism’s critics
maintain that the most important features of law are not to be found in its source-
based character, but in law’s capacity to advance the common good, to secure
human rights, or to govern with integrity.
Functional or Sociological Approach
I. Description
- The law is both means of social control and progress. This approach looks into a law
as a social phenomenon, as a measure of social trends and reengineering. Ideally in
this approach, the law should balance the diverse interests and institutions of society
and promote progressive national policies. (Philosophy and Theory of Law by Nicolo
F. Bernardo & Oscar B. Bernardo).
II. Proponents
- William James
- Charles Louis Baron de Montesquieu
- R. Von Jhering
- Roscoe Pound
- Max Weber
- Roberto Mangabeira Unger
- Eugen Ehrlich
III. Significance to the Development of Legal Systems

- The sociological approach has been used to recognize and advance the rights and
interests of marginal groups, mainly the Bill of Rights of the underprivileged, over the
power wielded by the State.
- Sociological school influences jurisprudence, where the approach recognizes that
there are various factors, overlapping and competing values among institutions,
organizations, communities, and interest groups, which the public policy to balance
interest must not ignore.
IV. Practical Use of the Theory

- The sociological approach has been used to recognize and advance the rights and
interests of marginal groups, mainly the Bill of Rights of the underprivileged, over the
power wielded by the State.
o Example: Before passing a certain bill, a significant individual, social group, or
institution is heard during committee hearing.
V. Cases/Policies
- OPSA V. FACTORAN – Challenges executive action on Timber License
Agreement. The court, on the basis of Section 16 linked with the right to health,
recognized a right to a balanced and healthful ecology and the correlative duty to
refrain from impairing the environment which would protect the rights of the youths,
unborn and next generations.
- “Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013”. (RA 10533) - Learners will be more
equipped to deal with higher education, readiness to join the workforce, and
skill competency in the global job market
- R.A. No. 10354- Responsible Parenthood and Reproductive Health - Its
importance, particularly in helping Filipino mothers survive pregnancy and childbirth,
giving couples and individuals the tools to make informed choices about their
families, and contributing to the improvement of the sexual and reproductive health
of young people, to the eradication of gender-based violence, and to the prevention
of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV/AIDS, make the RPRH Law a critical
piece of legislation
VI. Criticisms
- Max Weber, one of the main proponents of this school criticized the
institutionalization and bureaucratization of laws that have become unresponsive to
concrete situations. Too much bureaucracy where too many voices, concerns, and
concerns are heard and considered tends to cause delay in the passing and
approval of public policies.
- Social Approach view the world as a system of equilibrium and homeostasis that has
need to be met to survive and composed of interrelated parts that contributed to the
whole. This kind of approach may also be seen because of oversimplification. The
question that may be raised would be “Functional for whom?” Functional for some
may be dysfunctional for others.
THE CRITICAL THEORY
I. Description
- The law is interconnected with social issues especially social biases. The laws
established are for the interest of the law-makers. The law has been imposed for the
benefit of the privileged. The central theme of critical legal theory is to doubt the
prospect of uncovering a universal foundation of law based on reason. The purpose
of the theory is to challenge people to be socio-politically knowledgeable and to mold
the society by being critical about the legal system through “hermeneutics of
suspicion”. Such suspicion has led to development of critical feminist theory, critical
race theory, and post-modernism. Other purpose includes encouraging people to
initiate revolutions and uprisings.
II. Proponents
- Roberto Mangabeira Unger
- Alan Hunt
- Robert W. Gordon
- Duncan Kennedy

- Since it opens our minds regarding social biases and issues, it imposes a significant
challenge for everyone to reflect and envision structural arrangement which could
create more opportunities for more people in order for the law to be of benefit not
only to the dominant group, but to everyone. This way, we can help improve and
develop our legal system.
- Since the theory has pinpoint what are wrong on existing system, thus helping the
society especially lawmakers to correct such and help the society in discontinuing
and stopping such system.

- Critical theory can be a guide for social action. It calls for investigation of the social
order and understanding of why collective needs go unmet but the existing power
structure is maintained. Critical theory asserts that through self-awareness people
can transform society.
- Capitalism is a social structure that grants, even empower private ownership. In
Critical Legal Theory, capitalism has been emphasized as part of what binds people
to pitiless laws. This is because in Capitalism there is heightened right of private
ownership. Hence, there is an inevitable anticipation of misuse of this extended right
to ownership. The laws, therefore are presented as CURE or at least a remedy for
excessive utilization of private ownership. The CLT, then pointsout the problem that
the actors who creates, execute, and implement laws are those who possess more
means or ownership in the society. There is, therefore, a remarkable tendency that
the creation and implementation of laws can be circumvented in favor of their private
interests.
- One practical use would be how a Bill becomes a Law here in the Philippines. It
requires 3 readings which include discussion, proper discourse, and debate. This
shows that Congress are being critical and legally suspicious of every proposed bill.
- The Critical theory has led to the creation of critical feminist theory which then lead to
different movements catering the rights and interest of women and people who
identify themselves as women. In the Philippines, Gabriela party list advocated
women’s welfare. Worldwide, actress Emma Watson initiated the HeForShe
Movement which advocated women and men’s welfare.

- Based on our understanding of the theory, it helps in the creation and
implementation of Minority (PWD, Senior Citizen, Student) Discount. Through
challenging the system, law makers had prioritized the interest of the minority rather
than focusing on the benefit of majority.
- The Critical Legal Theory also mentioned the undeniable existence of racism; thus
lawmakers have proposed bills to address societal problem. Examples are Republic
Act No. 10911 (An Act Prohibiting Discrimination Against Any Individual In
Employment On Account Of Age And Providing Penalties Therefor), Presidential
Decree No. 966 (Declaring Violations Of The International Convention Of The
Elimination Of All Forms Of Racial Discrimination To Be Criminal Offenses And
Providing Penalties Therefor, RA 6725, and Anti-Discrimination Act of 2011.
VI. Criticisms
- The law is harsh, but it is the law.
- Critical theories are not without their critics. Perhaps the major criticism of them is
that they fail to provide rational standards by which they can justify themselves, by
which they can show themselves to be "better" than other theories of knowledge,
science, or practice.
- Another criticism is that Critical Theory necessarily entails the critique of ideology-
understood in the negative sense and used as label for worldviews that exclusively
reflect the particularistic interest of dominant social groups and yet are presented as
universally valid or true.
- Additionally, Critical theory has been criticized for not offering any clear road map to
political action, often explicitly repudiating any solutions because this theory focuses
on power structures.
ONCE UPON A TIME APPROACH
I. Description
- History of Law as a study has its evolution
- It is connected to the development of civilizations and it operates in the wider context
of Social History.
o Ancient Law
o Middle Ages
o Islamic Law
o Southern Asia
o South/East Asia
o European Law
o United States
o Canon Law
- A law is not made for nothing.
- The history of the law is encompassing.
o How LAWS originated.
o Why it was created.
o How it has evolved.
- Laws do not develop in isolation.
- Recording of Evolution of laws and the technical explanation on how these laws
have evolved with a view of a better understanding of the various LEGAL
CONCEPTS we have today.
- Law operates in a CONTEXTUAL MANNER.
o Language
o Cultural beliefs
o Traditions
o Customs
o Temperaments
o Common experiences
o Consciousness
- Sources of law
o Epics
o Folklore
o Religion
o Political Events
o Social
o Cultural
o CUSTOMARY that provide a window into the sentiments, archetypes, and
ideals.
II. Proponents
- Friedrich Karl Von Savigny
o German Jurist
o Founder of the HISTORICAL SCHOOL OF LAW in 1779.
o Law is the product of the people's life living in a particular society and it is the
outcome of a culture of a society.
o It embodies the whole history of a nation's culture and reflects inner
convictions that are rooted in society's common experience.
o Central purpose of this theory was to establish the CONCEPT OF
CUSTOMARY LAW – true living law.
- Henry Sumner Maine
o British Jurist/Historian
o Thesis - ANCIENT LAW
o Its object, as stated in the preface, was "to indicate some of the earliest ideas
of mankind, as they are reflected in ancient law, and to point out the relation
of those ideas to modern thought.
o Law and society developed "from status to contract”.
Lectures for the Inns of Court (Professional Associations for Barristers in
England and Wales.)
- George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel
o German Philosopher
o (1770–1831)
o Period of German idealism
o Comprehensive and systematic approach
o Writings in Philosophy – Teleological approach
o Historical developments of his contributions were used by Karl Marx –
Materialistic Theory – Communism.

