PHILOSPHY OF LAW MIDTERM
moral precepts of Islam.
I. WHAT IS PHILOSOPHY OF LAW
1. Concepts of Law
LAW- is a rule of conduct, just, obligatory, and
formulated by legitimate power for common
observance and benefit.
Aquinas- law is an ordinance of reason ordered
towards the common good, promulgated by him
who has charge of the community.
a. Elements of Law
1. reasonable ordinance
2. for the common good
3. promulgated
4. legitimate authority
b. Classification of Law
 Jural/Human Law- refers to sanctioned or
enacted law such as statutes, case laws,
normative rules and precepts.
-concern of lawyers
 Substantive law- establishes rights,
duties, and corollary prohibitions.
 Remedial/procedural/adjective law-
manner of administering, enforcing,
appealing, amending, using legal
rights and claims.
SCOPE of LAW
 Public/ Political law- concerned with
the structures of government,
relationship of an individual with the
state
 Private Law- concerned with rules
governing relationship of individuals
 Criminal Law- violation of public
order through punishable acts or
omissions
 Civil Law- rules of civility such as on
property, marriage, succession,
contracts and torts or private wrongs
that results in damages.
 Mercantile Law- artificial
personalities such as corporations
and management of business,
regulates commercial transactions.
 CIVIL CODE SYSTEM- legal system based on
coded laws through parliamentary statutes
such as Code of Hammurabi or the
Babylonian Law Code, Justinian Code or
Roman Law Code.
 COMMON LAW SYSTEM- based on case law
or judge-made law that relies on the
precedents set by judges in a court case.
 ISLAMIC/SHARIAH LAW- is based on the
 Non-Jural/Meta-legal law- anchored on
human promulgation such as divine law,
natural law and physical law.
-concerns of theologians, scientist and
physicists.
 Divine law- sacred writings such as
Qur’an/Bible
 Natural law- law of human nature
based on the demands of the society.
 Physical law- mechanical laws of the
universe. (law of gravity, Newtonian
mechanics, Einstein’s law of
relativity)
2. Concept of Philosophy
PHILOSOPHY- means ‘love of wisdom’
-seek to understand fundamental
truths about themselves, the world which
they live in, and their relationship to the
world and to each other.
3. Philosophy of Law- also called
jurisprudence, branch of philosophy that
investigates the nature of law, especially in
its relation to human values, attitudes,
practices and political communities.
4. Legal Philosophy School of Thought
a. The Teleological or Natural Law Theory
-looks into principles, purpose and end of
law.
-what the law is ought to be
-normative jurisprudence
-Believes that the law serves a higher
universal order based on natural order
which we can discover through our
common human reason and validated by
human experience.
-establishes an integral partnership
around law and morality.
-the Philippines civil code acknowledges
the existence of natural rights.
-Art19 of Civil Code “every person must,
in the exercise of his rights and in the
performance of his duties, act with
justice, give everyone his due, and
observe honesty and good faith.”
JOHN FINNIS- developed the central case approach
in evaluating the law.
-the focus and center of law are those ideal cases
where natural rights to basic human goods are
served.
-central case vs. peripheral case (underdeveloped)
NATURAL LAW and NATURAL RIGHTS -questions the law’s assumptions, such
as the assumption that the people are
7 basic goods natural to man life
free, and that the market is free.
-life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience,
MARXISTS- the law’s judgments and values serve
sociability, practical reasonableness, religion
the dominant paradigm, while disregarding the real
b. Legal Positivism/Positivist Theory conditions of the people.
-we follow the law because it is the law,
f. Historical Approach
period.
-holds that law has a past and
-what the law ‘posits’ by the authority
progression. It develops in a gradual and
give to the State or by socially accepted
evolutionary process and cannot be
rules.
separated from its national or indigenous
-also known as command theory
character.
-obedience to the content and
-how the law originated
expression of the law.
-law is a product of national genius
-dura lex, sed lex (the law is hard, but
that is the law)
g. Functional or Sociological Approach
-quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem
-law is both a means of social control and
(whatever pleases the prince has the
social advancement.
force of law)
-law as measure for behavioural
-analytic jurisprudence
conformity and social engineering.
-law for what it is
-justifies ‘judicial activism’ and ‘judicial
-rule of law
legislation’
c. Interpretivist/Constructivist Theory
-functional where every cell has different
-law is more than explicitly adopted rules
functions to maintain healthy organism
-it has merits or principles behind them
so that each one’s different pursuit are
that can be interpreted or constructed by
good to the whole society.
the courts
h. The Utilitarian Approach
-rights-based, pro-active construction of
the law
i. Economic Approach
-there are correctible issues on what the
law should be -economic jurisprudence
DWORKIN- thought principles and rights are not -law appropriately takes cue from the
something already laid down by natural law, but economics and play a larger role in
something still to be “constructed” by the modern legal system.
adjudication of judges, faced by novel claims to
-the purpose of law is to increase the
“best accommodate the community’s common
balance of happiness in society through
conviction ,” which he called the ‘best fit theory’.
