Sunteți pe pagina 1din 146

A  Primer  on  the  Civil-­‐Law  

System
Abdulrahman  Mangandog,  Graziella  Andaya,  Georgia  Angela  Dacuan,  
Denise  Michaela  Yap,  Jose  Victor  Santos,  San>ago  Baluyot,  Don  
Chris>an  San>ago,  Renzo  Francesco,  Cuisia  Carlos  Castañeda,  
Kaisser  John  Acuaña.  
 
Defini9on
•  Common  law-­‐is  that  body  of  law  derived  from  judicial  decisions  of  
courts  and  similar  tribunals.  
•  Civil  law-­‐is  a  legal  system,  in  which  that  its  core  principles  
are  codified  into  a  referable  system  which  serves  as  the  primary  
source  of  law.  
•  Mixed-­‐Implements  a  liLle  bit  of  both  
In  the  Beginning:  “All  Roads  Lead  to  Rome”
•  Lingua  Franca-­‐  Language,  as  a  culture,  as  a  means  of  communica>on.  
•  The  concept  of  law,  in  general  is  a  microcosm  of  a  culture.  
•  The  template  of  which  was  La>n  Language.  
Rome
•  Created  the  Republic.  
•  Adopted  Greek  principles  of  Democracy.  
•  Established  the  Civil  Law  system  by  27  BC  
•  Had  a  caste  of  Jurists,  Who  develop  new  principles,  rules,  and  
procedures  to  meet  the  challenges  of  their  par>cular  age  
•  This  judiciary  was  nonprofessional.  
Medieval  Developments  in  Italy
•  11-­‐15  Century,  successor  of  the  Roman  system.  
•  System  of  law  to  fulfil  both  the  commercial  and  social  needs  of  the  
populace.  
•  Glossators-­‐  interpreted  textual  material  from  the  Corpus  Juris  Civilis  
and  disseminated  those  interpreta>ons  to  other  scholars,  law  
students,  and  lay  judges  
Corpus  Juris  
Civilis
•  Originally  from  Rome  
•  Adopted  by  Italy  
•  Then  adopted  later  by  Spain  
•  Template  for  the  Civil  law  
Canon  Law
•  Originated  from  Italy  
•  Made  from  Corpus  Juris  Civilis,  and  customary  Law.  
•  Culmina>ng  to  Concordia  Discordan>um  Canonum.  
•  It  is  the  basis  for  almost  all  canon  law.  
Law  for  Merchants
•  Originated  from  Italy  
•  Made  from  Corpus  Juris  Civilis,  and  customary  Law.  
•  Necessitated  due  to  the  increased  trade  and  infrastructure.  
•  To  maintain  logis>cs  and  efficiency  of  the  trade,  the  law  was  
propagated.  
Mari9me  Code
•  Influenced  and  necessitated  by  the  Laws  for  Merchants.  
•  To  be  able  to  keep  the  gears  of  industry  well  oiled.  
•  Consolato  Del  Mare  (Consulate  of  the  Sea)  
•  Compiled  in  Spain  
Trade  Courts
•  With  increase  trade,  there  was  increased  conflict.  
•  Courts  had  to  be  created  to  be  able  to  resolve  trade  maLers.  
•  separa>ng  commercial  law  and  procedure  from  other  parts  of  the  
law.  
Recap
Rome  
Template  

Italy  Canon  law  and  


Law  of  Merchants  

Spain  Mari>me  code  and  


trade  dispute  courts  
1.  Canon  Law  and  the  Law  Merchant    
2.  Intellectual  Developments  Leading  to  the  
Codifica9on  Process    
3.  The  Codifica9on  Processes  in  France  and  Germany    
-­‐  The  French  Code    
-­‐  The  German  Code    
-­‐  The  Codes  of  Chile  and  Brazil    
 
4.  The  Development  of  the  Role  of  Jurists  in  Modern  
Systems    
 
 
Canon  Law  and  the  Law  
Merchant    

Roman  law  as   Customary  
incorporated  in   (local)  law    
Jus>nian’s  
Corpus  Juris  
Civilis,    
medieval  period    

• (1)  the  crea>on  of  a   •  2)  the  maturing  of  a  law  merchant,  
or  law  covering  commercial  
comprehensive  canon  or   transac>ons,  as  the  result  of  the  
ecclesias>cal  law  by  the   growth  of  commercial  classes  and  
Roman  Catholic  Church     expansion  of  commercial  ac>vi>es  
in  European  ci>es  and  regions.    

 ecclesias>cal  courts  evolved  within  the  Roman  church  


has;  
1.rela>vely  uniform  structure,    
2.  systema>c  management,  and    
3.  educated  staff  of  judges  trained  and  skilled  in  applying  a  
canon  law    
Gra9an    
A  jurist,  who  produced    the  Concordia  Discordan2um  Canonum    

 
         basis  for  all  canon  law  

Which  has  divided  into  3  parts  


(1) the  nature  and  sources  of  law  and  ecclesias>cal  offices  and  conduct;    
(2)   clerical  behavior,  penal  law  and  procedure,  church  property,  religious  
orders,  marriage,  and  penance;  and  
(3)   sacraments  and  church  doctrine.    
 
 
development  in  medieval  Europe  of  the  law  
merchant    

(1) the  crea>on  and  expansion  of  commercial  rela>ons  between  Italian  city-­‐
states  and  between  the  city-­‐states  and  other  urban  centers  outside  Italy;    
(2)   the  growth  in  mari>me  commercial  ac>vi>es  and  the  necessity  for  rules  
and  regula>ons  to  govern  that  commerce;    
(3)   the  rise  in  the  number  of  fairs  and  markets  throughout  Europe  and  the  
need  to  regulate  commercial  transac>ons  in  such  secngs;  and    
(4)   the  rise  of  associa>ons  of  merchants  in  commercial  centers  created  for  
purposes  of  safety  of  goods  in  transit,  financial  security,  and  speedy  
resolu>on  of  commercial  disputes.    
 
The  organiza>on  of  merchants,  seafarers,  craesmen,  and  traders  into  associa>ons  and  guilds  
formed  a  community  of  ins>tu>ons  that  followed  local  custom  and  prac>ce,  which  in  turn  provided  
substance  for  the  body  of  commercial  law  that  followed.  The  law  merchant  also  had  a  Roman  law  
element,  because  Roman  private  law  had  addressed  such  commercial  maLers  as  nego1able  
instruments  and  contracts.    
A  vast  assortment  of  important  customs  rela>ng  to  commercial  prac>ces  for  sea  transport  
developed  in  the  Italian  ci>es  of  Genoa  and  Pisa,  two  important  commercial  centers  of  the  medieval  
world.  These  customs  greatly  influenced  the  compila>on  of  the  most  important  mari>me  code  of  
the  period,  the  Consolato  Del  Mare  (Consulate  of  the  Sea).  Compiled  in  Barcelona,  Spain,  and  
containing  over  330  ar>cles,  the  Consolato  Del  Mare  covered  such  mari>me  maLers  as  construc>on  
of  vessels,  circumstances  requiring  assistance  to  other  vessels  in  distress,  general  average  (a  
mari>me  principle  for  alloca>ng  damages),  employment  of  pilots,  and  privateering.  One  ar>cle,  for  
example,  established  the  legal  requirement  of  a  ship  to  carry  a  cat  to  deal  with  the  rats  on  board.  
This  influen>al  code  was  translated  from  the  original  Catalan  (an  early  western  Mediterranean  
language)  into  La>n,  French,  and  Italian  and  was  circulated  in  the  early  sixteenth  century  
throughout  Europe.    
 