- Broad historical-comparative method
- It is explicitly critical
- Intellectual Historians – study IDEAS
- ABSTRACT PROPOSITION – critical application
- Incorporating CULTURE, LIFE and HISTORY – make it concrete/definite.
- The brand of history in determining laws is to critique current conditions from a
historical (and comparative) perspective.
- Global Issues:
- Global income inequality - employment
- Global warming - Environment
- Data Protection – Information Technology
- Tax/Labor – Governing Laws
- Migrantation – Human Trafficking
- Historical analysis of law appears as one mode of critical analysis among others,
including comparative analysis of law, economic analysis of law, and philosophical,
sociological, or ethical analysis of law
-

- Historical view or understanding is important to fully appreciate how laws evolve and
how laws are created.
- The revisions of the Philippine Constitution shows that the law must be read on the
basis of historic struggles of the Filipino People.
- This starts from the creation of the Treaty of Paris to the Treaty with the US and the
Great Britain with regard to the territory of the Philippines which is a display of the
creation of the historical profile and identity.
- The historical view for the creation of law has also allowed for the creation of statutes
unique to the culture of people creating it.
- In the Philippine setting, the Lupon ng Barangay is a unique Filipino system where
an amicable settlement is done before any court. This tradition of settlement is
evident in Philippine history even before the laws of our Republic were created.
- This amicable settlement is formalized in PD 1508 as amended by RA 7160.

- Universal Declaration of Human Rights
- Rizal Subject – mandatory to teach in higher level of the academe.
VI. Criticisms
- The theory is criticized for its tendency to have exclusive love for one's country
leading to xenophobia, ethnic cleansing, discrimination on immigrants, racial
superiority, separatist movements, and opposition to globalization.
- As mentioned by the German proponent Freidrich Karl von Savigny, law proceeds
from a voltgeist, essentially the "spirit" or cultural trait of particular groups of people.
This can be dangerous as this has the tendency to evolve into xenophobia. Case in
point: German policies in WWII to purify the Aryan race.
- As for ethnic cleansing, Mindanao is an island with a culture and history quite
different from the rest of the Philippines. Islam has dominated the island for centuries.
Its proud mujaheddin have defended their homes against colonial invaders from
Spain, the United States and Japan. Now the Philippine government rules Mindanao,
and they are exploiting the resources, diluting the Muslim majority and containing
tribal peoples in enclaves of underdevelopment. Settlers from the crowded and
predominantly Christian Luzon and Visayan islands have grown into a dominant
culture, seizing Muslim homelands declared 'public domain' by the courts of Manila.
- Newcomers prospered, while the indigenous were displaced and abandoned to
poverty. In terms of xenophobia is the WWII holocaust. Nazi Germany designated
human beings whose lives were unimportant, or those who should be killed outright:
Lebensunwertes Leben, or "life unworthy of life". The phrase was applied to the
mentally impaired and later to the "racially inferior," or "sexually deviant," as well as
to "enemies of the state" both internal and external. From very early in the war, part
of Nazi policy was to murder civilians en masse, especially targeting Jews.
- Its tendency to have exclusive love for one's country.
- Xenophobia
- Ethnic cleansing
- Discrimination on immigrants
- Racial superiority
- Separatist movements
- Opposition to globalization
- Law proceeds from a voltgeist, the "spirit" or cultural trait of particular groups of
people. (German proponent Freidrich Karl von Savigny)
- Case in point:
o German policies in WWII
o to purify the Aryan race
- WWII Holocaust
- Nazi Germany designated human beings whose lives were unimportant, or those
who should be killed outright:
- Lebensunwertes Leben, or "life unworthy of life".
- ETHNIC CLEANSING
o Mindanao is an island with a culture and history quite different from the rest of
the Philippines.
o Islam has dominated the island for centuries.
o Proud Mujaheddin have defended their homes against colonial invaders.
o Now the Philippine government rules Mindanao.
o Exploitation of resources
o Diluting the Muslim majority/tribal peoples in enclaves of underdevelopment
with promises of development.
o Now the Philippine government rules Mindanao
 Exploitation of resources
 Diluting the Muslim majority/tribal peoples in enclaves of
underdevelopment with promises of development.
- Settlers from the crowded and predominantly Christian Luzon and Visayan islands
have grown into a dominant culture, seizing Muslim homelands declared 'public
domain' by the courts of Manila.
- Newcomers prospered, while the indigenous were displaced and abandoned to
poverty.
THE ECONOMIC APPROACH
I. Description
- The purpose of law is to increase the balance of happiness in the society through
wealth maximization – in law, there is always an attached appropriations but its main
thinking of having this approach is to balance the societies and the people’s
happiness through wealth or money
 we maximize the utilization of wealth in order that society will be benefit with
the laws which are legislated/proposed. Every political leader would always
look into the economic benefit of a law to be passed
 inherent power of the government (taxation). If there is no money from the
public, we cannot propel to become a progressive society. We regulate the
money from the people in order to attain happiness – development of our
legal system
 pertains to the relationship of our economy and government money. How we
could collaborate the money that we have in the government which affects the
economic situation of our country
 policies are formulated to protect and boost the economy; loss is present for
the competitive market
II. Proponents
- Judge Richard Posner took the lead in “economic jurisprudence” and
“consequentialism.”
o For him, the purpose of law is to increase the balance of happiness in society
through “wealth maximization.” In Problems of Jurisprudence, Posner
explained that wealth maximization is the sum of all tangible and intangible
goods and services, including the value of rights. “Make everyone affected by
them better off, or at least no worse off,” he said. Wealth maximization is an
ethic of productivity and social cooperation. Good laws bear the imprint of
economic analysis.
- Ronald H. Coase
o argued that in the absence of transaction costs, an efficient solution to any
economic conflict arising from an externality could be arrived at regardless of
the initial distribution of property rights, without the need for a government to
impose a solution through regulation, taxation, or subsidy. This idea would
come to be known as the Coase Theorem, win Coase his place at the
prestigious University of Chicago, and greatly advance the field known as law
and economics.
- Gary Becker
o The basis of an economic approach to law is the assumption that the people
involved with the legal system act as rational maximizers of their satisfactions.
When will parties to a legal dispute settle rather than litigate? Since this
choice involves uncertainty-the outcome of the litigation is not known for sure
in advance-the relevant body of economic theory is that which
analyzes decision-making by rational maximizers under conditions of
uncertainty. If we are willing to assume, at least provisionally, that litigants
behave rationally, then this well-developed branch of economic theory.

