Functional School

Reported By:
Jerome Magpantay
Jennifer Borbon
Grace Ricafort
Aldous John Felix
Lauren Lopez
 The Functional School
The Scope and Purpose of Sociological Jurisprudence
by Roscoe Pound
 Schools of Jurists and Methods of Jurisprudence
PHILOSOPHICAL SCHOOL HISTORICAL SCHOOL ANALYTICAL SCHOOL
1. Eighteenth-Century-School-of- 1. German Historical School 1. Older Phase
Law - Jurists whose method is - Adhered to analytical method
- represented by Rousseauist philosophical and historical exclusively
School in France and with - Arose in a country dominated by
representatives fin American jurists Philosophical methods and at that
time when the Metaphysical School
was at its strongest

2. Metaphysical School 2. English Historical School 2. Newer Phase

- dominant in Philosophical - Jurists whose methods is - Method is historical as well as
jurisprudence during the first half comparative and historical analytical
of nineteenth century - Arose by way of revolt from a
predominant Analytical school.

3. Social-Philosophical School
- Have several varieties, but in which
the Neo-Hegelians seem to have
the most fruitful program
 Analytical Jurisprudence
• Pursues a comparative study of the purposes, methods and ideas
common to developed systems of law by analysis of such systems and
of their doctrines and institutions in their matured forms.
• The kernel of it is that law “is a product of conscious and increasingly
determinate human will”.
• The characteristics of the analytical school are as follows:
1. They consider developed systems only.
2. They regard the law as something made consciously by lawgivers,
legislative or judicial.
3. They see chiefly the force and constraints behind legal rules.
4. For them typical law is statute.
5. Their philosophical views are usually utilitarian or teleological .
 Historical Jurisprudence
• Pursues a comparative study of the origin and development of law, legal
systems, and particular doctrines and institutions.
• In opposition to the analytical jurists, the historical jurists and the philosophical
jurist agree that law is found, not made, differing only to with respect to what
it is that is found.
• Historical school deny that law is a product of conscious or determinate human
will.
• Historical jurists may be characterized as follows:
1. They consider the past rather that the present of law.
2. They regard the law as something that is not and in the long run cannot be made
consciously.
3. They chiefly the social pressure behind legal rules.
4. Their type of law is custom, or those customary modes of decision that make up a body of
juristic tradition or of case of law.
5. As a rule, their philosophical views have been Hegelian; partly because the school arose
when Hegel’s influence was paramount, but partly also because of an intrinsic sympathy.
 Philosophical Jurisprudence
• Studies the philosophical and ethical bases of law, legal systems and particular
doctrines and institutions, and criticizes them with respect to such bases.
• Characteristics of philosophical jurists:
1. Are more apt to consider the ideal future of law than its past or present.
2. While agreeing with the historical jurists that the law is not made but is found, yet in
general believe that when found its principles may, and, as a matter of expediency, should
be stated definitely and in certain form.
3. Look at the ethical and moral bases of rules rather that at their sanction.
4. Have no necessary preference for any particular form of law.
5. Hold very diverse philosophical view, so that, in a way, there is not so much a
philosophical school as a group of philosophical schools.
• It has an important function also in supplementing the analytical and the
historical methods in testing the apocryphal reasons worked out in later times
to explain or justify the rules of the past.
Rise of a Sociological School – The Social Philosophical
School
• From the comparison of rules within the legal system, it is but a
step to compare with the rules of other legal systems and to
compare systems themselves. This was the theory of the Ius
Gentium.
• The rule must conform to natural reason, and if it does not, must
be reshaped until it does, or must have reasons made for it. This
is the dominant idea of the Ius Naturale.
 Analytical Jurisprudence
• Pursues a comparative study of the purposes, methods and ideas
common to developed systems of law by analysis of such systems and
of their doctrines and institutions in their matured forms.
• The kernel of it is that law “is a product of conscious and increasingly
determinate human will”.
• The characteristics of the analytical school are as follows:
1. They consider developed systems only.
2. They regard the law as something made consciously by lawgivers,
legislative or judicial.
3. They see chiefly the force and constraints behind legal rules.
4. For them typical law is statute.
5. Their philosophical views are usually utilitarian or teleological .
 Historical Jurisprudence
• Pursues a comparative study of the origin and development of law, legal
systems, and particular doctrines and institutions.
• In opposition to the analytical jurists, the historical jurists and the philosophical
jurist agree that law is found, not made, differing only to with respect to what
it is that is found.
• Historical school deny that law is a product of conscious or determinate human
will.
• Historical jurists may be characterized as follows:
1. They consider the past rather that the present of law.
2. They regard the law as something that is not and in the long run cannot be made
consciously.
3. They chiefly the social pressure behind legal rules.
4. Their type of law is custom, or those customary modes of decision that make up a body of
juristic tradition or of case of law.
5. As a rule, their philosophical views have been Hegelian; partly because the school arose
when Hegel’s influence was paramount, but partly also because of an intrinsic sympathy.
 Philosophical Jurisprudence
• Studies the philosophical and ethical bases of law, legal systems and particular
doctrines and institutions, and criticizes them with respect to such bases.
• Characteristics of philosophical jurists:
1. Are more apt to consider the ideal future of law than its past or present.
2. While agreeing with the historical jurists that the law is not made but is found, yet in
general believe that when found its principles may, and, as a matter of expediency, should
be stated definitely and in certain form.
3. Look at the ethical and moral bases of rules rather that at their sanction.
4. Have no necessary preference for any particular form of law.
5. Hold very diverse philosophical view, so that, in a way, there is not so much a
philosophical school as a group of philosophical schools.
• It has an important function also in supplementing the analytical and the
historical methods in testing the apocryphal reasons worked out in later times
to explain or justify the rules of the past.
Rise of a Sociological School – The Social Philosophical
School
• From the comparison of rules within the legal system, it is but a
step to compare with the rules of other legal systems and to
compare systems themselves. This was the theory of the Ius
Gentium.
• The rule must conform to natural reason, and if it does not, must
be reshaped until it does, or must have reasons made for it. This
is the dominant idea of the Ius Naturale.
Positive, Normative and Functional Schools in Law and
Economics – Franceso Parisi