Municipal  commercial  courts  emerged  to  handle  mercan>le  cases.  The  power  of  the  guilds  to  regulate  
commerce  within  a  par>cular  crae  oeen  resulted  in  the  adop>on  of  municipal  statutes  governing  organiza>on,  
internal  policies,  and  commercial  prac>ces  of  a  par>cular  crae.  These  municipal  statutes  were  usually  based  on  
the  customs  of  the  crae  guilds  that  had  been  periodically  recorded,  and  they  became  a  source  of  local  
commercial  law.    
MUNICIPAL  STATUTES  –  serves  as  guilds  and  guild  members  
 
establishment  of  special  commercial  courts  to  deal  with  trade  disputes  and  trade  maLers—both  in  the  ci>es  for  
the  benefit  of  guilds  and  at  markets  and  fairs—paved  the  way  for  the  modern  prac>ce  in  some  European  
countries  of  separa>ng  commercial  law  and  procedure  from  other  parts  of  the  law.  Commercial  law  and  
procedure  were  assigned  to  a  special  commercial  code,  and  special  commercial  courts  were  created  to  
administer  the  commercial  law.    
 
main  tributary  was  Roman  law,  primarily  contained  in  Jus>nian’s  Corpus  Juris  Civilis,  as  modified  and  
elaborated  by  the  glossators  and  commentators  in  the  Italian  universi>es.  The  other  tributaries  were  
customary  (local)  law,  canon  law,  and  the  law  merchant.  Together  they  came  to  be  known  as  the  jus  
commune  (or  “common  law”—different  from  the  common  law  of  England),  common  to  a  whole  kingdom  
and  the  peoples  within  it.  The  jus  commune  as  it  was  established  in  France,  Spain,  and  other  European  
monarchies  was  characterized  by  both  con>nuity  and  similarity  of  actudes  about  the  law    
Intellectual  
Developments  
Leading  to  the  
Codifica9on  Process
Humanism  –  originated  from  renaissance  period  known  as  the  “NATURAL  LAW”  school.    

poli>cs  and  religion  the  decline  in  the  secular  influence  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  the  
waning  of  the  power  and  authority  of  the  Holy  Roman  Empire  were  accompanied  by  the  birth  
of  the  concept  of  the  na>on-­‐state  and  an  emphasis  on  strong,  central  governments.    
developments  culminated  in  the  crea>on  of  the  modern  European  system  of  states  by  the  
signing  of  the  Treaty  of  Westphalia  in  1648,  which  ended  the  Thirty  Years  War  and,  with  it,  
the  Holy  Roman  Empire    
inspired  by  the  culture  of  an>quity—primarily  Greece,  and  to  a  lesser  extent  Rome.    
 
Hugo  de  Groot  “Gro9us”  
father  of  public  interna>onal  law  
1.  De  Jure  Belli  ac  Pacis  (On  the  Law  of  War  and  Peace)    
   -­‐  universal  concepts  of  law  that  transcended  na>onal  boundaries  and  were  not  
dependent  on  any  one  legal  system.    
ADVOCATED  that;  
a.)  law  being  based  on  human  experiences  and  desires.  
b.)  ra>onal  approach  to  the  structure  of  law  and  the  resolu>on  of  disputes.    
c.)  systema>c  arrangement  of  legal  materials    
 
 
 
 
Samuel  Pufendorf  and  Christopher  Wolff    
-­‐jurispruden>al  writers  
-­‐  Who  aLempted  to  build  a  legal  system  using  the  scien>fic  methods  of  Galileo  and  
Descartes    
-­‐Pufendorf,  who  introduced  the  inclusion  of    introductory  ar>cles  sta>ng  the  
general  principles  of  law  that  provide  the  framework  for  the  subsequent  sec>ons  
can  be  aLributed  to  his  work  and  influence.    
 
“codifica>on  in  the  sense  of  a  ra>onally  organized  statement  of  the  whole  field  of  law  (or  of  
all  private  law)  was  only  possible  aeer  the  work  of  the  natural  lawyers.”    
 

During  the  18th  century,  ENLIGHTENMENT  had  paved  a  way  with  regard  to  the  intellectual  and  social  
turmoil  that  happened  during  the  15th  –  17th  Century  
 -­‐  based  on  a  belief  in  the  fundamental  importance  of  reason    
 -­‐  provided  the  final  s>mula>on  for  the  crea>on  of  the  modern  comprehensive  codes  of  the  
different  European  states    
 
Jus9nian’s  

star>ng  point  for  the  codifica>on  process    
In  their  codifica>on  it  also  provided  a  ra>onal  statement  of  the  legal  principles  and  rules  on  
almost  the  en>re  range  of  subjects  of  private  law  and  was  a  shared  tradi>on  in  almost  all  
European  legal  systems    
 
 
 

age  required  that  ci>zens  be  knowledgeable  on  maLers  of  law,  so  that  each  ci>zen  
could  know  and  understand  his  or  her  rights  and  du>es  under  the  law.    
 
The  Codifica9on  Processes  in  
France  and  Germany    

The  French  code
•  Napoleon  appointed  four  senior  prac>>oners  of  law    
•  four  years,  devoted  to  draeing  the  code    
•  Code  Civil  des  Français    -­‐  1804,  with  3  books  and  has  2,281  ar>cles    
following  is  the  basic  structure  of  the  Code  Civil:    
1.Six  ar>cles  at  the  beginning  of  the  first  book  announce  general  principles    
of  law,  including  the  publica>on,  effects,  and  applica>on  of  the  law.    
2.  Subsequent  >tles  in  Book  I  (ar>cles  7–515)  deal  with  civil  rights  and  the    
status  of  persons,  and  with  marriage,  divorce,  and  paternity.    
3.  Book  II  (ar>cles  516–710)  covers  real  and  personal  property,  and  the    
ownership  and  rights  rela>ng  to  such  property.    
4.  Book  III  (ar>cles  711–2281)  contains  provisions  on  rights  of  succession,    
contracts,  and  obliga>ons  (the  law  of  obliga>ons  covers  general  principles  of  obliga>ons,  as  well  as  
specific  contracts,  quasi-­‐contracts,  delict  (tort),  security  rights,  and  property  rights  in  marriage).    
 
The  German  Code    

•  ended  up  with  a  code  that  was  largely  the  product  of  codifica>on  processes  in  three  
Germanic  states:  Bavaria,  Prussia,  and  Austria    
•  s>ll  in  effect,  resulted  from  the  crea>on  of  a  commission  by  statute  in  1873  to  codify  
German  civil  law.  Bürgerliches  Gesetzbuch,  or  BGB  containing  5  books  
•  Book  I—General  parts,  including  natural  and  juris>c  persons,  the  defini>on  of  things,  
classifica>on  of  legal  acts,  and  prescrip>ve  periods.    
•  Book  II—The  law  of  obliga>ons,  including  crea>on  and  discharge  of  obliga>ons,  
contracts,  and  the  law  of  delict.    
•  Book  III—The  law  of  real  and  personal  property,  including  the  ownership  and  possession  
of  property  and  servitudes  on  property  and  securi>es.    
•  Book  IV—Family  law,  including  marriage  and  other  rela>onships  within  the  family.    
•  Book  V—The  law  of  succession,  including  hereditary  succession  and  the  rights  of  heirs,  
wills,  seLlements,  and  requirements  of  proof  rela>ng  to  inheritance.    
The  Codes  of  Chile  and  Brazil    