- Inherent power of the government (taxation). If there is no money from the public, we
cannot propel to become a progressive society. We regulate the money from the
people in order to attain happiness – development of our legal system.
 How economics plays a vital role or have a bearing in assisting the
state in catering the social happiness of the state; better picture on how
we can address socio-economic problems
 Used for social development – tool to examine choices relating the
formation and structure of law; considers how legislation would improve
market conditions
 Weigh the ends of legislation economically, laws are evaluated based
on their effects in the economy
 Dominant over all other theories; strong assertion of tools of economic
reasoning which can offer the best possibilities for a more justified legal
practice in terms of economy
 What people gain

- 4Ps – elevating those people who are financially challenged. It is a law that uplifts
the economic livelihood of the disadvantaged sector of our economy [taxation law –
tax is the lifeblood of the economy].
- South over North Korea, of Argentina over Cuba, and of Japan over Southeast Asia
- Understanding the consumer protection act – rights of consumers
- Even the 4Ps has its own share of leakage issues. While it has indeed helped
improve Filipino children’s access to education, Reyes et al. (2015) noted that it has
a leakage rate of 29 percent. This means roughly 3 in every 10 beneficiaries of the
said program are not poor and do not even deserve to enjoy its benefits. One
possible reason behind this leakage is the fact that the program uses outdated data
in targeting its beneficiaries

- Pertinent Laws/Jurisprudence:
1. General Appropriations Act – how govt utilizes and maximizes its resources to
benefit the whole society
2. National Internal Revenue Code
3. VAT – economical balance in the state
4. International trade policy – tariffs
5. Sales law
6. BP 122
7. Political law – how we make use of politics by making laws in relation to
formulating laws regarding economics
8. Minimum wage legislation
9. Salary standardization law (SSS)
10. BAMBE Law - Not to pay income tax (MSMEs)
11. Local Investment and incentive Code (LIIC)
12. GR 179334 – SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
AND HIGHWAYS and DISTRICT ENGINEER CELESTINO R. CONTRERAS
v SPOUSES HERACLEO and RAMONA TECSON
 Ponente Justice Peralta
 Justice Leonen (dissenting): economic of present value – money value
before compared to the value of money now
a. One good basis is to consider the economic approach in
considering the real value of money of today
13. The Interaction of the people and the government and private entities how the
policies affect the people, how the people react to these policies, and how
does it benefit the society as a whole (e.g. Labor Law – The welfare of the
people is the Supreme Law).
14. COVID affected Ph contract law (labor), changes of status quo of the PH
contract law – nothing protected laborers when COVID started
1. labor contracts being affected by the measures implemented by the
government and the mandate of temporary business closures bore
question of whether a party may invoke the defense of “force majeure”
to be relieved of its contractual obligation by reason of the COVID-19
pandemic
2. Since it was established that this pandemic falls under the general
definition of force majeure, it may commonly be stipulated between the
employer and the employee however the clause may differ from
contract to contract. Employees may still not be excused from their
obligations if the labor contract they’re under do not have force majeure
clauses/provisions and that there could be certain stipulations provided
under the contract that excuses them from this defense. If a contract
does not include a force majeure clause, the doctrine of frustration may
apply, but as discussed above, there is a high threshold for this
doctrine being engaged, and the contract needs to have become
incapable of being performed (Marino, 2020).
3. It is highly unlikely that most employers, in drafting their contracts of
employment, would have contemplated the current circumstances;
particularly the level of interruption and disruption to work as we know it,
which has been occasioned by the Government's response to the
COVID-19 pandemic (Oguntuga, Olorunmaiye, 2020). Article 1174 of
the Civil Code provides exceptions to force majeure, which includes
contractual stipulations between the employer and employee.
4. The first remedy to the arosed COVID-19 pandemic effect to contracts
is the Force Majeure Clause. Although disease and/or epidemics do
not feature in the non-exclusive list of events and circumstances that
follows this definition of force majeure, it seems likely that the COVID-
19 outbreak would in principle be covered by the general definition set
out above. However, it still depends upon whether there is a force
majeure clause in the relevant contract and the specific wording of any
such clause like disease, epidemic or pandemic is stated (Short, 2020).
- The Bayanihan to Heal As One Act already provides several potential remedies to
continuing contractual liabilities like grace periods for private and public payments
not limited to salary ones and for commercial rents paid by micro, small, and medium
enterprises failing due within the period of community quarantines. It also includes
direction on the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) to accelerate and undertake
massive promotion of online commerce and offer technical and financial assistance
through government financial institutions to those engaged in e-commerce, such as
those involved in internet retail, digital financial services, digital media, and ride-
hailing. As the COVID-19 situation rapidly develops in the country and around the
world, contracting parties should monitor corresponding enactments by the
Philippine Government (Lumauig, Sablan, 2020).
VI. Criticisms
- One-sided paying of taxes. Only the government maximizes but in the part of the
people who pay taxes, there is nothing to maximize
- Lesser revenue generation
- Those who benefit are those who are already rich
- The rich enjoy more freedom compared to the poor ones
- Unbalanced application of Distributive justice and Equitable justice
HABERMAS THEORY OF LAW
I. Description
- General level to an institutionalization of norms
o Habermas posit or presumed the intimate connection between law and
morality whereby he maintains that law, even in highly rationalized societies,
retains a critical normative dimension.
- Moral Justification
o To retain Modern law for justification, communication and debate was utilized
to cope with trend of technocratization.
- Rationalization (Legality and Legitimacy)
o He added a philosophical component to determine the rational foundation of
just law or the connection between law and rights.
o Thus, it is not because something is legal that it is accepted as just.
- Jürgen Habermas's theory of communicative action rests on the idea that social
order ultimately depends on the capacity of actors to recognize the intersubjective
validity of the different claims on which social cooperation depends.
- Norms should be a rational consensus in which lawmakers must be able to justify
their existence. In the Structure of Linguistics, Habermas argues that human
interactions are symbolically mediated on the basis of the use of language through
speech. He argues that communicative actions do not imply that all the claims are
accepted or that no one or more of them will be rejected. According to him, the
acceptability of legal argumentation is determined by the quality of the discourse in
which a position is defended.
- If all parties involved can reach an agreement on a norm in the ideal speech situation,
that norm is considered rationally formed. Theory refers to the institutionalization of
norm, of creation of a more equal and rational society. Habermas explains that
man’s treatment of “universal pragmatics,” deals with the relation between signs or
linguistic expressions and their users, ” keeps man from dealing with speech as
strictly a set of propositions whose function is limited to information. Put simply, there
exists a speech-act dimension, which means that man is not restricted to the
language of the text or speech alone, but whose text or speech is also broadened by
the notion of action “beyond the purely strategic and exploiting the richness and
potency of communication.
- Thus, speech does not only pertain to utterances made, but is also related to action
and communication – more specifically, that it has an illocutionary component. It is
the illocutionary component that establishes the validity of claims.
- Habermas’ concept of law refers at the most general level to an institutionalization of
norms.Thus, on a philosophical level, Habermas posits an intimate connection
between law and morality, whereby he maintains that law, even in highly rationalized
societies, retains a critical normative dimension.
II. Proponents
- Jurgen Habermas
o Sole or main proponent was the Habermas’ Theory of Law.
o He is a German sociologist, philosopher focuses mainly on foundations of
social theory, epistemology, democracy and the rule of law works.
o Born in Dusseldorf, Germany in 1929, and was a witness to Germany’s loss in
the war with the Allies in 1945.
o Studied at the University of Gottingen and the University of Bonn.
o Doctorate degree in Philosophy - University of Bonn in 1954.
o Habermas Social Theory elevated for the past decades from 1960s onwards.
o Philosophical aspirations with sociological interests in developing a theory of
societies in the modern and late-modern age were developed and followed
through younger generation scholar.
- Jürgen Habermas, a German social philosopher, has significantly influenced how
academics approach a variety of societal problems. He has paved the way for a
logical paradigm shift with his two-volume works The Theory of Communicative
Action and The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity. He has established himself as
a supporter of modernity—but a certain sort of modernity—moving from a philosophy
of consciousness to a philosophy of language and communication, the ideas of
procedural communicative rationality, and eventually to discourse theory and
deliberative democracy. The stance of Habermas suggests a critical view of the traits
of classical modernity, including its colonization of the living world and technical
rationality.