“wealth maximization”.
d. Realist or Pragmatist/Get-Real Theory
j. Legal Formalism or Conceptualism
-labeled as pragmatic jurisprudence
-law is a strict science governed by
-focuses on these human realities that
formal axioms, legal principles, and rules
are often overlooked by hard law,
of logic.
technicalities and abstract policies.
-further considers the original intent of
-whether the law reflects practical
the framers/drafters, or the original
experience
meaning based on what reasonable
JUSTICE OLIVER HOLMES JR. –argued for the ‘bad persons at the time the law was written
man model’ that implies that in crafting law or declare the law to mean in its”initial
deciding a case, always think from the perspective framework”.
of bad man, not the good man. k. Legal Practice Theory
-different approaches to law, or
e. Critical Legal Theory
modalities, have their own use. One
-law has been the means to enshrine and
should know how and when to use them
coercively impose the wishes of the
in making arguments.
dominant group or institutions.
CASES:
SANIDAD vs. COMELEC
FACTS:
 Marcos issued PD No. 991 calling for a
national referendum on Oct 116, 1976 for
Citizens Assemblies to resolve issued of
martial law.
 Marcos issued another related decrees PD
No. 1031, amending the previous PD No.
991.
 Marcos issued PD No. 1033, stating the
questions to be submitted.
 Sanidad filed a Prohibition with preliminary
injunction seeking to enjoin the COMELEC
from holding the referendum plebiscite,
declaring without force PD No. 991 and
1031.
ISSUE:
 Whether or not Marcos can validly propose
amendments to the Constitution.
RULING:
 Yes. The president can propose amendments
to the constitution, upon valid delegation by
the Supreme Court under Section 2 (2)
Article X of the new constitution and he was
able to present those proposals to the
people in sufficient time. The president at
that time also sits as the legislature.
LEGPHILO:
The matter is definitely justiciable or non-
political question. This constitutional authority by
the president is therefore a downright justiciable
question.
UK vs. ALBANIA
FACTS:
 2 british destroyers struck mines in Albania
waters and suffered damage and loss of life.
 UK filed an application against Albania,
claiming that the latter is responsible for the
incident and must make reparation or pay
compensation.
 Albania counter-claim that UK violated
Abanian territorial waters.
ISSUE:
Are international obligations in time of peace
created through elementary consideration
(humanity consideration)?
RULING:
 Yes. because every state has an obligation
not to knowingly allow its territory to be
used for acts contrary to the rights other
state.
MARBURRY vs. MADISON
FACTS:
 Outgoing president Adams appointed 42
new justices in an attempt to secure
Federalist control under incoming president
Jefferson’s administration.
 Upon inauguration of President Jefferson, he
instructed Secretary of State James Madison
to withhold delivery of commissions,
including Marburry’s.
 Marburry sought mandamus in the Supreme
Court.
ISSUE:
 Is Marburry entitled to mandamus from the
supreme court?
RULING:
 No. To issue mandamus to the Secretary of
State really is to sustain an original action,
which in this case is outside the
constitutional jurisdiction of Supreme Court.
LEGPHILO:
 The government of the US has been termed
as government of laws and not of men.
PEOPLE vs POMAR
FACTS:
 Julio Pomar, the manager of La Flor de la
Isabela, a tobacco factory, refused to pay
Macaria Fajardo, whom he granted a
vacation leave due to pregnancy, the wages
she is entitled to 30 days before and 30 days
after her delivery and confinement.
 Pomar was found guilty in violating section
13 in connection with section 15 of Act No.
3071.
ISSUE:
 WON Act 3071 has been adopted in the
reasonable and lawful exercise of the police
power.
RULING:
 The constitution is the supreme law of the
land. Police power of the state cannot be
 exercised in contravention of the
constitution.
ADONG vs. CHEONG SENG GEE
FACTS:
 Cheong Seng Gee, the legitimate child of the
deceased, Cheong Boo to Tan Dit in China,
claimed the property left by him.
 Mora Adong, on the other hand, who is
allegedly lawfully married to Cheong Boo in
Basilan, was also staking claim to the
property left by the deceased.
 The court ruled for both marriages to be
insufficient and unlawful.
ISSUE:
 Is the marriage performed according to the
Mohammedan Religion valid?
RULING:
 Yes. The provisions of section IX of the
marriage law validate marriages performed
according to the rites of the Mohammedan
religion.
ASIA BREWERY vs. SAN MIGUEL CORP
FACTS:
 San Miguel Corp filed a complaint against
Asia Brewery Inc. for trademark
infringement and unfair competition on
account of the latter’s Beer Pale Pilsen or
Beer Na Beer.
ISSUE:
 WON there is unfair competition
RULING:
 No. To determine whether a trademark has
been infringed, we must consider the mark
as a whole and not as a dissected.