•  Spanish  law  was  responsible  for  the  recep>on  of  Roman  law  in  
Central  and  South  America  through  the  colonizing  ac>vi>es  of  the  
conquistadors  and  those  who  followed  them    
•  Legal  developments  in  North  America  also  influenced  La>n  American  
legal  systems,  with  regard  to  their  cons>tu>onal  theory  and  prac>ce  
and  the  structure  of  government.    
•  the  content  of  civil,  commercial,  and  procedural  codes,  legal  
educa>on,  the  structure  of  the  legal  profession,  the  influence  of  legal  
scholars,  and  the  role  of  the  judge  in  the  judicial  process  in  almost  all  
La>n  American  countries  conform  very  much  to  the  civil-­‐law  tradi>on  
that  evolved  in  central  and  western  Europe.    
•  Spanish  law  itself  became  a  jumble  of  codes,  legisla>on,  and  judicial  
decisions.    
•  Nueva  Recopilación    
•  The  codifica>on  processes  in  Chile  and  Brazil  are  significant  because  
of  the  great  influence  of  the  Chilean  code  on  those  of  many  of  other  
La>n  American  countries  and  because  of  the  size  and  influence  of  
Brazil  generally  in  La>n  American  affairs  and  the  uniqueness  of  its  
situa>on  as  a  former  Portuguese  colony.    
ANDRESS  bello
•  Who  started  the  civil  law  tradi>on  in  Chile.  Who  draeed  the  New  Civil  Code  
for  his  adopted  country,  Chile.  
•  The  codifica>on  processes  in  Chile  and  Brazil  are  significant  because  of  the  
great  influence  of  the  Chilean  code  on  those  of  many  of  other  La>n  
American  countries  and  because  of  the  size  and  influence  of  Brazil  
generally  in  La>n  American  affairs  and  the  uniqueness  of  its  situa>on  as  a  
former  Portuguese  colony.    
•  The  NCC  was  adopted  by  by  Colombia  and  Ecuador,  and  was  used  as  a  
model  for  the  civil  codes  of  Argen>na,  Paraguay,  Venezuela,  El  Salvador,  
and  Nicaragua.    
•  The  Chilean  code,  which  has  undergone  major  revisions  since  its  mid-­‐
nineteenth-­‐century  adop>on,  primarily  by  later  legisla>on,  s>ll  remains  in  
force.    
Philip  II  (1603)  
•  The  ordinances  made  were  covered  by  many  aspects  of  private  
and  criminal  law  based  on  Roman  law,  canon  law,  customary  law,  
municipal  charters  and  statutes,  and  early  Portuguese  legisla>on.    
§  Characterized  by  legalism  and  formalism.  And  it  resulted  with  legal  codes.  
§  “greatest  monument  to  legal  thought  and  codifica>on  in  La>n  America.”    
§  (1)  general  principles,    
§  (2)  the  law  of  persons,  things,  and  rights,  and  
§   (3)  the  law  of  family,  property,  obliga>ons,  and  succession.  It  has  been  amended  
by  legisla>on  since  its  promulga>on,  primarily  in  the  area  of  domes>c  rela>ons,  
but  it  is  s>ll  in  force.    
The  Development  of  the  Role  of  
Jurists  in  Modern  Systems    

•  civil  codes,  based  as  they  are  on  the  Corpus  Juris  Civilis    
•  reasoning  process  from  code  provisions  is  deduc>ve—one  arrives  at  conclusions  
about  specific  situa>ons  from  general  principles    
•  jurists  apply  deduc>ve  reasoning  to  suggest  an  appropriate  judgment  or  result  in  
specific  cases.  Historically  their  work  took  the  form  of  trea>ses  and  
commentaries  that  became  the  “doctrine”  used  by  judges  in  their  delibera>ons  
about  specific  cases,  lawyers  for  advice  to  their  clients,  and  legislators  in  the  
prepara>on  of  statutes  and  regula>ons.  
Pontes  de  Miranda    
•  rote  many  books  on  Brazilian  law  that  are  referred  to  in  Brazilian  
judicial  opinions  and  used  in  the  draeing  of  Brazilian  legisla>on    
•  Trea2se  on  Private  Law,  consists  of  sixty-­‐two  volumes  of  commentary  
on  the  civil  code.    

condi>on  of  the  sixteenth-­‐  and  seventeenth-­‐century  German  courts,  staffed  by  lay  judges  untrained  
and  unsophis>cated  in  the  law    
law  professors,  the  academic  jurists  in  Germany.  
The  German  professors  were  wri>ng  the  decisions  according  to  their  own  developed  doctrine.  
Evolu9on  in  france
•  The  monarchy  encouraged  legally  trained  men  into  the  judiciary.    
•  French  legal  scholars  and  law  professors  were  never  able  to  achieve  
the  standing  and  power  accorded  their  colleagues  in  Germany.    
•  The  leading  jurists  of  the  pre-­‐Napoleanic  period  in  France,  Charles  
Dumoulin  (1500–1566)  and  Robert  Pothier  (1699–1772),  were  not  
law  professors.  Dumoulin  was  an  advocate  and  later  “consultant,”  
and  Pothier  was  a  judge  for  over  fiey  years  of  his  long  professional  
life.    
Contrast  of  german  and  French  jurist
•  With  reference  to  appellate  cases  
•  Both  cases  involve  an  issue  of  tort  liability  of  individuals  involved  in  
concerted  ac>vi>es.    
•  French  decision  is  cryp>c,  containing  only  about  500  words  and  ci>ng  only  
two  sec>ons  of  the  code  and  no  doctrinal  trea>ses.  The  German  decision  is  
longer—about  2,000  words—with  a    
•  more  lengthy  analysis  of  the  issues,  and  cites  not  only  relevant  code  
provisions,  but  the  wri>ngs  of  at  least  three  German  jurists    
•  The  two  cases  are  also  instruc>ve  about  the  role  of  precedent  in  these  
countries.  The  French  decision  contains  none,  and  the  German  decision  
only  three.    
Part  II:  TheFunc9ons  in  the    
System  As  It  Exists  and  
Func9ons  in  the  Modern  Era
The  Private  Law  –  Public  Law  Dichotomy
•  The  fundamental  division  in  modern  civil-­‐law  systems  is  that  between  
private  and  public  law.  

•  As  exemplified  in  the  17th  and  18th  century  civil  codes,  Private  law  is  
that  area  of  the  law  in  which  the  sole  func>on  of  the  government  was  
recogni>on  and  enforcement  of  private  rights.    

•  Thus,  today  private  law  includes  at  least  the  civil  and  commercial  
codes.  
The  Private  Law  –  Public  Law  Dichotomy
•  Public  law  focuses  on  the  effectua>on  of  the  public  interest  by  state  
ac>on  

•  Today,  Public  law  includes  at  least  what  common  law  aLorney  would  
recognize  as  cons>tu>onal  law,  administra>ve  law,  and  crminal  law.    
The  Private  Law  –  Public  Law  Dichotomy
•  Public  Law  generally  is  not  part  of  comprehensive  civil  codes.  

•  Public  Law  consists  of  various  statutes,  supplemented  liberally  by  


judge-­‐made  norms,  that  regulate  the  organiza>on  and  func>on  of  
public  authori>es  and  the  rela>onship  between  public  agencies  and  
invdividual  ci>zens.  

•  Public  Law  tends  to  be  more  fluid  than  the  civil  codes  since  it  change  
rapidly  in  reponse  to  poli>cal  forces.    
Court  Structure

•  Typical  Civil-­‐Law  Judicial  System  would  be  represented  as  a  set  of  two  
or  more  dis>nct  structures  with  no  bridge  in  between.  

•  As  a  general  maLer,  a  system  of  ordinary  courts,  staffed  by  ordinary  


judges,  adjudicates  the  vast  majority  of  civil  and  criminal  cases.  

•  Ordinary  Courts  are  the  modern  administra>ve  state.  


Court  Structure

•   A  Common-­‐Law  judicial  system  may  be  drawn  as  a  pyramid  with  the  
“highest”  court  on  top.  

•  A  Civil-­‐Law  judicial  system  would  be  represented  as  a  set  of  two  or  
more  dis>nct  structures  with  no  bridge  between  them.  

   
 
Court  Structure
Ordinary  Courts  
 
•  Is  staffed  by  ordinary  judges  that  adjudicates  the  vast  majority  of  civil  
and  criminal  cases.  

•  They  are  the  modern-­‐day  successors  of  the  various  civil  courts  that  
existed  in  Europe.    

•  Jurisdic>on  expanded  to  include  maLers  formerly  addressed  by  the  


ecclesias>cal  tribunals,  as  well  as  commercial  disputes.  
Court  Structure

French  System  
•  The  apex  of  the  ordinary  court  is   First  Level  of  French  Court  consists  
the  Cour  de  Cassa2on  (Supreme   of:  
Court  of  Cassa>on).  
•  General  Civil  
•  The  court  reviews  on  a  
discre>onary  basis,  only  ques>ons   •  Criminal  trial  courts  
of  statutory  interpreta>on.   •  Specialized  Courts  
•  Cour  de  Cassa>on  is  composed  of  
100  judges  who  sit  in  six  rota>ng  
specialized  panels.  
Court  Structure
German  Model  
•  Relies  on  several  independent  court  systems,  each  with  its  own  
supreme  court.  

•  There  are  separate  systems  of  labor  courts,  tax  courts,  and  social  
security  courts.  

•  The  lower  courts  sit  in  panel  of  3  professional  judges.  


The  Legal  Process
Civil  Procedure    
 
•  The  judicial  proceedings  are  public  and  controlled  by  the  par>es.  

•  Civil-­‐Law  judges  supervises  and  shapes  the  fact  finding  process.  

•  Civil  Process  is  conducted  primarily  in  wri>ng  and  trial.  