POSITIVE NORMATIVE FUNCTIONAL

• Result of an effort • Need for legal • Methodological
intervention individualism
• Selection through
adjudication • Value-tainted and • Social reality
prone to policy recognition
• Efficiency focused intervention
• Incentive inquiry
• Efficiency is not the
ultimate end of a legal
system
 Delos Santos vs. Roman Catholic Church of Midsayap (1954)
G.R. no. L-6088, 50 O.G. 1588

• Issue:
– Is the sale of the valid and in Accordance with Section 118 of the Commonwealth Act
no. 141?
Ruling:
Section 118 of the Commonwealth Act no. 141
• “That a parcel of land acquired under free patent or
homestead provisions cannot become liable to satisfaction
of any debt contracted prior to the expiration of five years
from the date issuance of the patent”
Analysis of the Facts:
• On December 9, 1938 a homestead patent covering a tract of land Is
situated in the municipality of Midsayap province of Cotabato was granted
to Julio Sarabillio and on March 17, 1939 the original certificate of title
was issued in his favor.
• December 31, 1940, Julio Sarabillio sold 2 hectares to the Roman Catholic
Church of Midsayap for PHP800 for educational and charitable purposes
and was subject for approval of the secretary of Agriculture and Natural
Resources.
• December 1947, a request of Approval was asked for by the Roman
Catholic Church that the land would be used solely for educational and
charitable purposes only.
• The sale was approved March 26, 1949 then March 29, 1950 the deed of
sale was registered in Cotabato. No new title was issued in favor of the
Roman Catholic Church.
• In the meantime Julio Sarabillio died and Delos Santos was appointed
adminstratix of the estate. She said that the sale of the 2 hectare land is in
violation of section 118 of the Commonwealth act. Delos Santos Prayed
that the sale be declared null and Void.
• The defendant Church backed up by “Pari Delicto”
• The Clerk of court ordered Delos Santos to reimburse the PHP800 Plus the
Additional PHP 601 for the improvement and the defendant church to
vacate the land.
 ANALYSIS of the Argument
Delos Santos
Delos Santos argued that the sale of the
land was made in violation of the Section
118 of the Commonwealth act No. 141
and wanted to declare the sale of the land
null and void.
Roman Catholic Church
They argue that the sale is legal and valid
because it has been executed for
educational and charitable purposes and
was approved by the Secretary of
Agriculture and Natural resources.
 Conclusion:
• The Right to remain in the Possesion of the
Land is no better than that of Delos Santos
and therefore, they should not be allowed to
remain in it to the prejudice of Delos Santos
during and until the government takes steps
towards its revision to the state.
 Justa G. Guido, petitioner
vs
Rural Progress Administration (RPA) c/o Faustino Aguilar, Manager RPA, respondent