DEL MONTE CORP vs COURT OF APPEALS
FACTS:
 Del Monte Corp filed a complaint against
Sunshine Sauce Manufacturing for
infringement of trademark and unfair
competition, for using the Del Monte bottle
which the latter bought from junk shops for
recycling.
 The RTC dismissed the complaint which was
affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
ISSUE:
 WON the CA erred in upholding the decision
of the court a Quo?
RULING:
 Yes. the respondent court failed to take into
consideration several factors which should
have affected its judgement. With regard to
the use of del monte’s bottle, the same
constitutes unfair competition.
REPUBLIC vs MERALCO
FACTS:
 MERALCO and ERB filed an application for
the revision of its rate schedules which
reflected to an increase in its distribution
charge.
 ERB then issued an order upon finding that
MERALCO is entitled to lesser increase rates
and shall either refund to the customers the
excess amount to them.
ISSUE:
 WON the MERALCO could pass on to
consumers what is was paying the
government as taxes.
RULING:
 No. Accordingly, the burden of paying the
tax should be MERALCO’s alone and should
not be shifted to the consumers by including
the same in the computation of its operating
expenses.
DURAN vs ABAD SANTOS
FACTS:
 Pio Duran is a prisoner under the custody of
Director of Prisons without any information
having filed against him and is entitled to
provisional release on P35k bail.
 Judge Salvador Abad Santos denied the
petition for bail not stating this reasons.
ISSUE:
 WON the judge committed a grave abuse of
discretion for denying the petitioners
petition to bail.
RULING:
 No. Petitioner was charged for treason which
is the higher of all crimes thus the hearing
shall be set fort the People’s court to be
informed and determine whether there was
 a strong evidence of the commission of 4. Thomas Aquinas on Natural Law
capital offense for allegedly adherence to -universe is governed by Divine Reason
the enemy by the petitioner during the through an eternal law that to humans is
Japanese domination. called “natural law”.
-argument for necessity of Divine Law
MODULE 2: NATURAL LAW, -divine law is needed for him to realize his
INTERNATIONAL LAW, CLASSIC supernatural ends.
PHILOSOPHERS 5. Immanuel Kant and the Enlightenment
Philosophers on Natural Rights
1. The Stoics: Jus Naturale
-EPNR: rights are natural and inherent and
-proponents were the Stoics who believed
need not to be created but only to be
that there is true law discoverable by right
recognized or declared.
reason and shared by all persons.
-rights should be given to every human
-emphasis on the equality of all men,
being.
governed by the same law.
-reason and rationality as the only absolutes
-believed that whatever one’s status in life
in life.
is, one can find happiness by doing what is
6. Natural Law as the law of Nations
good.
a. Hugo Grotius
-apathy=stoic
-dutch jurist: the law on war and peace
-suppressing emotions and sensitivity to
-father of international law
pleasure or pain are needed to clear the
-natural law as the basis for law of
mind of what is really good.
nations
MARCUS TULLIUS CICERO- we are born for justice, -states may not take away the natural
and that right is based, not upon men’s opinion but right to life and property of individuals.
upon nature. b. William Blackstone Commentaries
-“that we should live honestly, hurt
nobody, and render to everyone his due
2. Plato on Ideal Law and the Republic
(justice)
- Natural law for Plato is not the law of the
-law of nations cannot be dictated by any
common man, but the law of an ideal man.
particular state or man but depends
- Republic: regime ruled by a benevolent
entirely upon the rules of natural law on
dictator; state plans society according to
the equality of men and mutuality of
ideals, an idea embraced by Fascism and
contracts, treaties, leagues and
Communism alike; the role of the ruler is to
agreements.
get the society close to the perfect form.
c. Jacques Maritain
- laws have to be preceded by preambles to
-law of nations is now known as
convince the people of the rightness of their
international law
provisions. Reasoned thought must be
-UDHR (Universal Declaration of Human
embodied in laws.
Rights)- is grounded on natural law
3. Aristotle on Rational Law
-international law developed from an
understanding that there are universal
- father of natural law
aspirations common to humanity,
- human beings have a rational nature that
demandable everywhere as a matter of
must be followed as a matter of law.
rights and must be available to everyone.
- Nicomachean ethics: Aristotle said that
7. John Finnis: Natural Law and Natural Rights
happiness is the final goal or end of all of
man’s pursuits. NATURAL LAW and NATURAL RIGHTS
- people have different functions and interest
7 basic goods natural to man life
in life but they have common function-
reasoning that separates them from other -life, knowledge, play, aesthetic experience,
species. sociability, practical reasonableness, religion
- virtue is the practice of reason.
-cannot be eliminated from humanity
CASES:
REPUBLIC vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
FACTS:
 AFP Anti-Graft Board, created by PCGG
under EO No. 1, investigated various reports
of alleged ill-gotten wealth of respondent
Major General Josephus Ramas and his
alleged mistress Elizabeth Dimaano.