 
The  Legal  Process
Civil  Procedure  
 
•  A  lawyer  must  submit  “ar>cles  of  proof”  to  the  judge  and  the  opposing  
counsel.  
•  Opposing  counsel’s  role  is  to  make  certain  that  the  record  of  summary  
of  the  tes>mony  is  complete  and  correct.  
•  The  par>es  must  submit  proposed  evidence  to  the  judge  in  wri>ng  or  
in  oral  hearings.  
•  The  judge  delivers  rulings  concerning  the  relevance  and  admissibility  of  
the  evidence  
The  Legal  Process:  Criminal  Procedure
Three  Phases  in  Criminal  Proceeding  
 
•  Inves>ga>ve  Phase  
•  Examining  Phas  
•  The  Trial  
 
The  Legal  Process
Appellate  Procedure  
 
•  Intermediate  appellate  courts  may  obtain  addi>onal  tes>mony,  
supervise  the  collec>on  of  new  evidence,  and  seek  out  expert  
opinions.  

•  Intermediate  appellate  review  in  civil-­‐law  tradi>on  oeen  involves  a  


de  novo  review  of  both  the  facts  and  law  of  the  case.    
 
Legal  Process
Appellate  Procedure  
 
•  Appellate  courts  of  last  resort,  generally  consider  only  ques>on  of  law.  

•  French  System  of  “Cassa>on”,  the  court  decides  only  the  ques>on  of  law  
that  has  been  referred  to  it,  not  the  case  itself.  

•  The  Court  of  Cassa>on  may  either  affirm  the  lower  court  decision  or  
remand  the  case  for  reconsiderafion  to  a  different  lower  court.  
Legal  Process
Appellate  Procedure  
 
•  The  remand  court  is  free  to  decide  the  case  the  same  way  as  the  
previous  lower  court.  

•  If  that  occurs,  2nd  appeal  may  be  taken  to  the  Court  of  Cassa>on,  
which  will  then  sit  in  plenary  session.  

•  The  court  may  then  issue  a  disposi>ve  ruling  in  some  case  to  a  third  
lower  court  to  issue  the  judgment.  
Legal  Process
Appellate  Procedure  
 
•  In  the  German  System,  the  high  court  may  reverse,  remand,  and  
modify  the  lower  court  decision  and  enter  the  judgment  itself.    
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Scholars  

•  According  to  legal  folklore,  the  legal  scholars  does  the  “basic  
thinking”  for  the  legal  system.  

•  Judges  and  legislatures,  look  to  legal  scholars  for  definitve  views  on  
the  law.  

•  Legal  scholarship  is  not  a  formal  source  of  law,  but  the  “doctrine”  as  
developed  by  scholars  is  highly  valued  in  the  civil-­‐law  tradi>on.  
 
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on

The  Legislature  
 
•  The  Legislature  in  the  civil-­‐law  tradi>on  strives  to  suppliment  and  
update  the  codes  in  those  areas  in  which  the  legal  scholars  have  
suggested  that  codes  are  defec2ve  or  incomplete.  
•  New  Legisla>on  employes  the  concepts  and    follows  the  structures  
established  by  the  legal  scholars  and  embodied  in  the  earlier  codes.  
•  Legislatures  seek  completeness  and  clarity,  aLemp>ng  to  produce  
laws  that  are  consistent  with  the  tenets  of  the  legal  science  and  
compa>ble  with  established  legal  order.  
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Judges  
 
•  Judges  typically  enter  judicial  service  at  the  lower  levels  of  the  
judiciary.  Theyenterd  directly  from  law  school  aeer  passing  state  
qualifying  examina>ons.    

•  Judge’s  role  is  limited  by  strict  no>ons  of  legisla>ve  supremacy.  

•  Civil  Law  Judges  are  the  operators  of  the  system  designed  by  legal  
scien>sts  and  built  by  the  legislators.    
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
•  Courses  tend  to  focus  on  general  legal  principles,  as  opposed  to  
professional  skills  and  problem  solving.  

•  Prac>cal  skills  are  acquired  through  appren>ceship.    

•  Tradi>on  of  legal  science,  civil-­‐law  students  study  legal  trea>ses  that  
expound  the  established  principles  of  the  law  with  liLle  case-­‐method  
analysis.  
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
 
•  Civil-­‐Law  students  choose  among  the  several  branches  of  the  legal  
profession.  
 
•  These  choices  include  a  career  as  a  governement  lawyer  or  in  private  
legal  prac2ce.  
 
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
 
•  Private  legal  prac>ce  is  divided  between  the  advocate  and  the  notary.  
 
•  Private  Lawyers  are  generally  governed  by  Mandatory  Bar  
Associa2ons.  
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
 
•  The  Advocate  meets  with  and  advices  clients,  and  represent  them  in  
court.  

•  Advocates  generally  serve  as  appren>ces  to  experienced  lawyers  for  


several  years  aeer  law  school.  

•  Advocates  prac>ces  law  in  small  firms  or  as  solo  prac>>oners.    
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
 
Three  basic  func>on  of  a  Notary  Lawyer:  

•  Draeing  legal  documents.  


•  Authen>ca>ng  documents.  
•  Keeping  records  on  or  providing  copies.  
Legal  Actors:  Tradi9on  and  Transi9on
Legal  Educa1on  and  Lawyers  
 
•  Government  lawyers  serves  either  as  a  public  prosecutors  or  as  a  
lawyer  for  government  agencies.  

•  Prosecutors  in  civil-­‐law  tradi>on,  prepares  the  government’s  case  in  


criminal  maLers.    
 
•  Prosecutors  represent  the  public  in  some  civil  cases.    
Transi9on  in  the  Civil-­‐Law  World
•  Legisla>ve  prac>ce  oeen  falls   •  As  a  result,  judges  frequently  
short  of  its  objec>ve  to  provide   must  interpret  vague  code  
a  clear,  systema>c  legisla>ve   sec>ons.  
prescrip>on  for  every  legal    
problem  that  may  rise.    
Transi9on  in  the  Civil-­‐Law  World
Merryman:  
 
•  The  folklore  is  clearly  losing  its  power,  but  un>l  some  new,  
acceptable,  coherent  view  of  the  legal  process  appears  to  replace  it,  it  
will  con>nue  to  occupy  the  field.  It  is  s>ll  the  residual  model  of  the  
legal  process,  and  even  scholars  who  recognize  that  this  model  is  not  
working  spend  moe  effort  trying  to  perfect  its  basic  design  than  in  
trying  to  design  a  beLer  model.    
PART  III  