ISSUE:
• Whether or not the expropriation of Guido’s
land is in conformity to the principle of social
justice?
 RULING

• Commonwealth Act No. 539

• Section 1 - This Act authorized the President of the Philippines to acquire
private lands or any interest therein through the purchaser or farms for resale
at a reasonable price.
• Section 2 - The President may designate any department, bureau, office or
instrumentality of the National Government to carry out the objective.
• Article XIII of the Constitution - Congress may authorize upon payment of just
compensation, the expropriation of lands to be subdivided into small lots and
conveyed cost to individuals.
• Section 1 (par 2), Article III, Constitution – Private property should not be
taken for public use without due process of law and without just
compensation.
• Preamble -..…to secure to the Filipino people the blessing of independence
under the regime of justice, liberty and democracy.
 ANALYSIS
• Justa Guido is the owner of the land being expropriated by the Rural Progress
Administration (RPA).
• He filed for a petition for prohibition to prevent RPA and Judge Oscar Castelo from
proceeding with expropriation as he alleged that the land sought is commercial
and therefore excluded within provisions of Commonwealth Act 539 .
 ANALYSIS of the Arguments
Justa G. Guido, Petitioner Rural Progress Administration (RPA) c/o
Faustino Aguilar, Manager RPA,
Respondent
Constitution Article XIII section 4/ Included
Commonwealth Act 539 concerned
private land not included
 CONCLUSIONS

• No. It is not in conformity to the principle of social justice.

 YU SINGCO VS REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. L-6162. December 29, 1953

ISSUE:
• Whether or not Yu Singco application for
Naturalization be approved?
• What constitutes "proper and irreproachable
conduct?"
 RULES:

• SECTION 2 OF THE REVISED NATURALIZATION

LAW COMMONWEALTH ACT NO. 473
• “He must be of good moral character and
believes in the principles underlying the
Philippine Constitution, and must have conducted
himself in a proper and irreproachable manner
during the entire period of his residence in the
Philippines in his relation with the constituted
government as well as with the community in
which he is living.”
 ANALYSIS:

• YU Singco, a Chinese citizen applied for naturalization. The CFI Of

Cotobato approved the petition and the opposition file a petition
on the ground that he had lived an immoral life by maintaining two
Chinese wives and had illicit relationship with Ortuoste with whom
he had children but there is no evidence of the supposed elicit
relationship. However, there is evidence to the effect that Singco
had children with Cua and had five children, Singco did not deny the
relationship or that the children and he even admitted that he had
lived with Cua and he had been giving money, his excuse is that he
had received help from Cua’s father when still living with them.
Singco had children with CHua Hoc Ty whom she married in China in
1924.
• THE CFI HELD THAT SINGCO’S SUPPORT TO THE CHILDREN OF CUA
PROVES THE GRANDEUR OF HEART AND CONSCIOUSNESS OF A
GRACE RESPONSIBILITY ON THE PART OF THE PETITIONER.
 RESPONDENT ARGUMENTS:

• Solicitor general contends that Singco has not conducted himself “in a
proper and irreproachable manner during the entire period of his
residence in the Philippines… ” as required by SECTION 2 of the Revised
Naturalization Law and what constitutes “proper and irreproachable
conduct” within the meaning of the law must be determined not by the
law of the country of Singco but by the standards of morality prevalent in
the country and in these in turn by the religious beliefs and social
concepts existing therein. This country is predominantly Catholic and
universally Christian in religious belief. Both seduction and bigamy are
punished as crimes, and while seduction is a private crime and
illegitimates declared legal heirs, a man and a woman living together as
husband and wife, if known to be unmarried, are in general despised and
avoided in society, even if not considered social outcasts. Society may
pardon the sins of their members, but such pardon should not be
confused with approval.
 CONCLUSIONS:

• No, the application should be denied. The court reversed the decision of the trial
court.
• Singco had previously lived with another woman with whom he has had five
children and abandoned them, marrying another. The conduct of Singco cannot be
consider proper and irreproachable within the meaning of the law, even if he
actually gives support to his children.