 The petitioner failed to present evidences
thus Ramas filed a petition to dismiss the
case.
 The Sandiganbayan dismissed the amended
complaint and ordered the return of the
confiscated items to Dimaano.
ISSUE:
 WON PCGG has jurisdiction to investigate
and cause the filing of a forfeiture petition
against Ramas and Dimaano for unexplained
wealth under RA No. 1379
 WON it was proper to dismiss the case
before the presentation of evidence.
RULING:
 No. Mere position held by a military does
not make him ‘subordinate’ as this term was
used in EO No. 1.
 Yes. the petitioner had almost 2 years to
present the evidence and has only itself to
blame for failure to complete presentation
of its evidences.
LEGPHILO:
 On the history of natural law and natural
rights
 The case at bar merely calls us to determine
whether two particular rights
1. right against unreasonable search seizure
-is a core right implicit in the natural right
to life, liberty and property.
-protects the people’s right to security of
person and property.
-being a right indispensable to the right
to life, liberty and property, may be
derived from Aquinas’ man’s inclination
to self-preservation and self-
actualization.
2. right to the exclusion of evidence illegally
seized
-no man shall be convicted on
unconstitutional evidence.
-the government shall not be allowed to
convict a man on evidence obtained in
violation of natural right.
have the force and effect of natural rights
which private respondent Dimaano can
invoke against the government.
ATENEO DE MANILA vs. CAPULONG\
FACTS:
 Aquila Legis, a fraternity in Ateneo,
conducted its initiation rites wherein one
neophyte died and one was seriously
injured.
 The disciplinary board found 7 students
guilty of violating rule 3 of the rules of
discipline which resulted to the expulsion of
the said students.
 Judge Capulong ordered Ateneo to reverse
its decision.
ISSUE:
 WON Ateneo Law School has competence to
issue an order dismissing such students
pursuant to its rules.
RULING:
 Yes. This is an academic freedom on the part
of the school which includes freedom to
determine who may teach, what may be
taught, how shall it be taught and who may
be admitted to study.
LEGPHILO:
 SOCRATES and PLATO on ACADEMIC
FREEDOM
 “Academic freedom” a term describing the
emerging rights related to intellectual
liberty, has traditionally been associated
with freedom of thought, speech, expression
and the press; in other words, with the right
of individuals in university communities,
such as professors, researchers and
administrators, to investigate , pursue,
discuss and in the immortal words of
Socrates, “to follow the argument wherever
it may lead,” free from internal and external
interference or pressure.
YAMASHITA vs STYER
FACTS:
 Tomoyuki Yamashita, a commanding
general, after his surrender became prisoner
of war of USA but was then placed in
confinement as an accused war criminal
charged before an American Military
Commission constituted by Lieutenant
General Styer.
  Yamashita filed for habeas corpus and RULING:
prohibition against styer and demanded to
 No. the only authority that could have
be reinstated to his former status as prisoner
grated pardon or executive clemency to
of war.
herein petitioner during the Japanese
ISSUE: occupation was the president of the
Philippine Republic or commander in chief of
 WON the petition for habeas corpus and
the Japanese Imperial forces. But no
prohibition be granted in this case.
evidence has been presented proving that
 WON Military Commission has
such pardon was granted.
jurisdiction over war crimes.
LEGPHILO:
RULING:
 ARISTOTLE ON THE SEPARATION OF
 No. A petition for habeas corpus is improper
POWERS
when release of petitioner is not sought. In
 Aristotle in the following words of his
this case, the petitioner seeks no discharged
“Politics” highlighted the principle of
but merely restoration to his former status.
separation of powers, dividing the powers
 Yes. Articles of War, Art 15, US has explicitly
among three departments-legislative,
provided that military tribunals shall have
executive and judicial-and within the
jurisdiction to try offenders or offenses
province of each one of them no
against laws of warn in appropriate cases.
encroachments are allowed without
LEGPHILO: violating the tripartite division established by
the constitution.
 ANCIENT PHILOSOPHERS ON THE LAW OF
NATIONS
TECSON vs DESIDERIO
 Yamashita is entitled to be accorded all the
gurantees, protections and defences thall all FACTS:
prisoners should have, according to the
 Ronal Allan Kelly Poe aka Fernando Poe Jr.
customs and usages, conventions and
filed his COC for the president in the
treaties, judicial decisions and executive
forthcoming national elections.
pronouncements and generally accepted
 Fornier filed a petition to disqualify FPJ on
opinions of legal philosophers of just rules
the grounds that Poe is not a natural born
and principles of international law.
Filipino citizen, which is a requirement for
his COC.