The  Common  Law  and  a  Comparison  of  the  Civil  Law  and  Common  Law  
Systems  
Origins  of  the  Common  Law  System
Ø Ins>tu>on  of  the  Jury  System  
o  Ancient  Greece  had  a  procedure  analogous  to  the  modern  system  
Ø Medieval  France  and  was  connected  to  Royal  Power  
Ø Frankish  kings  
o  “The  best  and  most  trustworthy  in  the  district”  
o  Sworn  in  
o  Subs>tute  for  trial  by  baLle  or  ordeal  
Ø William  the  Conqueror    
o  Conquest  in  1066  
o  The  prac>ce  of  a  sworn  inquest,  usually  involving  land,  was  adopted  a  feature  of  government  
Ø Doomsday  Book  
o  The  record  of  boundaries  of  the  land  in  England  
o  1081  and  1086  
o  Compila>on  of  jury  verdicts  about  boundaries  
Ø First  guise  in  England    
o  Jury,  A  group  of  persons  usually  local  ci>zenry  or  body  of    neighbors  
o  Summoned  by  a  public  official  
o  “whatever  the  truth  may  be”  
Origins  of  the  Common  Law  System
Ø Henry  II  
o  1164  
o  “normal  part  of  the  machinery  of  jus>ce”  
o  jury  trials  for  persons  dispossessed  of  lands  
Ø King  John  
o  13th  Century  
o  Criminal  cases    
o  1215  at  Runnymede,  Magna  Carta  
Ø William  the  Conqueror    
§  Conquest  in  1066  
§  The  prac>ce  of  a  sworn  inquest,  usually  involving  land,  was  adopted  a  feature  of  government  
Ø Roman  Law  
o  Carried  early  to  Britain  by  scholars  and  teachers    
o  Italian  universi>es    
Ø Vicarious    
o  A  master  at  Bolgna  
o  Jus>nian’s  Code  and  Digest  
Origins  of  the  Common  Law  System
Ø Jury  trial  as  a  mechanism  for  resolving  disputes  
Ø Crea>on  of  royal  courts  
o   to  dispense  jus>ce  throughout  the  realm  
o  Trained  judges  to  preside  and  administer  them  
o  Rising  of  commercial  affairs  in  London  
o  Turning  away  from  Roman  and  ecclesias>cal  law  
Ø The  inn  of  Court  
o  A  new  ins>tu>on  created  by  Judges  and  lawyers  in  London  
o  To  train  lawyers  in  adversary  prac>ce  and  the  art  of  advocacy  
Ø Other  Characteris>cs  of  the  new  system  
o  The  expansion  of  jury  trials  to  more  types  of  civil  cases  
o  Reliance  by  judges  on  precedent  
o  Induc>ve  reasoning  on  precedent  to  create  the  substance  of  the  law  
o  Legal  norms    
o  The  common  law  system  was  being  born    
Ø Canon  Law  
o  Oxford,  later  at  Cambridge  
Jurists  in  the  Common    Law  System
Ø Elevated  importance  of  judicial  precedent  
Ø Three  generaliza>ons    
o  1.  the  majority  of  jurists,  have  been  judges  
o  2.  legal  wri>ngs  of  jurists    
o  3.  trea>es  ad  commentaries  of  jurists    
Ø Great  works  of  legal  literature  in  the  United  States  
o  Trea>es  of  Samuel  Williston  
o  Arthur  Corbin  on  the  law  of  contracts    
o  John  Wigmore  on  the  law  of  evidence  
Ø Restatement  of  the  Law  series  
o  Collec>ve  work  of  law  professors,  judges,  and  lawyers  of  the  American  Law  Ins>tute  
o  Influenced  the  development  of  substan>ve  law  in  some  areas  
Ø Uniform  Code  series  
o  Series  of  codes  for  individual  states  in  the  United  States  
o  Stand  as  a  model  for  individual  state  legisla>on  
o  Could  also  be  aLributed  to  the  collec>ve  efforts  of  jurists  
Ø Common   law   is   open   ended   and   an>the>cal   to   system   building   of   the   type   found   in   civil  
law  countries  
Difference  in  the  Two  Systems
•  Common  Law  system   •  Civil  Law  system  
•  Statutes     •  Comprehensive  codes  
•  Some>mes  collected  in  codes   •  Abundance  of  legal  topics    
•  An  ad  hoc  process  over  many  years   •  Some>mes   trea>ng   separately     private   law,  
•  Reflect   the   rules   of   law   enunciated   in   criminal  law,  and  commercial  law  
judicial  decisions   •  T h e   c o d i fi c a > o n   r e l a > n g   t o   t h e  
•  T h e   c o d i fi c a > o n   r e l a > n g   t o   t h e   development  of  legal  principles  
development  of  legal  principles  
•  the  role  and  influence  of  judicial  precedent,  
•  In  common  law  countries,  precedent  has  been   at   least   un>l   more   recent   >mes,   has   been  
elevated  to  a  posi>on  of  supreme  prominence  
negligible   the   role   of   judicial   decisions   in   the  
•  common-­‐law   judges   ins>nc>vely   reach   for   making   of   law,   and   the   manner   of   legal  
casebooks   to   find   the   solu>on   to   an   issue   in   a   reasoning  
case  
•  Methods  of  legal  reasoning   •  civil-­‐law   judges   or   their   scholar-­‐advisers  
•  In   common-­‐law   countries   the   process   is   the   ini>ally   look   to   code   provisions   to   resolve   a  
reverse—judges   apply   induc>ve   reasoning,   case  
deriving   general   principles   or   rules   of   law   •  Methods  of  legal  reasoning  
from   precedent   or   a   series   of   specific  
decisions   and   extrac>ng   an   applicable   rule,   •  In   the   civil-­‐law   tradi>on,   the   reasoning  
which  is  then  applied  to  a  par>cular  case   process  is  deduc>ve,  proceeding  from  stated  
general   principles   or   rules   of   law   contained  
in  the  legal  codes  to  a  specific  solu>on  
 
Difference  in  the  Two  Systems
•  Common  Law  system   •  Civil  Law  system  
•  Structures  of  court  
•  Structures  of  court   •  it  follows  the  tradi>on  of  separate  codes  for  
•  favors  integrated  court  systems  with   separate  areas  of  law,  favor  specialty  court  
systems  and  specialty  courts  to  deal  with  
courts  of  general  jurisdic>on  available  to   cons>tu>onal  law,  criminal  law,  administra>ve  
adjudicate  criminal  and  most  types  of   law,  commercial  law,  and  civil  or  private  law  
civil  cases,  including  those  involving   •  Trial  Process  
cons>tu>onal  law,  administra>ve  law,   •  the  single-­‐event  trial  is  unknown,  and  trials  
and  commercial  law   involve  an  extended  process  with  a  series  of  
successive  hearings  and  consulta>ons  for  the  
•  Role  of  the  judge  in  the  trial  process   presenta>on  and  considera>on  of  evidence.    
•  as  the  manager  of  the  trial  (and  “referee”   •  Role  of  the  judge  in  the  trial  process  
of  the  lawyers  ac>ng  in  an  adversary   •  the  judge  assumes  the  role  of  principal  
interrogator  of  witnesses,  resul>ng  in  a  
role)  is  secondary  to  that  of  the  lawyers,   concomitant  deroga>on  of  the  role  of  lawyers  
who  are  the  prime  players  in  the  process,   during  the  trial  
introducing  evidence  and  interroga>ng   •  They  view  themselves  less  as  being  in  the  
witnesses   business  of  crea>ng  law  than  as  mere  appliers  of  
the  law    
•  They  are  able  to  search  crea>vely  for  an   •  They  merely  applies  the  applicable  code  
answer  to  a  ques>on  or  issue  among   provisions  to  a  case,  with  liLle  opportunity  for  
many  poten>ally  applicable  judicial   judicial  crea>vity  and  oeen  with  the  assistance  
of  legal  scholars  and  legal  scholarship  
precedents  
Difference  in  the  Two  Systems
•  Common  Law  system   •  Civil  Law  system  
•  How  judges  are  selected  and  trained   •  How  judges  are  selected  and  trained  
and  in  their  legal  educa>on   and  in  their  legal  educa>on  
•  They  are  generally  selected  as  part  of  the   •  the  judiciary  is  usually  part  of  the  civil  
poli>cal  process  for  a  specific  judicial   service  of  the  country  
post  that  they  hold  for  life  or  for  a   •  a  recent  law  graduate  selects  the  
specified  term,  with  no  system  of   judiciary  as  a  career  and  then  follows  a  
advancement  to  higher  courts  as  a   prescribed  career  path    
reward  for  service.   •  The  tradi>on  of  legal  training    
•  The  tradi>on  of  legal  training     •  the  study  of  law  at  a  faculty  of  law  
•  the  study  of  law  is  almost  always  post-­‐ follows  gradua>on  from  high  school,  with  
graduate.     no  intermediate  educa>on  in  the  liberal  
•  The  law  student  is  exposed  to  other   arts  or  other  fields  of  learning,  and  with  
disciplines  prior  to  matricula>on  in  the   liLle  or  no  exposure  to  subjects  taught  in  
law  school   other  departments  of  a  university  
•  a  student  at  a  faculty  of  law  rarely  has  a  
baccalaureate  degree  
 
Conclusion
•  Common  Law  system   •  Civil  Law  system  
•  the  common  law  lawyer,  by  and  large,   •  law  students  are  taught  that  law  is  a  science,  
simply   doesn’t   care   whether   such   a   and   that   the   task   of   the   legal   scien>st   is   to  
[comprehensive,  logical,  legal]  system   analyze   and   elaborate   principles   which   can  
be   derived   from   a   careful   study   of   posi2ve  
exists  or  not.     legisla2on   into   a   harmonious   systema2c  
•  He  is  busy  deciding  cases,  with  the  aid   structure.  
of   judicial   precedent   and   with   or   •  The  components  of  this  system  are  believed  
w i t h o u t   t h e   a i d   o f   s t a t u t o r y   to   be   purely   legal,   a   set   of   ul>mate   truths  
enactment  of  rules  in  par>cular  cases.     related  by  rigorous  deduc>ve  logic.    
•  Hence,   the   legal   scien>st’s   inquiry   is   almost  
exclusively  directed  towards  the  legal  norm.  
It   is   hard   for   the   legal   scien>st   to   escape   the  
feeling   that   considera>on   of   non-­‐legal   facts  
detracts   from   his   search   for   absolute  
principles   and   the   true   nature   of   legal  
ins>tu>ons.  
LOGIC FOR LAW STUDENTS