- In the differentiation of system and lifeworld, law fulfills a central function by legally
institutionalizing the independent functioning of money and power in, respectively,
the economic and administrative systems.
- The significance of the role of law is evidently shown that political authority has
- historically evolved from judicial offices.
- In a lasting sense relevant to contemporary societies, the special connection
between law and politics is confirmed by the fact that legislation is a political function
and that political authority
- Habermas’ theory of law paves the way for an essential philosophical consideration
to establish the rational basis of just law or the relationship between the law and
rights. Furthermore, Jurgen Habermas contends that sociological research is
necessary to understand how the law functions and also with regards to the changes
in modern society.
- Jurgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action serves as a theory of
communication for development and social change. In the main his theory has
focused on analysis of industrial or postindustrial societies, but it is also relevant to
the study of development and social change. This relevance extends beyond
questions related to the public sphere. Habermas’s work involves a general theory of
social evolution. This he shares with early modernization along with his defense of at
least some of the enlightenment traditions they shared. At the same time, the theory
of communicative action has deep and systematic differences from modernization
theory. Its critical theory shares with the many critics of modernization theory a deep
apprehension regarding the negative effects of scientism and uncontrolled market
rationality. It is fundamentally critical of the functionalist reason underlying early
modernization research. Its theory of the lifeworld provides an elaborate framework
for analyzing cultural change.
- It offers a sophisticated defense of universalizable human rights that eschews the
idea of a priori universal rights.
o The Theory of Communicative Action, Habermas interprets the ambivalent
implications of the development of welfare law on the basis of a dual concept
of law. On the one hand, law as an institution refers to legal norms that remain
in need of justification on the basis of the intimate connection of law to
morality. Habermas in this case mentions certain areas of law that are closely
related to deeply held belief systems, such as criminal law. On the other hand,
Habermas argues that law can also function as a medium, in which case it
suffices that legal regulations operate effectively by means of a specified
procedure, such as in the case of business and administrative law. Whereas
law as an institution belongs to the lifeworld, law as a steering medium is
relieved of substantive justification because it operates in the political and
economic systems on the basis of functional needs.

- Natural Inherent Rationality of Human beings
o The law, possibly in the layman’s eyes, is a product of the human mind and
human behavior cannot be produced without man’s rationality.
o For Instance,
o When a person attempt to answer the question of “what is law?” or the legality
of the law.
o Man’s rational or thinking will definitely come up to argue and justify the
existence of law.
- The Theory of Communicative Action, Knowledge, and human interests
o Habermas “began to develop a distinctive method for elaborating the
relationship between a theoretical social science of modern societies.
o This limits to his claim of “universal pragmatics” that he took up the speech-
act and the claim it makes, drawing his readers beyond the narrowness of
dealing only with speech in terms of propositions and functions to information.
- The World of Norms and their Validity
o This expansion by Habermas is parallel to the “process of nomization”:
externalization, objectification, and internalization which assert the
concretization of the mind’s contents to establish institutions which build social
relations.
o For instance, (Philippine Setting)
o Article VIII of the Civil Code provides that “judicial decisions applying or
interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of
the Philippines.” This given law does not merely make a statement on judicial
decisions. Once it is included in the world of objective contents of thought, it
becomes part of a recognized fact of institution.
o For instance,
o Rational discourse of the legislative process of “how a bill become a law”
wherein it passes (3) three readings: reading of the proposed bill, referral to
the proper committee, committee deliberations and public consultations,
submission of the committee report containing the respective proposals, floor
deliberations by the representatives of the house, voting for the bill’s
amendment, adoption or abandonment
- The Habermas theory in relation to law and morality, justifies that norms, whether
they be moral or legal is under on the a possibility of advocatory agreements on
behalf of those who are not present, since the criterion of normative validity is that in
a rational discourse all 'those affected' could have agreed As an example, consider
the behaviors or rules that everyone who would be impacted by them could accept
as participants in the reasonable conversation. Another example, is the demand that
whatever justifications there may be for the standard be defendable to all potentially
affected parties with justification that all potentially affected parties may accept.
- In Habermas theory, the principle of universalization holds that for a norm to be valid,
the consequences and side effects of its general observance for the satisfaction of
each person's particular interests must be accepted by all. For example, in the
existence of tribal war, in order to preserve order and peace in the society, the rival
tribes will do the bodong. A way to establish rules in dealing with forthcoming events
in the lives of the tribes. In Habermas theory, the principle of rationality will invoke
the rights of the concerned parties, in which claims are established. For example, in
order the claims will be taken into proceedings, each party will present evidence that
which justify their claims. This is due process. Just like in court proceedings, trials
commence for the judgment of truth.
- In Habermas theory, the principle of rationality will invoke the rights of the concerned
parties, in which claims are established. For example, in order the claims will be
taken into proceedings, each party will present evidence that which justify their
claims. Just like in court proceedings, trials commence for the judgment of truth.. In
Habermas theory, he proposed the principle of democracy. This is legitimate
lawmaking. It says that the law must be consistent with the constitution. For example,
in check and balance, the Judicial department will check on the constitutionality of
the law. If it violates, then it will be amended or archived or stopped.
- Habermas conceived the relation of law and morality from a normative point of view,
and can be explained with the help of justification of action, whether moral or legal
norms.
- Going more into law, Habermas proposes a principle of democracy that should
establish a procedure of legitimate lawmaking. A process of legislation that involves
the assent of all citizens in a discursive process is the source of the legitimacy of law.
Meaning that, every citizen must be given equal right to participate.
- The source of all legitimacy for Habermas is the democratic law-making power,
which is also his principle of popular sovereignty. He claims that everything that
came from legitimation is open to criticism, that’s why it must always be based in the
forum of rational discourse.
- Habermas insists that there should be a link between law and ethics and that law
must be harmonized with moral principles of justice and solidarity in the conduct of
the people. He adds that resistance to law, willful disobedience and open defiance
are merely manifestations of cognitive dissonance that result from the lack of such
harmony.

- In the case of Estrada vs. Desierto and Estrada vs. Macapagal-Arroyo in
demonstrating an issue in legitimacy and legitimation. Mr. Justice Reynato Puno, the
ponencia of the aforementioned cases, delivered an opinion consistent with that of
Habermas’ theory when he wrote that “rights in a democracy are not decided by the
mob whose judgment is dictated by rage and not by reason. Nor are rights
necessarily resolved by the “power of number,” for in a democracy, the dogmatism of
the majority is not and should never be the definition of the rule of law.”
- The rule of law is not therefore simply adjudged by the number of people adhering to
it but should be particularly dictated by reasonable people who are not overcome by
their rage in establishing a specific norm. The rule of law is a concept higher than the
“power of number,” such that the former requires the rationality of the human mind. It
is therefore not enough that thousands of people gathered during EDSA II to call for
the ouster of the then Pres. Joseph Estrada. It is in the resolution and the
submission of this issue to the proper discourse in order to form a norm and rule of
law that is accepted by all.
VI. Criticisms
- Hugh Baxter, Boston University School of Law Baxter challenged Habermas’s
general theory of adjudication. First was the difficulty he identifies is that Habermas
offers no account of judicial interpretation and on one hand Baxter’s contention of
that equally serious shortcoming is that Habermas’s theory leaves no place for
common-law adjudication.
- Habermas could argue straightforwardly that common-law adjudication is simply
illegitimate, he makes no such argument explicitly.
- Moreover, he contends, if he had made such an argument, it would have been
inconsistent with the premises of a “reconstructive” theory. Such a theory cannot
reject, as a simple mistake, a practice that is as basic to the reconstructed order as
common-law adjudication is to Anglo-American legal systems
- Haberma's concept of law creates an intimate relation between law and morality but
are still two different distinct concepts. These two are different aspects yet can
normally be correlated. It must reflect in a way how we must deal with morality.
These two when dealt with altogether and not two different concepts conclude to
have a better perspective and to conform with the society's ideals in a wider view.
- Weber’s theory of law that morality and legality are distinct issues , and that each is
better off without the other.
- Normative Rightness may be subjected to immediate changes. As norms change
rapidly from time to time, perception of what is right may change too. Since,
according to this theory, validity of a proposition is not legal or moral in character
(rather a normative sense), changes on "what is valid" may not be acceptable to
some groups. This may result in frequent conflicts and societal divisions.
- Some critics of Jürgen Habermas have charged that his ideas have an affinity with
authoritarianism. This criticism rests on a fundamental misinterpretation of
Habermas' project for communicative ethics. Political authoritarianism is deeply
incompatible with his conceptions of practical rationality and normative legitimacy.
- Habermas contrasts his view with that of Weber, who concludes that modern law is
separated from morality. This article first discusses the relationship between morality
and law as conceived by Habermas. The problem is how legality can claim
legitimacy, a question that Weber tried to solve with his theory of the formal
rationality of modern law. Habermas's solution is the concept of procedural rationality.
The critique then examines Habermas's conception of the relationship between law
and society within a normative view
- Habermas’s theory of the constitutional state: the so-called “discourse principle,”
according to which a norm (whether legal or moral) is justified only if it could receive
universal assent in an unconstrained discourse. This is very difficult to attain as
every person has their own norm and the possibility of accepting change is minimal.
HART THEORY
I. Description
- For Hart, law is a system of “social rules.” Tribal societies, being closely knit and
related, started first with a “regime of primary rules” (rules of conduct) where the
sanctions for misbehaviors were made through indeterminate means of social
pressure and conformity.
II. Proponents
- Herbert Lionel Adolphous Hart
o Chair of Jurisprudence at the Oxford University, presented a different
evolution of law, contrary to naturalists who trace human law to natural law,
with his version of “soft positivism” in The Concept of Law.