CARAOS vs DAZA
ISSUE:
FACTS:
 WON FPJ is a natural born citizen of the
 Estrella Punzalan Vda de Ylagan, the wife of
Philippines
the deceaded Leoncio Ylagan, request the
issuance of a warrant for the arrest of herein RULING:
petitioner to continue serving the unexpired
 Yes. in the death certificate of Lorenzo Poe,
portion of penalty imposed on him for crime
may have been benefited from the ‘en
of homicide.
masse filipinization’ that the Philippine Bill
 Caraos claimed that he was granted
had effected, there is no doubt that Allan
executive clemency or pardon by the
Poe, father of Fernando Poe, Jr., was a
Provincial governor of batangas even before
Filipino citizen which under 1935
the mass release happened due to bombing
constitution, recognizes those whose father
in the vicinity of capitol, near provincial jail.
is a Filipino citizen, as a natural born citizens.
ISSUE:
LEGPHILO:
 WON pardon or executive clemency had
 ARISTOTLE ON CITIZENSHIP
really been extended to herein petitioner by
 Aristotle described “citizen” to refer to a
the proper authorities.
man who share administration of justice and
in the holding of an office.
 US vs GUENDIA
FACTS:
 The defendant was convicted for committing
an assault with an intent to kill but proof
shows that the defendant was crazy at the
time commission of crime.
 With no capacity to make proper defense,
the governor general ordered to confine the
defendant to San lazaro hospital for his
treatments.
ISSUE:
 WON the court should reverse judgement
and acquit the accused of the offense with
which he is charged
FACTS:
RULING:
 Yes. But in such case an order for his
commitment to asylum should be made
pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 2 of
Article 8(1) of the Penal Code.
LEGPHILO:
 BLACKSTONE ON THE PLEA OF INSANITY
 In William Blackstone’s commentaries of
plea of insanity, he further explained how an
ISSUE:
accused with a case of insanity or imbecility,
should be exempted from criminal liability,
for a reason that due to his present
condition, the accused cannot make proper
defense of himself. The court instead should
RULING:
suspend the proceedings and commit the
accused to a proper place of detention until
his faculties are recovered.
US vs SANTOS
FACTS:
 Dionisio Santos, a policeman of Pateros Rizal,
arrested without warrant 2 nightwalkers
who he then found in front of uninhabited
house and camarin, although no crime had
LEGPHILO:
been committed.
ISSUE:
 WON the accused is guilty of coercion as
found by the trial court.
RULINGS:
 No. under the rule of law, peace officers may
arrest w/o warrant any person found in
suspicious places or under suspicious
situation, tending to show potential
commission of crime.
LEGPHILO:
 BLACKSTONE ON ARREST WITHOUT
WARRANT
 In relation to Blackstone’s commentaries, it
was clearly implied that a peace officer
might arrest and detain in prison form
examination persons walking in the street at
night whom there is reasonable ground to
suspect felony, although there is no proof of
a feliny having been committed.
 The reason for such rule is that good people
do not ordinarily lurk about streets and
uninhabited premises a night.
PEOPLE vs POMAR
 Julio Pomar, the manager of La Flor de la
Isabela, a tobacco factory, refused to pay
Macaria Fajardo, whom he granted a
vacation leave due to pregnancy, the wages
she is entitled to 30 days before and 30 days
after her delivery and confinement.
 Pomar was found guilty in violating section
13 in connection with section 15 of Act No.
3071.
 WON Act 3071 has been adopted in the
reasonable and lawful exercise of the police
power.
 No. The law is unconstitutional and the
provisions has been adopted in the
reasonable and lawful exercise of the police
power. The law creates a term in every such
contract, without the consent of the parties.
Such person is therefore deprived of their
liberty to contract which is protected by the
due process of law clause of the
constitution.
 BLACKSTONE AND BENTHAM ON POLICE
POWER
 Blackstone defines police power as “the due
regulation of kingdom, whereby the
inhabitants of the state, like members of a
well-governed family, are bound to conform
their genera behaviour to the rules or
propriety, good neighbourhood, and good
manners and to be decent, industrious, and
inoffensive in their respective stations.
 IN RE: COLUMNS OF AMADO MACASAET IN LEGPHILO:
MALAYA
 BLACKSTONE ON DOUBLE JEOPARDY
FACTS:  Blackstone commentaries plea of autrefois
acquit that no man is to be brought into
 Amado Macasaet published contained
jeopardy of his life more than once for the
statements about an alleged bribery incident
same offense and a man once fairly not
in the Supreme Court, committed by SC
found guilty upon any indictment may plead
Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago.
such acquittal in bar of any subsequent
 Macasaet sanctioned by the Sc for indirect
accusation for the same crime.
contempt.
LAUREL vs MISA
ISSUE:
FACTS:
 WON Macasaet was wrongfully sanctioned
for indirect contempt.  The accused was charged with treason for
adherence to the enemy during Japanese
occupation.
RULING:  The accused claimed that there is a
suspension of allegiance to the state during
 No. Macasaet is guilty of indirect contempt
the occupation and there is a change of
of court his complete failure to exercise a
sovereignty.
single vestige of responsible journalism in
publishing his unfounded and ill-thought ISSUE:
diatribes against the judiciary and the
 Whether the accused is guilty
honourable people who serve it.