How to Think Like a Lawyer


LAW SCHOOLS NO LONGER
TEACH LOGIC
DISCUSSION FLOW

1.  Examining the basics of the deductive syllogisms


2.  Basics of inductive generalizations
3.  Uses and Abuses of Analogies
LOGIC

The science of reasoning, or of the operations of the understanding


which are subservient to the estimation of evidence.
-Black Law Dictionary
IN THE LAW ACADEME, LAW
PROFESSORS REQUIRE THEIR
STUDENTS TO DEFEND THEIR
COMMENTS WITH COHERENT,
IDENTIFIABLE LOGIC
DEDUCTIVE REASONING
A METHOD OF REASONING BY
WHICH YOU START YOUR
ARGUMENT WITH A PREMISE AND
YOU GO TO ANOTHER PREMISE, AND
THESE PREMISES LEAD TO A
CERTAIN CONCLUSION.
APPLICATION

1.  State the general rule of law or widely-known legal rule that
governs your case (Major Premise)
2.  Describe the key facts of the legal problem at hand (Minor Premise)
3.  Examining how the major premise about the law applies to the
minor premise about the facts (Conclusion)
BOGUS ARGUMENTS

•  Usage of these indefinite prepositions:


“some”, “certain”, “a,” “one,” “this,” “that,” “sometimes,” “many,”
“occasionally,” “once,” and “somewhere.”
•  Syllogisms that does not make sense
INDUCTIVE REASONING
A FORM OF LOGIC IN WHICH BIG,
GENERAL PRINCIPLES ARE DIVINED
FROM OBSERVING THE OUTCOMES
OF MANY SMALL EVENTS.
DANGERS OF INDUCTIVE REASONING

•  Fallacy of Hasty Generalization


-  happens when there is a creation of a general rule coming from the bases of
inadequate particulars.
-  this cannot be avoided because it is impossible to achieve absolute certainty, at least
with inductive reasoning
-  EXAMPLE:
(O’Conner v. Commonwealth Edison Co.)
ANALOGY
IT IS THE COMPARISON
BETWEEN PERSONS, PLACES,
OBJECTS, OR IDEAS FOR THE
PURPOSE OF EXPLANATION
THREE-STEP PROCESS OF ANALOGICAL
REASONING

1.  establish similarities between two cases


2.  announce the rule of law embedded in the first case
3.  apply the rule of law to the second case.
YOU MAY NOT CONCLUDE
THAT ONLY A PARTIAL
RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN TWO
ENTITIES IS EQUAL TO A
SUBSTANTIAL OR EXACT
CORRESPONDENCE.
CRITERIA FOR APPRAISAL OF
ANALOGICAL ARGUMENT

1.  the acceptability of the analogy will vary proportionally with the
number of circumstances that have been analyzed
2.  the acceptability will depend upon the number of positive
resemblances (similarities) and negative resemblances
(dissimilarities)
3.  the acceptability will be influenced by the relevance of the
purported analogies.
IMPORTANCE OF ANALOGY IN LAW
SCHOOLS

•  Helps students answer questions that cannot be solved by only using


syllogisms.
•  To probe the boundaries of an issue
•  Encourages students to read further the provisions of the law with
due care and absorb its contents
THERE IS MORE TO LIFE THAN
LOGIC
DISCOVERING
THE LOGIC OF
LEGAL REASONING
R U L E O F L AW
Ø  Q U A L I T Y O F L E G A L R E A S O N I N G

REQUIREMENTS:
ü  S I M I L A R C A S E S S H O U L D B E
D E C I D E D S I M I L A R LY
ü  D E C I D E D O N I T S M E R I T S
ü  C O M P LY W I T H A P P L I C A B L E R U L E S
OF PROCEDURE AND EVIDENCE
ACHIEVING OBJECTIVE RATIONALE
TRANSPARENT decision-making + OPEN to
SCRUTINY = OBJECTIVE RATIONALE
LEGAL REASONING
I T I S A R E A S O N I N G I N V O LV E D I N :

Ø  INTERPRETING CONSTITUTIONS


Ø  S TAT U T E S
Ø  R E G U L AT I O N S
Ø  B A L A N C I N G F U N D A M E N TA L P R I N C I P L E S A N D
POLICIES
Ø  ADOPTING AND MODIFYING LEGAL RULES
Ø  A P P LY I N G T H O S E R U L E S T O C A S E S
Ø  E V A L U AT I N G E V I D E N C E
Ø  M A K I N G U LT I M AT E D E C I S I O N S
We are not like mathematicians. We are
also unlike statisticians. Nor do we act
like natural and social scientists. . Nor do
we take the approach of the medical
profession.
We largely content ourselves with
IN THE
“knowing good legal LEGAL
reasoning when we see it.” PROFESSION

RESULT: existing an isolated pockets of


theoretical work on legal reasoning
methods.
W H AT I S M I S S I N G ?
C O N C E RT E D E F F O RT W I T H I N
O U R P R O F E S S I O N TO
A RT I C U L AT E T H E G E N E R A L
LOGIC OF OUR METHOD OF
REASONING
THE MOST COMMON SCENARIOS FOR NOT
OBTAINING A USEFUL NORMATIVE
METHOD
•  Most legal educators, •  Seldom develop general
however, merely illustrate accounts that explain to
reasoning by exhibiting a students how lawyers ought
stream of examples (both to reason and why
historical and hypothetical),
leaving it to the student to
abstract from those examples
“how to think like a lawyer.”
LEGAL REASONING
Ø  E X H I B I T D I S T I N C T I V E F E AT U R E S T H AT M E R I T
L O G I C A L A N A LY S I S

Ø D E M A N D S O F T H E R U L E O F L AW +
T H E P R A G M AT I C N AT U R E O F L E G A L
REASONING = DISTINCTIVE
PAT T E R N S O F R E A S O N I N G
1. Rule-based

}
found in
reasoning
law, exhibit
distinctive
logical
2. Evidence evaluation features
found in law, exhibit THREE TYPES
distinctive logical
features
OF LEGAL
can modify REASONING
both rule-
based
3. Second-order reasoning and
process reasoning evidence
evaluation.
STRUCTURE OF THE LEGAL
COMMUNITY
Ø  A vital factor for it promotes the evolution of reasoning
patterns that are well-adapted to the task of solving legal
problems.
Ø  Empirical research is needed to discover the actual
patterns that have evolved
T H E P R A G M AT I C
N AT U R E O F
LEGAL REASONING
ISSUE
Legal profession has not found traditional formal logic very useful