- Essential to Hart's theory then is a system of "primary" and "secondary" rules. Rules
are explained by rules. This is essentially his positivism. "Primary rules" repress
activities that make it impossible for persons to live in proximity.
- Primary rules lay down what may be done and what may not be done, and for many,
law is a set of primary rules. The only trouble is that when one has nothing more
than primary rules, some nasty problems do arise:
- The rule of recognition argues that citizens voluntarily obey the laws of the land
because they accept as valid the rulemaking institution (e.g. congress's) claim to the
exercise of authority.
- To remedy these flaws, early societies entered a “legal regime” that has three
characteristics: first, the creation of an authoritative list or text of rules written in a
document or carved in a public monument to be recognized as conclusive and valid
(“rule of recognition”). This disposes doubts on whether a rule exists as there is now
a written reference to cite or appeal to. Second, a reference to legislation to make
and repeal rules (“rules of change”). Third, a procedure to be followed to resolve
legal disputes (“rules of adjudication”)
- Secondary rules we now see are "meta-rules", rules on rules, and in a sense are
more basic than the "object rules" the primary rules, because they prescribe how
primary rules are generated and recognized. But there is something more interesting
about rules like the rule of recognition. On the one hand one can with good reason
talk of the rule of recognition as "law," although it is in fact the criterion by which law
is recognized.

- RA 9262 VAWC - Violence against Women and Children law was created due to the
rampant violence that women and children face. Women and children have been
found to be inherently weak compared to men. Because of this the government was
pressured by the society to afford extra protection for women and children. Hence,
the VAWC law.
- RA 9165 Comprehensive Drug Act
- RA 11313 An Act Defining Gender-Based Sexual Harassment in Streets, Public
Spaces, Online, Workplaces, and Educational or Training Institutions, Providing
Protective Measures and Prescribing Penalties Therefor

- The positivist approach has been criticized for its tendency to legalism, formalism,
and uncritical obedience to authority, which served dictatorial regimes. For example,
during the Nazi regime, laws were passed to exterminate the Jews, and the Nazis
would raise the defense that they were only following what was then valid official law.
- In the Philippine setting, the doctrine of enrolled bill is in fact a juridified policy of
judicial restraint, consequent to the rule of recognition that the Philippine Court
accepts.
VI. Criticisms
- This regime of unofficial rules has three defects: first, doubts arose as to the precise
scope of the rules as there was no authoritative reference, such as through a
declaration or text; second, the static traditional character of the rules as there were
no means to deliberately abrogate defunct customary rules; and third, the absence of
an official and consistent monopoly of sanctions.
THE INTERPRETIVIST/CONSTRUCTIVIST THEORY
I. Description
- Interpretivism about law offers a philosophical explanation of how institutional
practice, the legally significant actions and practices of political institutions
modifies legal rights and obligations.
- Characteristics
o Interpretivist Theory is SUBJECTIVE
 Subjective means looking at something with bias and is value laden.
 They believe people make own choices and is not connected to laws
of science or nature.
 Studies tend to be done in greater detail and looks at culture and how
people live their lives, unlike Positivists who tend to look at general
overview, Interpretivism has high validity because it is a true
representation and is trustworthy.
 Theory represents what “ought to be” or normative
II. Proponents
- Ronald Dworkin

- The expository purposes are:
o first, to show that Dworkin's legal philosophy presents a comprehensive and
unified conception of law;
o second, to show that Dworkin's conception is a significant and (in some
respects) superior alternative to the traditional views in legal theory--natural
law and legal positivism
- Dworkin believes that the law as an interpretive concept designed to construct an
internal, participants' view of a community's legal practice. This constructive
interpretation is meant to show that each community's legal practice embodies
principles and values drawn from the community's basic political morality. Moreover,
this interpretation both explains the existing elements of the legal record (e.g.,
statutes, precedents, regulations, etc.), and justifies these elements by
connecting them with a defensible background political morality

- Emphasis is placed on understanding the individual and their interpretation of the
world around them. Hence, the key tenet of the Interpretivist paradigm is that reality
is socially constructed (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998). This is why sometimes this
paradigm is also called the Constructivist paradigm
- By creating opportunities to experience the context directly, the interpretive approach
facilitates empathetic understanding of how particular values and norms
influence perceptions and behaviors
- It is used for Judicial Review
- Interpretivism is a thesis about the fundamental or constitutive explanation of
legal rights and obligations

- G.R. No. 127444
o This approach is particularly helpful in properly situating and analyzing
landmark interpretive applications of the doctrine in light of the varying legal
interpretations
o This case nudges the Court to revisit the doctrine on double jeopardy, a
revered constitutional safeguard against exposing the accused to the risk of
answering twice for the same offense. In this case, after trial on the merits, the
accused was acquitted for insufficiency of the evidence against him in the
cases for murder and frustrated murder (although his co-accused was
convicted), and finding in the illegal carrying of firearm that the act charged
did not constitute a violation of law
VI. Criticisms
- A Court-Centric Conception of Legality.
o to cast legal practice in its best moral light, as the interpretive method requires,
is to interpret it in light of legality
- Integrity and its Discontents.
o They are, he claims, a species of political rights and duties. We have other
political rights and duties. We have those that are the job of state institutions
other than courts to implement. For instance, it may be true that according to
the best theory of justice we have a political right to a minimum income. But
presumably the demand for a minimum income is properly addressed to, say,
the legislature
FORMS AND FUNDAMENTAL APPROACH
I. Description
- Legal formalism and conceptualism holds that the law is a strict science governed by
formal axioms, legal principles, and rules of logic.
- Formalism is also referred to as “textualism” or the “plain meaning” approach to the
law and “originalism” or the “original meaning” approach to the Constitution.
- Formalism is a by-the-book approach best demanded from certain elements of the
legal system who may abuse their discretionary powers, including administrative
agents who may issue rulings contrary to statutes, or judges who are tasked to apply
the law on facts presented.
II. Proponents
- Christopher Columbus Langdell
- Louis Sullivan
- Jeremy Bentham

- Separation of powers are observed among the three branches of the government
regarding their respective functions, hence there are no encroachment.
- The legal system as a whole is also formal in its degree of conformity to system-wide
principles of the rule of law.
- The system as a whole is formal in its overall coherence of content, as well.
- In sum, basic legal forms and other formal aspects are to be found all over the law,
in all of its institutional, methodological, preceptive, systemic and other reality.