RULING:
LEGPHILO:
 Yes. There is a violation of art 114 of the
 BLACKSTONE ON LIBERTY OF THE PRESS
penal code and such claims by the accused
 According to William Blackstone, he
were not supported and proven.
described the twin aspects of press freedom:
“Every freeman has an undoubted right to LEGPHILO:
lay what sentiments he pleases before the
 BLACKSTONE ON STATE ALLEGIANCE
public: to forbid this is to destroy freedom of
 According to Blackstone commentaries,
the press: but if he publishes what is
allegiance is the tie or ligament which binds
improper, mischievous, or illegal, he must
the subject to the kind, in return for that
take the consequences of his own temerity.”
protection which the kind affords the
subject. It is a debt due from all men born
PEOPLE vs VELASCO
within the King’s dominion immediately
FACTS: upon their birth for they are under king’s
protection.
 Honorato Galvez, the mayor of San Ildefonso
Bulacan, and his body guard, was charged MANZANARES vs MORETA
with 1 count of murder and 2 counts of
FACTS:
frustrated murder.
 Galvez was acquitted.  A male child, 8/9 years of age was killed due
 The petitioner elevated the case to higher to negligence of defendant in driving his
court questioning the decision of the RTC automobile.
judge.  the poor mother bring actions against the
defendant to recover damages for her loss.
ISSUE:
ISSUE:
 WON there is a violation of double jeopardy
 WON the loss of life could be compensated
RULING:
in money.
 Yes. Article III Section 21 of 1987 constitution
RULING:
states that “no person shall be twice put in
jeopardy of punishment for the same  Yes. Article 1902 of Civil Code states that
offense.” “any person who by an act or omission
 causes damage to another by his fault or
negligence shall be liable for the damage so
done.”
LEGPHILO:
 GROTIUS ON ACTUAL DAMAGES
 Grotius said “any man slaying another,
unjustly, is bound to discharge the expenses,
if any are contracted, for physicians, and to
give to those whom the slain was in duty
accustomed to main-such as parents, wives,
children-as much as that hope of
maintenance.”
MODULE 3: CIVIL LAW: ROMAN JURISTS TO
CONTEMPORARY THINKERS
1. Justinian on Codification of Law
-Justinian Code or the Roman Law Code
-Article 364 of our Civil Code
-the codal section is evidently based upon
the vulnerable maxim of equity that one
who comes into equity must come with
clean hands.
2. Cicero: De Legibus
-he argued that neither can a statute be
called a “law” if it is irrational, destructive
and unjust.
-In de legibus, cicero wrote that “we are
born for justice, and that right is based, not
upon men’s opinion, but upon nature.
-law is ought to be a reformer of vice and an
incentive to virtue”
-we may differ in our choice of words and in
our language, we express the same
sentiments,.
we may have different cultures, but we
recognize the same virtue.
3. John Locke on Private Property
-what man puts value through his labor
becomes his own. As a corollary, what one
does not work for he cannot own.
4. Robert Nozick: Englightenment Theory
-Entitlement theory
-people are entitled to things they earned,
worked for, or produced
-things do come into the world already
attached to people having entitlements over
them, (Anarchy, State and Utopia)
-if a property was legally required, it may not
be seized by the government for
distrubution
5. Latin Maxims
-refer to IPAD
CASES:
KASILAG vs RODRIGUEZ
FACTS:
 The parties entered into a contract of loan
with an accompanying contract of mortgage
which includes the improvements of a piece
of land and the interest of tax.
 the petitioner accepted such contract
believing that there are no violations to the
prohibitions in the alienation of land and was
allegedly acting in good faith.
ISSUE:
 WON the petitioner is deemed to be a
possessor of the land in good faith with his
claim of lack of knowledge of the contract of
antichresis.
RULING:
 Yes. Section 433 of the civil code of the
Philippines provides “Every person who is
unaware of any law in his title or in the
manner of its acquisition by which it is
invalidated shall be deemed a possessor of
good faith”.
LEGPHILO:
 JUSTINIAN CODE ON MUTUAL BAD FAITH
 Justinian Code speaks through practically all
the civil codes which Art 364 of our civil code
comes into play. The codal section is
evidently based upon the vulnerable maxim
of equity that one who comes into equity
must come with clean hands.
JAIN vs IAC
FACTS:
 Jain was accused of theft, in conspiracy with
the Bermejo’s cane guard, as he withdrew
the said trainman’s receipt and substituted
them with other trainman’s receipts in the
name of the accused Jain.
 Making it appear that the cane cars belong
to Jain.
ISSUE:
 Whether Jain is criminally liable for theft.
RULING:
 No. For theft to be committed there must be
physical handling for personal property
therefore Jain did not commit theft but he
committed estafa.
