San Beda College

Alabang
School of Law
Alabang Hills Village, Muntinlupa
City
LEGAL PHILOSOPHY 1770 Philippines

COURSE OUTLINE

I. WHAT IS LAW?

1. Herbert Lionel Hart: Concept of Law

2. Jurgen Habermas: Rationality and Law
3. Thomas Aquinas: Scholastic Treatment of the Nature of Law
4. John Dworkin: Theory of Adjudication and Model of Rules

Readings: Aquino, pp. 35-114; Bernardo, et.al., 1-30; Golding, et.al., 1-12; Tabucanon, 1-48.
Cases: Sanidad vs. Comelec, 73 SCRA 333
The United Kingdom vs. Albania, 1949 I.C.J. 4 (The Corfu Channel Case)
Marburry v. Madison, 5 US (1Cranch) 137
People vs. Pomar, 46 Phil. 440
Del Monte Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, 131 SCRA 410
Asia Brewery vs. San Miguel Corporation, G.R. No. 103543, July 5, 1993
Republic of the Philippines vs. Meralco, G.R. 14314, November 15, 2002
Adong v. Cheong Seng Gee, 43 Phil. 43
Duran vs. Abad Santos, G.R. L-99, November 16, 1945

II. NATURAL LAW: THE CLASSIC, SCHOLASTIC, ENLIGHTENMENT & POSTMODERN PHILOSOPHERS

1. The Stoics: Jus Naturale

2. Plato on Ideal Law and the Republic
3. Aristotle on Rational Law
4. Thomas Aquinas on Natural Law
5. Immanuel Kant and the Enlightenment Philosophers on Natural Rights
6. Natural Law as the Law of Nations
a. Hugo Grotius
b. William Blackstone Commentaries
c. Jacques Maritain
7. John Finnis: Natural Law and Natural Rights

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 60-102; Coquia, 198-244; Golding, et.al., 15-28, 287-299;
Tabucanon, 111-116, 163-176, 188-190.
Cases: Republic of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, July 21, 2003
ADMU vs. Capulong, G.R. No. 99327, May 27, 1993
Yamashita vs. Styer, G.R. No. L-129, December 19, 1945
Caraos vs. Daza, G.R. No. L-442, May 23, 1946
Tecson vs. Desiderio, Jr., G.R. No. 161434, March 3, 2004
US vs. Guendia, G.R. No. L-12462, December 20, 1917
US vs. Santos, G.R. No. L-12779, September 10, 1917
People vs. Pomar, G.R. No. L-22008, November 3, 1924
In re: Columns of Amado Macasaet in Malaya, A.M. No. 07-09-13-SC, August 8, 2008
People vs. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 2000
Laurel vs. Misa, G.R. No. L-409, January 30, 1947
Manzanares vs. Moreta, G.R. No. L-12306, October 22, 1918

III. CIVIL LAW: ROMAN JURISTS TO CONTEMPORARY THINKERS

1
1. Justinian on Codification of Law
2. Cicero: De Legibus
3. John Locke on Private Property
4. Robert Nozick: Enlightenment Theory
5. Latin Maxims

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 102-128; Aquino, 198-220; Golding, et.al., 122-162.

Cases: Kasilag vs. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 46623, December 7, 1939
Jain vs. IAC and People, G.R. No. L-63129, September 28, 1984
People vs. Hon. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 2000

IV. CRIMINAL LAW AND FAMILY LAW: CHRISTIAN & CONTEMPORARY PHILOSOPHERS

1. Augustine: Law, Order and the City of God

2. Aquinas on Crime and Punishment
3. Dietrich von Hildebrand: Personalism
4. Karol Wojtyla: Domestic/Family Philosophy
5. Michel Foucault: Discipline and Punish

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 129-153; Golding, et.al., 107-121, 207-235; Tabucanon, 49-110.
Cases: Echegaray vs. Secretary of Justice, G.R. No. 132601, January 19, 1999
Santos vs. CA and Bedia-Santos, G.R. No. 112019, January 4, 1995
Estrada vs. Escritor, A.M. P-02-1651, August 4, 2006
People vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. L-52, February 21, 1946

V. MERCANTILE LAW: FROM CUSTOMS TO LAW

1. Gerard de Malynes, Lex Mercatoria

2. Lord Mansfield: English Commercial Law
3. Adams Smith: The Wealth of Nations
4. Ayn Rand, Freedom of Production and Trade

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 154-169; Golding, et.al., 67-79.