- The obedience to the simple meaning of legal rules serves purposes we correlate
with the rule of law. It raises the possibility that those who are accountable to the law
will know what behavior the law tolerates or forbids. Moreover, if judges don’t apply
laws according to their plain and definite meaning, but rather granting what the
legislature have had in thought but failed to publicize, civilians will be unclear as to
how the laws will be exercised in practice. Complying with strict rules therefore
improves predictability and certainty in the law, delivering the ideal of government,
namely “a rule of laws, not men.”
- According to Phillip Bobbit in Constitutional approach wrote the different approaches
to law or modalities and he was able to identify 6 modalities
o Historical, which must be used when the intention is to decipher what was
really meant by the framers of the law
o Textual, looking for what the law simply declares or denies
o Structural, inferring rules from structures and mandates
o Doctrinal, applying rules generated by precedent
o Ethical or moral, appealing on the ethos or ideals of a government
o Prudential, refers to the exigencies and the calculus of costs and benefits

- GR No. L-49, November 12, 1945
- William F. Peralta v The Director of Prison
VI. Criticisms
- It doesn’t dwell on the extrinsic aids, it merely focuses in the intrinsic view of the law
itself
- It constrains a judge from deciding or giving opinions on what the law should be or
should mean other than what t says or does
- Originalism or formalism says that judges should only “interpret” not “construct”
- Some judges’ decisions are raw as it is based on the law itself, and without dwelling
or those found outside the language of the law
THE PRACTICE THEORY
I. Description
- Practice Theory explains society and culture as the result of structure and individual
agency.
- Structures- products of historical practices which are constantly reproduced and
transformed by historical practices per se.
- agency: is the capacity of individuals to have the power and resources to fulfill their
potential. This is powered by free-will.
- “Social actors are not just shaped by their social world, they in turn shape it as well.”
- A legal theory that refers to the law as an autonomous realm of thought and practice
in which people are capable of “neutrality” and “objectivity” in judgment and decision-
making.
- It can be credited as a new attempt to reinstate cognitive jurisprudence.
II. Proponents
- Pierre Bourdieu
o A French sociologist and public intellectual
o Bourdieu's work was primarily concerned with the dynamics of power in
society, especially the diverse and subtle ways in which power is transferred
and social order is maintained within and across generations.
- PHILIP BOBBIT
o Philip Chase Bobbitt, KBE is an american author, academic, and lawyer. He is
best known for work on U.S. constitutional law and theory, and on the
relationship between law, strategy and history in creating and sustaining the
state.

- The significance of practice theory is that one should know how and when to
use them in making arguments. Bobbit identified six (6) main modalities, which
are neither true or false, right or wrong, but expressions of what is true, which
must be mastered in legal practice, to wit:
o Historical - in determination of what is the intent of the framers we must look
or trace its historical basis prior to the creation of such law. It is therefore
significant in the legal systems to look into the matters that are indispensable
in interpreting a law.
o Textual - in the construction of a statute or law in our legal system, it must be
construed in its plain text without ambiguity in order to identify the subject
matter or the object of law in its entirety.
o Structural - to be able to understand or interpret such kind of law, a certain
structure in the creation of such must be followed simply as if it can be
understood by all.
o Doctrinal - applying rules generated by precedent where jurisprudence
decided by the Supreme Court is applicable to the same crime committed.
o Ethical or moral - although it was said that the law is harsh but it is still the
law, such must also do not degrade nor destroy persons morality. Thereupon,
offenders or violators of such law must be given penalty or sanction that
commensurate to his actions.
o Prudential - seeking to balance the costs and benefits of a particular rule
taking into consideration the possible effects whether it will be beneficial or
detrimental.
- Furthermore, Practice theory simply argues objectivity and neutrality of legal
processes. Without tested theories particularly on the application of Practice Theory,
on how to deliver effective legal services, we are just messing around the legal
system which therefore births unwanted biases, injustices, prejudice, and worst, the
inorganization or chaos of the social system. We, in the first place have evolved from
being incapable of delivering effective justice system as shown historically with the
animism religion of the pre-colonial Philippines influences and how the justice
system is delivered that is mainly based on primordial doctrines and is far from what
is justice in the modern times is defined.
- Presently, there is a concept of objectivity and neutrality, however it is only bestowed
by a subjective ruler. The good thing now is that the Philippine legal system has now
has been evolved to contain various dynamism wherein most of which centers on
human rights.
- Therefore, Practice theory should be present as it bears objectivity and neutrality,
without which, the existence of the legal system per se is irrelevant.

- In particularity, Bobbit explained that every modality cannot be interpreted as if they
are all similar, each has its own grammar and logic based on how such person
evaluate the law. We can freely choose an approach based on our own senses and
motivations.
- Practical use of the practice theory could provide a clear causal basis (in the form of
relatively non-mysterious processes such as imitation, training, and sanctioning) for
the institution and maintenance of social or cultural patterns exercising normative
authority over individual performances, this would seem to constitute genuine
philosophical progress. The aim of practice theory is not to reduce social wholes to
individual performances or norms to non- normative causal interaction, but simply to
articulate insightfully and in detail how human understanding is inculcated and
developed through social interaction.
- Practice Theory has been used especially in enacting laws or amending certain
provisions of the constitution. Historically, a good example was on how death penalty
has been amended as a penalty for some offenses that has been committed,
wherein there is no study to prove that this penalty reduces the crimes committed in
our country. Another good example on how this theory works structurally, wherein
this occurs when you are making about a right or power derived from the constitution
based on the relationship among the different parts of the document. For instance,
the framers outline the powers of Congress before they outline restrictions on that
power. This means that they meant for the powers of Congress to be interpreted
expensively rather that restrictively. The Prudential modalities enables you to
evaluate or interpret the Constitution based on the practical considerations that are
at issue where you are making an argument based on consequences or basically,
you are asking what is going to happen if we take this argument into its logical
extreme.