LEGPHILO:
 THE ROMAN LAW ON THEFT
 Institutes of Justinian elaborated definition
of theft as follows: “theft is the fraudulent
handling of a thing with the object of
acquiring gain either from the thing itself or
from its use, or from possession of it”.
PEOPLE vs VELASCO
FACTS:
 Honorato Galvez, the mayor of San Ildefonso
Bulacan, and his body guard, was charged
with 1 count of murder and 2 counts of
frustrated murder.
 Galvez was acquitted.
 The petitioner elevated the case to higher
court questioning the decision of the RTC
judge.
ISSUE:
 WON there is a violation of double jeopardy
RULING:
 Yes. Article III Section 21 of 1987 constitution
states that “no person shall be twice put in
jeopardy of punishment for the same
offense.”
LEGPHILO:
 THE ROMAN LAW On DOUBLE JEOPARDY
 in Justinian Codification of Law, the term
jeopardy rests deep in the ancient Grecian
view of legal concept of punishment that the
“law forbid the same man to be tried twice
on the same issue”. To suffer twice for the
same misfortune was anathema to ancient
thought.
MODUEL 4: CRIMINAL LAW AND FAMILY
LAW: CHRISTIAN AND CONTEMPORARY
PHILOSOPHIES
1. Aquinas on Crime and Punishment
-justified the necessity for both civil and
penal law
-need civil law to determine how he will deal
with others
-doctrine of reasonable classification under
the equal protection clause (rendering to
each that “which is due to him according to
equality of proportion”)
-violence and fear can cause involuntariness
of action.
-in violence , one act’s contrary to one’s will.
-in fear, one does an act to avoid the evil
feared
2. Augustine: Law, Order and the City of God
3. Dietrich von Hildebrand: Personalism
4. Karol Wojtyla: Domestic/Family Philosophy
-believe that it is his duty to reflect on the
dignity of human sexuality
-man has a power of self-determination and
free will to choose his sexual acts unlike
animals
-explaining self-sacrifice and self-limitation
-man longs for love more than freedom
-if a man truly love his wife, he needs to
accept and regard the natural order, the
natural cycle of the woman as part of her
being.
-the couple will see each other’s fertility as a
gift, not a disease to be medicated.
5. Michel Foucault: Discipline and Punish
CASES
ECHEGARAY vs. SEC. OF JUSTICE
FACTS:
 Petitioner was convicted to the crime of rape
of the 10 year-old daughter of common law
spouse.
 He was charged with death penalty through
lethal injection in which he questioned its
constitutionality.
ISSUE:
 Is the lethal injection a cruel, degrading and
inhuman punishment?
RULING:
 No. Pursuant to the case of Harden v.
Director of Prison wherein the court ordered
“punishment are cruel when they involve
torture or a lingering death”. In this case,
under RA no. 8177, lethal injection is the
easiest and most humane form of death
penalty.
LEGPHILO:
 ON THE RIGHT TO LIFE
 The constitution guaranteed that “no person
shall be deprived of life, liberty and property
without due process of law”. Hence, the
constitution values dignity of every human
person and guarantees full respect for
human rights, expressly prohibits any form
of torture which is arguably a lesser penalty
than death.
 SANTOS vs CA AND BEDIA-SANTOS
FACTS:
 Santos and his wife got married and resided
in Julia’s parents’ compound.
 The couple quarrel over number of things.
 Julia left to work in US and despite
petitioner’s desperate attempt to reach Julia,
all his efforts were of no avail.
 The petitioner filed a complaint to declare
their marriage void on the grounds of
emotional incapacity in the part of Julia.
ISSUE:
 WON their marriage could be considered
void under Art 36 of Family Code
RULING:
 No. the meaning of psychological incapacity
refers to the most serious cases of personal
disorders clearly demonstrative of an utter
insensitivity or inability to give meaning and
significance to the marriage.
LEGPHILO:
 ON PSYCHOLOGICAL INCAPACITY
 In a book entitled “Canons and
Commentaries on Marriage” it states that
“mere difficulty of assuming these
obligations, which could be overcome by
normal effort, obviously does not constitute
incapacity. The canon contemplates a true
psychological disorder which incapacitates a
person from giving what is due.”
ESTRADA vs ESCRITOR
FACTS:
 Escritor, an interpreter in RTC of Las Pinas
City was accused by Estrada of having an
affair with a married man which the
petitioner pointed out that it shouldn’t be
allowed for it is an immoral conduct.
 Escritor is a member of religious sectors that
testified that the relationship of the 2 is
permitted in their congregation.
ISSUE:
 WON the respondent is guilty of gross and
immoral conduct and should be penalized by
the state.
RULING:
 No. The constitution adheres the benevolent
neutrality approach that gives room for the
accommodation of religious exercises as
required by the Free Exercise Clause.
LEGPHILO:
 ON THE SEPARATION OF THE CHURCH AND
STATE
 The review of the Old World antecedents of
religion shows the movement of
establishment of religion as an engine to
promote state interests, to the principle of
non-establishment to allow the free exercise
of religion.