CAUSE
that logic tracks the deductive reasoning of mathematics, and not the practical
reasoning we actually employ in law.
3 SENSES IN
1.  Reasoning is action-oriented WHICH WE
2.  It balances the “epistemic EMPLOY
objective” of law against the PRAGMATIC
applicable “non-epistemic REASONING
objectives TECHNIQUES
3.  Legal decision-making occurs in
real time, uses limited resources, These three pragmatic
and is usually based on dimensions of legal
incomplete information reasoning dictate
certain features of its
logic.
Examples:
Ø We use it to make legal arguments about
the legitimacy of governmental action or
inaction.
Ø When judges decide cases or administrative
agencies adopt new regulations, they must
interpret constitutional, statutory, or 1. REASONING
regulatory texts, and balance legal principles
against substantive policies IS ACTION-
ORIENTED.
Legal reasoning is therefore pragmatic in
the sense that its ultimate subject matter
is governmental action, and is almost
always about justifying decisions leading
to such action.
Epistemic objective - produce determinations of fact 2. IT BALANCES
that are as accurate as possible and which are
warranted by the legally available evidence THE “EPISTEMIC
Example: The epistemic side of law aims at truth, OBJECTIVE” OF
but a truth constrained by reasonable inferences
from the evidence.
L AW AG A I N S T
THE
Non-epistemic objectives APPLICABLE
Examples: common across governmental “NON-
institutions and proceedings (for example,
procedural fairness or administrative efficiency),
EPISTEMIC
while others are limited to particular institutions OBJECTIVES.
and proceedings (for example, achieving an adequate
supply of electric power, or increasing economic
efficiency within securities markets). Legal reasoning is pragmatic
because it must incorporate
Weighed against this epistemic objective such balancing and must reason
are numerous non-epistemic objectives. about appropriate balancing.
The decision-maker has to evaluate, at
3. LEGAL
each stage of the process, whether the
DECISION-
evidence is complete enough, whether MAKING OCCURS
the residual uncertainty is acceptable, IN REAL TIME,
and whether action should be taken USES LIMITED
or postponed RESOURCES, AND
Example: A prosecutor could always I S U S UA L LY
BASED ON
conduct more investigation and a
INCOMPLETE
regulator could always obtain more I N F O R M AT I O N
scientific studies.
THEORIES ABOUT THE
LOGIC OF LEGAL
REASONING MUST BE
USEFUL IN ORDER TO
B E N O R M AT I V E
RULE-BASED
REASONING
RULE-BASED LEGAL REASONING
•  A particular type of reasoning which uses "if-then-else" rule statements.
•  In this type of conditional schema, a legal rule states that if proposition p (the condition) is
true then this fact warrants that proposition q (the conclusion) is also true.
•  A major feature of rule-based legal reasoning is the distinction between prima facie case and
affirmative defense.
•  EXAMPLE: Self-defense. In a self-defense case, there are requisites that must be met in order
for such act to be considered as self-defense.
•  Another feature of rule-based legal reasoning that challenge traditional deductive logic is the
possibility of changing the rules themselves as a result of reasoning.
•  EXAMPLE: Common law systems. Their courts have inherent authority to elaborate new legal
rules that apply tot he very case being decided, as well as to future cases.
EVIDENCE
EVALUATION
EVIDENCE EVALUATION
•  Legal rules identify those issues of fact that are relevant to proving the ultimate issue of fact.
•  In any particular case, various participants (such as private parties, prosecutors, or
administrative staffs) produce evidence for the legal record, and use that evidence to try to
prove or disprove those issues of fact.
•  Role of the factfinder is evidence evaluation: deciding which evidence is relevant to which issue
of fact, evaluating the probative value of the relevant evidence, and making findings of fact
based on evidence.
•  Hence, evidence evaluation studies the methods and principles for the inferential aspects of
the factfinder’s task. It explains the reasoning that a reasonable factfinder would use to
determine the probative value of evidence.
•  Basic building block of evidence evaluation is the PROPOSITION.
•  Propositions which constitutes the evidence.
•  EXAMPLE: Statements made my testifying
witnesses or statements contained in
documents that are admitted into evidence E V I D E N T I A RY
•  Although evidentiary assertions are A S S E RT I O N S
propositions, and therefore capable of being OR
either true or false, factfinders are permitted A S S E RT I O N S
to assign them degrees of plausibility
(plausibility-values) instead of truth-values.
CHALLENGES THAT EVIDENCE EVALUATION
POSES IN FORMULATING USEFUL
NORMATIVE LOGIC
•  1. EXPLAINING HOW WE REASON ABOUT “RELEVANCE” ITSELF- how we decide to link
particular evidentiary assertions to particular fact.
•  II. STUDYING THE LOGICAL PROPOERTIES OF DIFFERENT PLAUSIBILITY SCALES.
•  III. COMBINING PLAUSIBILITY-VALUES OF NUMEROUS EVIDENTIARY ASSERTIONS INTO
A SINGLE PALUSIBILITY-VALUE FOR A PARTICULAR CONCLUSION.
•  These are complicated problems in law because factfinders must be able to integrate both
non-expert and expert evidence into a single pattern of reasoning.
•  In logic, a ”schema: is a formal linguistic pattern containing variables, so that appropriate
substitutions for the variables create instances of the pattern.
•  PLAUSIBILITY SCHEMA- a pattern of default reasoning that, when instantiated, warrants the
conclusion to be plausible.
•  EXAMPLE: the schemas of deductive logic (such as modus ponens), which necessarily preserve
truth from premises to conclusion, also preserve plausibility from premises to conlusion.
SECOND-ORDER
PROCESS
REASONING
SECOND-ORDER PROCESS
REASONING
•  Legal decision making is a process governed by the rule of law and a third area of legal reasoning
that grants conclusions on the structure of that process. Process rules allow the decision making
process to be dynamic, participatory and interactive. Different participants can play different roles,
with divisions of labor and responsibility, ideally within a single, fair and efficient process.
2 types of processing decisions and rules governing decisions 
•  Procedural rule - addresses issues as general as jurisdiction, or as specific as the appropriateness of
particular filing. Procedural decisions based on those rules orchestrate the dynamics and timing of
the decision making process.
•  Evidentiary rule – addresses issues about the evaluation of evidence, such as the admissibility of
evidence, the legal sufficiency of evidence, and burdens of proof. Evidentiary decisions based on the
those rules manage various tasks involved in evidence evaluation, and allocate them to various
participants in the process.
FEATURES OF REASONING AND DECISION-
MAKING PROCESS
•  “Second-order” reasoning - the proposition of stating substantive legal rules or about
evidentiary assertions in a particular case.
•  Policy-based reasoning – the integration of the content on policies and principles, would
formulate methods for weighing many divergent lines of reasoning in warranting decisions
about particular rules.
•  Analogical reasoning – the practice that addresses concerns for deciding similar cases similarly
overtime for maintaining predictability of outcome and for providing due notice potentially
affected parties. It should capture the kinds of reasons that courts routinely give for
considering two cases to be similar and for distinguishing one case from another.
CONCLUSION

•  The goal of this is to be suggestive but open-ended about discovering the logic of legal
reasoning. Legal reasoning patterns evolve is intended to spur a desire for empirical research.
We in the legal profession have little incentive to engage in such research if  we do not sense a
need for it and if we do not sense that reasoning we apply to legal problems that has a
distinctive and coherent structure, we are unlikely to study that structure. What we need is a
professional awakening to the possibility of discovering a useful logic of legal reasoning.
LOGIC AND LEGAL
REASONING: !
A GUIDE FOR LAW STUDENTS

DENISE  MICHAELA  YAP  


•  In  order  to  exhibit  “pris1ne  logic”  a  legal  statement  should  
adhere  to  the  form  of  the  logic  syllogism.    

•  A  SYLLOGISM  consists  of  a  MAJOR  premise,  MINOR  premise,  


and  a  CONCLUSION.  
 
•  In  legal  arguments,  this  is  generally  a  STATEMENT  OF  LAW.    
WHAT  CONSISTS  OF  A  MAJOR  PREMISE,  A  MINOR  
PREMISE  AND  A  CONCLUSION?  
 MAJOR  PREMISE                          MINOR  PREMISE  
 
      Makes  a  factual  asser>on  about  a  
Usually  states  a  general  rule   par>cular  person  or  thing  or  a  
  group  of  persons  or  things.  
 
In  legal  arguments,  this  is  usually  a  
statement  of  fact.  

CONCLUSION  

In  legal  arguments,  this  


process  is  called  applying  the   Connects  the  par>cular  statement  
law  to  the  facts.   in  the  minor  premise  with  the  
general  one  in  the  major  premise,  
and  tells  us  how  the  general  rule  
applies  to  the  facts  at  hand.    
EXAMPLE  
To  qualify  as  a  “ci>zen”  of  a  state  for  purposes  of  diversity  
jurisdic>on,  a  party  must    
1.currently  reside  in  that  state  and  (2)  intend  to  remain  there  
indefinitely.    
(Major  premise;  states  a  rule  of  law.)    
2.  Here,  the  plain>ff  does  not  currently  reside  in  North  Carolina  
 (Minor  premise;  makes  a  statement  of  fact.)    
3.  Therefore,  the  plain>ff  cannot  be  a  “ci>zen”  of  North  Carolina  for  
jurisdic>onal  purposes.  
 (Conclusion;  correctly  applies  the  law  to  the  facts.)    
In  ord
e
logica r  for  a  syl
l lo
its  co ly  impossi gism  to  be
nclus b
ion  to le  for  its  p  valid,  it  m
 be  fa remis u
lse. es  to   st  be  
  be  tru
e  a nd  
A  SYLLOGISM  is  valid  if,  given  the  truth  of  its  premises,  the  conclusion  “follows”  
logically  such  that  it,  too,  must  be  true.    
 