- In the case of CO KIM CHAM v. EUSEBIO VALDEZ TAN KEH and ARSENIO P.
DIZON (G.R. No. L-5, 17 September 1945), it is ruled that when the words of an
instrument are free from ambiguity and doubt, and express plainly, clearly and
distinctly the sense of the framer, there is no occasion to resort to other means of
interpretation. It is not allowable to interpret what needs no interpretation.
- Another case is used as a basis is the case of Estrada vs Sandiganbayan (G.R. No.
148560, November 19, 2001), wherein the court ruled that where therefore, the
ambiguity is not latent and the legislative intention is discoverable with the aid of the
canons of construction, the void for vagueness doctrine has no application.
VI. Criticisms
- In every theory, we can identify how good it is if properly applied or used. Inevitably,
we can as well identify some of its criticisms, one of which is rules are not self-
interpreting. Given only a rule, the possibility always remains open to follow the rule
in deviant ways. One might then try to specify how the rule is to be interpreted, but
any such interpretation would itself be another rule open to deviant application.
- Another criticism in Bobbitt’s theory is his struggles to provide a principled account of
constitutional decision- making in the rare and difficult case where the different
modalities may point towards divergent, yet equally legitimate, outcomes.
- Also, another criticism of the theory may include the possibility of giving the
government too much power to make laws under the guise of protecting the public.
Specifically, governments may use the cloak of the social contract to invoke the fear
of a state of nature to warrant laws that are intrusive.
43. G.R. No. 174689, October 22, 2007 Silverio V Republic
Legal Theory:
- No Law Allows The Change of Entry In The Birth Certificate As To Sex On the Ground
of Sex Reassignment
Issues:
- Whether or not the petitioner will be successful in getting the live birth certificate
changed as a result of a sex reassignment procedure.
Philosophical Theory:
Historical Approach
o Under the Civil Register Law, a birth certificate is a historical record of the facts
as they existed at the time of birth. Sex is visually done by the birth attendant (the
physician or midwife) by examining the genitals of the infant.
o Since the statutory language of the Civil Register Law was enacted in the early
1900s and remains unchanged, it cannot be argued that the term "sex" as used
then is something alterable through surgery or something that allows a post-
operative male-to-female transsexual to be included in the category "female."
44. G.R. No. 252117 In Re: Almonte
Legal Theory:
- The entitlement to bail is a question of fact.
Issues:
- Whether or not the petitioners be given provisional liberty on the ground of equity
Get Real-Realist Theory:
o The Supreme Court decision was determined by the actual practice of courts that
the Constitution guarantees the right to bail of all the accused except those charged
with offenses punishable by reclusion perpetua when the evidence of guilt is strong.
However, in· cases where the offense is punishable by reclusion perpetua and where
the evidence of guilt is strong, bail is a matter of discretion.
45. Andal V. Andal G.R. No. 196359
Legal Theory:
- Psychological incapacity is not a medical but a legal concept.
Issues:
- Whether or not the marriage between Mario and Rosanna is void due to psychological
incapacity?
HLA Hart’s Theory,
- The Court abandons the second Molina guideline. Psychological incapacity is neither a
mental incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be proven through expert opinion.
There must be proof, however, of the durable or enduring aspects of a person's personality,
called "personality structure," which manifests itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality
that undermines the family. The spouse's personality structure must make it impossible for
him or her to understand and, more important, to comply with his or her essential marital
obligations.
- Molina guidelines was then the authoritative or acceptable standard of Psychological
Incapacity (rule of recognition) which repealed and abandoned by the court (rule of
change) by resolving the dispute thru Court En Bank decision (rule on adjudication)
Members:
ARIBBAY, MARVIN LANUZA
ESPEJO, RALPH RHANDALL
GACUTAN, FLORES
LAGUNDI, JENICA LEON’E
LANUZA, JESSA
SALVADOR, CHRISTIAN VAN
SORIANO, GUY CARLOS JOBIM
TAGUINOD, JEFERSON
TAGULAO, ANDREA JEAN

[CASE DIGEST]
ROSANNA L. TAN-ANDAL vs. MARIO VICTOR M. ANDAL

G.R. No. 196359 May 11, 2021
Leonen, J.:
FACTS:
Mario Andal and Rosanna Tan-Andal were childhood friends. They lost contact with each
other for 17 years. Mario had worked in Switzerland, Germany, and Italy before returning to the
Philippines in April 1995. The parties reconnected and eventually became a couple. Mario left
for Italy in July 1995. Barely two (2) months after he had left, he had quit his job and stayed in
the country.
Mario and Rosanna married on 16 December 1995 at the Saints Peter and Paul Parish in
Poblacion, Makati City. On 27 July 1996, Rosanna gave birth to Ma. Samantha, the only child of
the parties. The family lived in a duplex in Parañaque City, with Rosanna's parents living in the
other half of the duplex.
According to Rosanna, Mario exhibited odd behaviors prior their wedding and during their
marriage. Mario had difficulty in managing his finances. Rosanna taught him to run Design and
Construction Matrix, the construction firm she had set up before she married. However, Mario
continued with his "emotional immaturity, irresponsibility, irritability, and psychological
imbalance." He made numerous cash advances and purchases using supplementary credit
card, which resulted to the family’s financial losses and the closure of Design and Construction
Matrix. He would leave their house for several days without informing Rosanna of his
whereabouts. Once he returned home, he would refuse to go out and would sleep for days.
Mario was also "hyper-active" late at night.
Mario allegedly did not assist Rosanna when she gave birth to their child, Ma. Samantha. He
left her in the hospital, knowing that she could not move until the effects of the spinal anesthesia
had worn off. He only returned to the hospital later that evening to sleep. When Rosanna and
Ma. Samantha were discharged from the hospital, Mario showed symptoms of paranoia. He
thought everyone was out to attack him and, at times, would hide Ma. Samantha from those he
thought were out to hurt them. Further, during the times when Ma. Samantha was sick, Mario
would instead ignore the ill child.
Rosanna petitioned the Regional Trial Court (“RTC”) to voluntarily commit Mario for drug
rehabilitation at the National Bureau of Investigation Treatment and Rehabilitation Center, and,
eventually, at the Seagulls Flight Foundation. Mario remained confined there until 24 December
2000, when the rehabilitation center released Mario without completing his rehabilitation
program. Rosanna wrote the trial court as to Mario's premature release from the rehabilitation
center. Since Mario's release, Rosanna and Mario had been separated and had not lived
together. Mario also failed to give support to Rosanna and Ma. Samantha.
These events, according to Rosanna, showed Mario's psychological incapacity to comply with
his essential marital obligations to her. Rosanna contended that Mario's drug use was the
manifestation of a grave personality disorder "deeply rooted within Mario's adaptive system."
She prayed that the trial court nullify their marriage and that she be declared the sole and
absolute owner of the parcel of land donated to her by her aunt as well as the duplex built on it.
To prove Mario's psychological incapacity, Rosanna presented Dr. Garcia, a