Cases: US vs. Tan Quingco Chua, G.R. No. L-13708, January 29, 1919
PNB vs. The National City Bank of New York, G.R. No. L-43596, October 31, 1936
Compagnie Franco-Indochinoise vs. Deutschaft, G.R. No. L-1395, January 17, 1919

VI. REMEDIAL LAW: THE EMPIRICAL PHILOSOPHERS

1. Francis Bacon’s Inductive Jurisprudence

2. David Hume’s on Presumptions, Probabilities and Exhuming the Evidence
3. Ludwig Wittgenstein’s Game of Doubt: Logical and Epistemological Considerations in Law

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 162-169; Aquino, 115-160; Golding, et.al., 163-176, 315-342.
Cases: Apiag vs. Judge Cantero, A.M. No. MTJ-95-1070, February 12, 1997
Arianza vs. Workmen’s Compensation Commission, G.R. No. L-43352, February 28, 1978

VII. POLITICAL LAW: REFORM, REVOLUTION, AND RESISTANCE

1. Niccolo Machiavelli: The Breach and Practice of Politics

2. Jeremy Bentham: The Panopticon
3. Thomas Hobbes on Sovereign Immunity
4. John Locke: The State of Nature
5. Charles de Montesquieu: Doctrine of Separation of Powers

2
6. Thomas More on Republicanism, the Familial State and the Rule of Law
7. Jean Jacques Rousseau: Social Contract Theory
8. John Stuart Mill on Utilitarian Regime
9. John Rawls: A Theory of Justice

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 170-192; Aquino, 161-197; Tabucanon, 176-187; Golding, 179-286.
Cases: Tolentino vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 148334, January 21, 2004
The Province of North Cotabato vs. Philippine Peace Panel, G.R. Nos. 183591, et.al.,
October 14, 2008
Air Transportation Office vs. Sps. Ramos, G.R. No. 159402, February 23, 2011
David vs. Macapagal-Arroyo, G.R. No. 171396, May 3, 2006
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001

VIII. LABOR LAW: CAPITALISM, SOCIALISM AND COMMUNISM

1. Max Weber: The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism

2. Karl Marx: Critique and Prophetique
3. Marx and Friedrich Engels, The Communist Manifesto
4. Joseph Stalin and Nicolai Lenin: Socialism

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 194-203; Coquia, 164-173.

Cases: Calalang vs. Williams, G.R. No. 47800, December 2, 1940
De Ramas vs. CAR and Ramos, G.R. No.L-19555, May 29, 1964
People vs. Lava, G.R. No. L-4974, May 16, 1969
People vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. L-6025, May 30, 1964

IX. LEGAL PHILOSOPHY SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

1. The Teleological or Natural Law Theory
2. Legal Positivism
a. David Hume: Legal Positivism
b. Jeremy Bentham on the Principles of Morals and Legislation
c. John Austin: The Province of Jurisprudence
d. Hans Kelsen: Pure Theory of Law
e. Thomas Hobbes: Legalism or “Rule by the Law”
f. Herbert Hart: Rule of Recognition
g. Confucianism: Political Theory and Rectification of Names
3. The Interpretivist or Constructivist Theory
a.Ronald Dworkin: Interpretivist Approach and “Best Fit Theory”
4. Realist or Pragmatist Theory
a. Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes: The Path of the Law
5. Critical Legal Theory
a. Roberto Unger: Hegemony, Deconstruction and Hermeneutics of Suspicion
6. The Historical Approach
a. Freidrich Karl von Savigny: The Voltgeist
b. Sir Henry Sumner Maine: Legal History Theory
c. G.W.F. Hegel: Dialectic Idealism and the Philosophy of Law
7. The Functional or Sociological Approach
a. William James: Law as a means to satisfy needs
b. Emile Durkeim: Theory of Legal Change
c. Charles Louis Baron de Montesquieu: Adapting law to shifting conditions
d. R. Von Jhering: Law as a method of ordering society
e. Roscoe Pound: The scope and purpose of socio-logical jurisprudence
f. Max Weber: Typology of Law
g. Roberto Mangeira Unger: Cultural Context Theory