PEOPLE vs DELA CRUZ
FACTS:
 Appellant is charged with the crime of
robbery in band as he was identified as one
of the four men who robbed the drugstore
of Dr. Sison.
 The appellant appealed praying that he be
acquitted.
ISSUE:
 WON the appellant is one of the robbers.
RULING:
 Yes. the analysis of the testimonies given in
this case convinces us that appellant was
conclusively identified as one of the robbers.
LEGPHILO:
 ST. THOMAS AQUINAS On ROBBERY
 Aquinas maintained that appropriation of
other’s goods that the owner do not need is
not a form of robbery, if made in
disobedience to extreme necessity in the
present case, there is absolutely no showing
of extreme necessity, which constitutes the
act of the accused as a form of robbery.
MODULE 5: MERCANTILE LAW: FROM
CUSTOMS TO LAW
1. Gerard de Malynes: Lex Mercatoria
-law of merchant
-customs of ancient and medieval maritime
trade
-body of rules and principles laid down by
medieval merchants to regulate their deals.
 -originated the “writing obligatory” that we
now refer to as bills of exchange, checks and
promissory notes
2. Lord Mansfield: English Commercial Law
-he said that ‘mercantile law is not the law of
a particular country, but the law of all
nations”.
-he supported free trade
-he believed that equity should be applied by
the courts
3. Adams Smith: The Wealth of Nations
-in The Wealth of Nations, argued that
commercial transactions are legitimately
based on self-interest since no one sells or
buys without anything in it for him.
-self-interest will yield to quality competitive
goods that serve over-all public interest.
4. Ayn Rand : Freedom of Production and
Trade
-in free economy, no man or group of men
can use physical coercion against anyone
-economic power can be achieved only by
voluntary means (voluntary choice and
agreement of all those who participate in the
process of production and trade.)
-in free market, all prices , wages and profits
are determined by the law of supply and
demand.
CASES
US vs TAN QUINGCO CHUA
FACTS:
 Pedro Andres borrowed a sum of P100 with
interest of 24 cavanes of palay which two
years later, became P226.70, secured by a
pacto de retro with the interest of 44
cavanes of palay.
 Andres executed a document which he sold
a part of land and a carabao to Tan, under
the pacto de retro.
 Andres was able to pay Tan bu the Provincial
Fiscal of Nueva Ecija filed an information
charging Tan of violation of Usury Law.
ISSUE:
 WON Tan Quingco Chua is guilty of the crime
under Usury Law pursuant to the
accomplishment of what purports to be a
pacto de retro
RULING:
 Yes. The SC ruled that there is no doubt that
the document in question was not a true
pacto de retro, but was a sham document to
cover usurious financial manipulation.
LEGPHILO:
 MANSFIELD ON UNCONSCIONABLE SALES
 Lord Mansfield characteristically says: “I lay
the foundation of the whole upon a man’s
going to borrow under colour of buying:
there the contract is usurious; but where it is
a bona fide sale…” in which in this case, it
certainly is not.
PHILIPPINE NATIONAL BANK vs THE
NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK
MOTOR SERVICE CO., INC.,
FACTS:
 On April 7 and 9, 1933, unknown persons
indorsed to defendant Motor Service
Company, Inc. two checks in payment for
automobile tires purchased from the
defendant’s store.
 PNB found out that the signature had been
forged and demand defendants
reimbursement in which the latter refused.
ISSUE:
 WON the drawee bank should be allowed
recovery.
RULING:
 Yes. Under Section 62 of the NIL, the court
held that acceptance is unnecessary in so far
as bills of exchange payable on demand are
concerned.
LEGPHILO:
 MANSFIELD’S OLD RULE ON DRAWER-
DRAWEE LIABILITY
 Lord Mansfield took the case out of the
doctrine as to payments under mistake of
fact by the assumption that a holder who is
simply presents negotiable paper for
payments makes no representation as to
the signature, and that the drawee pays at
his peril.
COMPAGNIE FRANCO-INDOCHINOISE vs DEUTSCH-
AUSTRALISCHE DAMPSCHIFFS GESELLSCHAFT
FACTS:

 The damages resulting from the illegal

detention of cargo belonging to the plaintiff
embarked upon that ship at Saigon and
brought to the port of Manila at the
outbreak of the European War.
ISSUE:

 WON the trial court had awarded too little

and the defendant that the court had
awarded too much
RULING:

 As already stated, we are of the opinion that

the damages assessable in this case should
not be limited to the amount contracted to
be paid for freight, and the damages must
stand at the higher amount of the proven
damages.
LEGPHILO:

 MANSFIELD ON INTERNATIONAL
MARITIME LAW
 Lord Mansfield, in Luke vs. Lyde, the
maritime law “is not the law of the
particular country, but the general law of
nation.”