physician-psychiatrist, as expert witness. Dr. Garcia found Rosanna "psychologically
capacitated to comply with her essential marital obligations." As for Mario, Dr. Garcia diagnosed
him with narcissistic antisocial personality disorder and substance abuse disorder with
psychotic features. Mario's narcissistic antisocial personality disorder, which Dr. Garcia found to
be grave, with juridical antecedence, and incurable, allegedly rendered Mario psychologically
incapacitated to comply with his essential marital obligations to Rosanna. Dr. Garcia testified
that Mario's personality disorder was grave and "deeply rooted" in his character. Dr. Garcia
added that persons suffering from personality disorders are "impermeable to any form of
psychiatric therapeutic modality" because of "the presence of denial and cognizance on the
basic pathology of the person suffering from the disorder."
Mario contended that it was Rosanna who was psychologically incapacitated to comply with her
essential marital obligations. He prayed that the trial court nullify his marriage to Rosanna due
to her psychological incapacity, and that the properties they had acquired during their
cohabitation be divided equally between them. He also prayed that the custody of Ma.
Samantha be awarded to him.
The RTC nullified the parties’ marriage on the ground of Mario's psychological incapacity. It
awarded the custody of Ma. Samantha to Rosanna, with Mario having visitation rights. As to the
Parañaque duplex, the trial court declared Rosanna as its sole and absolute owner, including
the parcel of land on which it was built.
The Court of Appeals (“CA”) reversed the ruling of the lower court and declared the parties’
marriage to be valid and subsisting. It found Dr. Garcia's psychiatric evaluation of Mario to be
"unscientific and unreliable" since she diagnosed Mario without interviewing him. It ruled that Dr.
Garcia "was working on pure suppositions and second-hand information fed to her by one side."
Before the Supreme Court, Rosanna argued that psychological incapacity need not be
grounded on psychological illness, as this is allegedly more consistent with psychological
incapacity being a “liberal ground” for nullifying marriages. She cited cases where the Supreme
Court held that competent evidence, not necessarily expert opinion, may establish
psychological incapacity, and that what matters is the totality of the evidence presented.
Rosanna added that psychological incapacity is incurable, but not necessarily in a medical or
clinical sense. For her, incurability is manifested by ingrained behavior manifested during the
marriage by the psychologically incapacitated spouse.
ISSUE:
Does psychological incapacity need to be medically or clinically identified?
RULING:
NO. The Supreme Court ruled that psychological incapacity need not be medically or clinically
proven. In effect, the Court modified the doctrine enunciated in Republic vs. Court of Appeals
and Molina (“Molina”). Considering the inconsistencies with which the doctrine laid down in
Molina has been applied, the Court took a more comprehensive but nuanced approach
regarding the proper interpretation and application of said doctrine.
Under the second guideline in Molina, the root cause of psychological incapacity must be a)
medically or clinically identified, b) alleged in the complaint, c) sufficiently proven by experts,
and d) clearly explained in the decision. In Santos vs. Court of Appeals (“Santos”), the Court
defined psychological incapacity as a mental (not physical) incapacity to comply with the
essential marital obligations. It involves the most serious cases of personality disorders clearly
demonstrative of an utter insensitivity or inability to give meaning and significance to the
marriage. In the past, however, the Court has been inconsistent in requiring expert evidence in
psychological incapacity cases. In light of said inconsistencies, the Court now categorically
abandons the second Molina guideline. Now, psychological incapacity is neither a mental
incapacity nor a personality disorder that must be proven through expert opinion. There must,
however, be proof of the durable or enduring aspects of a person’s personality which manifests
itself through clear acts of dysfunctionality that undermines the family. Such personality
structure must make it impossible for him or her to understand and comply with their marital
obligations. The proof required for this need not be given by an expert. Ordinary witnesses who
have been present in the life of the spouses before the latter contracted marriage may testify on
behaviors that they have consistently observed from the incapacitated spouse.
With regard to the juridical antecedence requirement of the psychological incapacity under
Article 36 of the Family Code, the incapacity must be characterised as incurable. However, the
Court acknowledges that psychological incapacity, not being an illness in a medical sense, is
not something to be cured. As such, the third Molina guideline is amended to mean incurability
in a legal sense, not a medical sense, Particularly, this means that the incapacity is so enduring
and persistent with respect to a specific partner, and contemplates a situation where the
couple’s respective personality structures are so incompatible and antagonistic that the only
result of the union would be the inevitable and irreparable breakdown of the marriage.
Considering the foregoing, the Court found Mario psychologically incapacitated to comply with
his essential marital obligations. Rosanna was able to discharge the burden of proof required to
nullify her marriage to Mario. Clear and convincing evidence of his incapacity was shown
through testimonies on Mario’s personality and how it formed primarily through his childhood
and adult experiences well before he married Rosanna. Dr. Garcia was also able to recount
how Mario developed traits exhibiting chronic irresponsibility, impulsiveness, lack of remorse,
lack of empath, and a sense of entitlement, behaviours which manifest his inherent
psychological incapacity to comply with his essential marital obligations.
While drug addiction is a ground for legal separation, it will not prevent the court from voiding a
marriage so long as it can be proven that the drug abuse is a manifestation of psychological
incapacity existing at the time of marriage. Here, the totality of evidence presented by Rosanna
clearly and convincingly proved that Mario’s drug abuse was of sufficient durability that
antedates the marriage. His persistent failure to rehabilitate, even bringing his child into a room
where he did drugs, indicates a level of dysfunctionality that shows utter disregard of his
obligations not only to his wife, but also to his child.
His failure to render mutual help and support was also clearly proven by his consistent failure to
find gainful employment and even driving to bankruptcy the construction firm founded by
Rosanna by siphoning its funds for his drug abuse.
TAN-ANDAL v ANDAL - Divina Law
Recently, the Supreme Court (SC) sitting en banc unanimously modified the guidelines on how
to prove psychological incapacity as a ground for nullity of marriage under Article 36 of the
Family Code (Art. 36). In the case of Tan-Andal v. Andal (G.R. 196359, 11 May 2021), the SC
seized the opportunity to, once and for all, clarify the interpretation on ‘psychological incapacity’
as a ground to nullify a marriage.
Mario Andal and Rossana Tan got married on 16 December 1995. On 27 July 1996, Rosanna
gave birth to Ma. Samantha. Prior to the wedding, Mario already showed signs of odd behavior.
Rossana still opted to see the good in Mario and accepted him for who he is especially since
she was already pregnant with their child prior to their marriage.
However, during their marriage, Mario consistently showed the same signs of odd behavior that
he was not able to assist Rossana, during their child’s birth. He also continued to struggle
managing his finances and keeping their business together. He would even be gone for several
days and could not justify his whereabouts to Rosanna. He would be very hyper-active at night,
and would sleep all day when he is at home. Rosanna then found out about the drug abuse to
which he did not deny but justified that he needed it to keep him going with all the pressures of
his work.
The couple then separated, but when Mario pleaded Rosanna to come back, she gave him a
second chance but knew she had to monitor him closely. However, the final nail on the coffin of
their marriage was when Mario tried to bring their daughter somewhere without the permission
of Rossana who was then busy with their business. Rosanna even asked for the help of Mario’s
siblings to have him under control and try to rehabilitate him. Mario was very unhappy about
Rossana’s insistence on his rehabilitation that one day, Mario’s actions led to Rossana calling
the police to assist them and get him under control. The police then found packets of shabu in
Mario’s person.
Rossana filed for the petition for nullity of their marriage under Art. 36. To prove Mario’s
psychological incapacity, Rosanna presented Dr. Garcia, a physician-psychiatrist, as an expert
witness.
Dr. Garcia found Rosanna “psychologically capacitated to comply with her essential marital
obligations.” As for Mario, Dr. Garcia diagnosed him with narcissistic antisocial personality
disorder and substance abuse disorder with psychotic features. Mario’s narcissistic antisocial
personality disorder, which Dr. Garcia found to be grave, with juridical antecedence, and
incurable, allegedly rendered Mario psychologically incapacitated to comply with his essential
marital obligations to Rosanna. Mario, for his part, contended that it was Rosanna who was
psychologically incapacitated to comply with her essential marital obligations.
On whether or not the marriage should be nullified, the SC found Rosanna to have successfully
discharged the burden of proof required to nullify her marriage to Mario. Clear and convincing
evidence of his incapacity was shown through testimonies on Mario’s personality and how it
formed primarily through his childhood and adult experiences well before he married Rosanna.
It further ruled that psychological incapacity need not be scientifically or medically proven. The
proof required for this need not be given by an expert. Ordinary witnesses who have been
present in the life of the spouses before the latter contracted marriage may testify on behaviors
that they have consistently observed from the incapacitated spouse.
With regard to the juridical antecedence requirement of the psychological incapacity, the
incapacity must be characterized as incurable. However, the Court acknowledges that
psychological incapacity, not being an illness in a medical sense, is not something to be cured.
As such, incurability shall mean in a legal sense, not a medical sense, particularly, this means
that the incapacity is so enduring and persistent with respect to a specific partner, and
contemplates a situation where the couple’s respective personality structures are so
incompatible and antagonistic that the only result of the union would be the inevitable and
irreparable breakdown of the marriage.

Philo Finals

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Philo Finals

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Legal Theories

A. Interpretivist or Constructivist Theory

Interpretivist Theory is SUBJECTIVE.

Significance to the development of legal sysytems

Practical Use of the Theory

Significance to the development of legalsystems

Practical Use of the Theory

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

E. Functional or Sociological Approach

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

G. Forms and Fundamental Approach

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

J. H. L. A. Hart's Theory of Law

Significance on the development of legal systems

K. Habermas' Theory of Law

Significance on the development of legal systems

Practical Use of the Theory

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

VI. Criticism on the theory

III. Significance to the Development of Legal Systems

IV. Practical Use of the Theory

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

III. Significance to the development of legal systems

IV. Practical use of the theory (you may give examples)

V. Cases/policies where the theory is used as a reference or basis

44. G.R. No. 252117 In Re: Almonte

- The entitlement to bail is a question of fact.

45. Andal V. Andal G.R. No. 196359

- Psychological incapacity is not a medical but a legal concept.

HLA Hart’s Theory,

ARIBBAY, MARVIN LANUZA

ESPEJO, RALPH RHANDALL