3
 h. Eugen Ehrlich: The Living Law
i. Talcott Parsons: Law as integrativist mechanism of social control
j. John Rawls: The Sociological School
8. The Utilitarian Approach
a. Jeremy Bentham: Felicific Calculus
b. John Stuart Mill: Utilitarianism, Law and Authority
c. Henry Sidgwick: Act and Rule Utilitarianism
9. The Economic Approach
a. Richard Posner: Economic Jurisprudence and Consequentialism
10. Legal Formalism or Conceptualism
a. Jeremy Bentham: Originalism/Textualism or the Plain Meaning Approach
b. Antonin Scalia: Contemporary Originalism
11. The Policy Science School
a. Harold Lasswell and Myres Mcdougal: Legal Education and Public Policy
12. Legal Practice Theory
a. Philip Bobbit: The Six Main Modalities

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 1-59; Coquia, 3-197; Golding, 13-89;Tabucanon, 117-162, 191-192.
Cases: Sta. Maria vs. Lopez, G.R. No. L-30773, February 18, 1970
Vargas vs. Rilloraza, G.R. No. L-1612, February 26, 1948
Peralta vs. the Director of Prisons, G.R. No. L-49, November 12, 1945
Estrada vs. Escritor, A.M. P-02-1651, August 4, 2006
Miranda vs. Abaya, G.R. No. 136351, July 28, 1999
Co Kim Cham vs. Valdez, G.R. No. L-5, September 17, 1945
Regala vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 105938, September 20, 1996
Primicias vs. Fuguso, G.R. No. L-1800, January 27, 1948
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 148560, November 19, 2001
Padua vs. Robles and Bay Taxi Cab, G.R. No. L-40486, August 29, 1975
Republic of the Philippines vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 104768, July 21, 2003

X. POSTMODERNISM AND THE FUTURE OF LAW

1. Feminist Philosophy
2. The “Other”: Anti-Discrimination Laws
3. Environmental Law and Ethics
4. The Philippine Legal Paradigm

Readings: Bernardo, et.al., 204-256; Golding, et.al., 90-104, 300-312.

Cases: Marcos vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 119976, September 18, 1995
Oposa vs. Factoran, G.R. No. 101083, July 30, 1993
Ang Ladlad LGBT Party vs. Comelec, G.R. No. 190582, April 8, 2010
Cruz vs. Sec. of Environment & Natural Resources, G.R. No. 135385, December 6, 2000
OCA vs. Judge Floro, A.M. RTJ-99-1460, March 31, 2006
Imbong vs. Ochoa, G.R. No. 204819, April 8, 2014

REFERENCES:
Aquino, Ranhilio. A Philosophy of Law: An Introduction to Legal Philosophy, Central Book Supply, Inc.
Bernardo, Nicolo and Bernardo, Oscar. Philawsophia: Philosophy and Theory of Law, Rex Book Store, Inc.
Coquia, Jorge. Readings in Legal Philosophy and Theory: Texts and Comments from Plato to McDougal ,
Rex Book Store, Inc.
Golding, Martin and Edmundson, William. The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Law and Legal
Theory, Blackwell Publishing.
Tabucanon, Gil Marvel. Legal Philosophy for Filipinos, Rex Book Store, Inc.