Note  that  an  argument  is  not  valid  simply  because  its  premises  and  conclusion  are  
all  true.    
Example:
“All cats are mammals.
Some mammals are excellent swimmers. Therefore,
some cats are excellent swimmers.”
The  example  above  is  a  fallacious  argument.  Learning  how  to  spot  and  avoid  such  
logical  fallacies  can  enormously  strengthen  your  legal  wri>ng  and  advocacy  by  helping  
you  adhere  to  the  “pris>ne  logic”  of  correct  syllogis>c  reasoning.    
“[A]rguments, like [people], are
often pretenders.”
– Plato

WHAT  ARE   “Fallacious and misleading
arguments are most easily
FALLACIES?   detected if set out in correct
syllogistic form.”
- Immanuel Kant
A  fallacy  is  an  error  in  reasoning.  
 A  fallacious  argument  is  one  that  may  appear  
correct,  but  on  examina>on  proves  not  to  be  
so.  Even  if  the  premises  and  conclusion  are  all  
correct,  an  argument  may  s>ll  be  fallacious  if  
the  reasoning  used  to  reach  that  conclusion  is  
not  logically  valid.  
Fallacies  are  extremely  common.    
At  first  blush,  they  oeen  seem  persuasive.  Because  legal  
arguments  can  be  quite  complex,  fallacies  can  be  especially  
hard  to  detect  in  legal  memoranda,  briefs,  and  judicial  
opinions.  Knowing  how  to  spot  and  avoid  them  can  improve  
your  legal  wri>ng  and  advocacy  immeasurably.  
There  are  fieeen  types  that  occur  most  frequently  in  legal  wri>ng  
and  advocacy.    

Most  of  these  fallacies  may  be    


grouped  in  two  broad  categories.    

Fallacies  of  ambiguity  occur  when  


Fallacies  of  relevance  occur  when  
the  meaning  of  a  key  word  or  
the  premises  “miss  the  point”  and  
phrase  shies  and  change,  so  that  
fail  to  provide  logical  support  for  the  
the  terms  do  not  really  “match  up”  
conclusion.    
within  the  argument.  
1. Appeal to Inappropriate Authority.
 
This  fallacy  arises  when  the  authority  invoked  has  no  legi>mate  
claim  in  the  maLer  at  hand.  In  legal  wri>ng,  this  fallacy  occurs  
when  we  cite  a  secondary  authority  or  a  case  from  another  
jurisdic>on  as  controlling  authority.  It  also  occurs  when  we  cite  
the  opinion  of  an  expert  in  a  maLer  outside  his  or  her  
exper>se.  


Example: “The possession of nuclear weapons is a moral
abomination. Even Edward Teller, the ‘father of the
hydrogen bomb,’ urged the United States to halt production
once the full extent of their destructive power became
known.”
2.  Disconnected  Premises.  
 In  a  standard  logic  syllogism,  there  must  be  exactly  three  basic  concepts:  a  “major  term”  
that  occurs  in  the  major  premise,  a  “minor  term”  that  occurs  in  the  minor  premise,  and  a  
“middle  term”  that  occurs  in  both  the  major  and  minor  premises,  but  not  in  the  conclusion.  
(The  conclusion  should  connect  the  major  and  minor  terms.)    
 
The  middle  term  is  the  glue  that  holds  the  argument  together.  That  glue  must  be  applied  in  
the  right  places,  or  the  argument  will  fall  apart.  
 
 In  a  typical  legal  syllogism,  the  middle  term  will  consist  of  either  the  elements  of  a  cause  of  
ac>on  or  the  defini2on  of  some  term  of  art.  

Example: “Murder is the intentional killing of a human being. State v. Jones, 12 N.C. 345, 34 S.E.2d 56
(1929). Here, the defendant is an escaped convict who was already serving a life sentence for the murder of a
police officer and was apprehended just two miles from where the victim’s body was found. Therefore, the
defendant is guilty of murder.”  
3.  Irrelevant  Conclusion.    
This  fallacy  occurs  when  the  premises  “miss  the  point”  and  fail  to  
substan>ate  the  conclusion,  instead  suppor>ng  some  other,  perhaps  
unstated,  conclusion.  Oeen,  this  fallacy  arises  when  we  advocate  for  a  
par>cular  objec>ve,  but  offer  only  generalized  support  for  that  objec>ve  
that  could  equally  well  support  an  alterna>ve  approach.  An  irrelevant  
conclusion  may  also  be  called  a  non  sequitur.  

Example: “There is no such thing as a leaderless group. Although the style


of leadership may change depending on the situation, a leader will always
emerge or no task would ever be accomplished.”
4.  False  Cause  
 
This  fallacy  consists  in  trea>ng  something  as  a  cause  that  is  not,  or  
should  not  be  assumed  to  be,  a  cause.  
 
Most  commonly,  the  mistake  is  in  assuming  that  A  caused  B  simply  
because  A  preceded  B.  

Example: “The defendant fled the state just hours after the
crime was committed. Therefore, he was clearly involved in
one way or another with its planning or execution.”
5.  Overzealous  applica1on  of  a  general  rule.    
 
This  fallacy  occurs  when  we  apply  a  generaliza>on  to  an  individual  case  
that  it  does  not  necessarily  govern.  The  mistake  oeen  lies  in  failing  to  
recognize  that  there  may  be  excep>ons  to  a  general  rule.  
 
Example:  “Sixty  men  can  do  a  job  sixty  >mes  as  quickly  as  one  man.  
One  man  can  dig  a  post-­‐  hole  in  sixty  seconds.  Therefore,  sixty  men  can  
dig  a  post-­‐hole  in  one  second.”  
6.  Hasty  Generaliza1on  
 
This  fallacy  is  the  converse  of  the  preceding  one.    
 
It   occurs   when   we   move   too   quickly   to   establish   a   broad   principle   or  
general  rule  based  on  specific  factual  observa>ons.  
 
Example:   “In   the   present   case,   the   dog   that   aLacked   the   small   child  
clearly  had  a  ‘vicious  propensity.’  Two  years  earlier,  that  same  dog  had  
biLen  a  postal  worker  who  came  on  the  property  to  deliver  the  mail.”    
 
7.  Circular  argument  
 
 This  fallacy  occurs  when  one  assumes  the  truth  of  what  one  seeks  to  prove  in  the  very  effort  
to  prove  it.  In  other  words,  an  argument  is  fallacious  when  the  conclusion  lies  buried  in  the  
premises  used  to  reach  that  conclusion.    
This  is  also  known  as  begging  the  ques2on.  Ques>on-­‐begging  arguments  oeen  mask  
themselves  in  clever  rhetoric.  
 
 They  can  be  easy  to  miss  because  they  oeen  sound  good.  Read  these  examples  closely,  and  
see  if  you  can  iden>fy  why  each  is  fallacious  before  you  read  the  explana>on  immediately  
following.  

Example: “The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review is inherently


undemocratic. When unelected judges reign supreme in the exposition
of the Constitution, it cannot be said that we have a government ‘of the
people, by the people, and for the people.’”
8.  Complex  Ques1on  
 
 This  fallacy  occurs  when  the  ques>on  itself  is  
phrased  in  such  a  way  as  to  presuppose  the  
truth  of  a  conclusion  buried  in  that  ques>on.  
The  solu>on  is  generally  to  root  out  the  buried  
assump>on  by  “dividing  the  ques>on.”  

Example: “Isn’t it true that your sales


increased dramatically after these
misleading advertisements were
published?”

Example: Jonathan Swift said:
“No man will take counsel, but
every man will take money;
therefore, money is better than
counsel.”

9.  Ambiguity.    
When  we  use  a  key  word  or  phrase  to  have  two  or  more  
different  meanings  in  the  same  argument,  we  commit  
the  fallacy  of  ambiguity.  Because  many  words  and  
phrases  are  naturally  ambiguous  (have  two  or  more  
meanings,  or  even  a  range  of  meanings),  this  fallacy  
oeen  escapes  no>ce.  
10.  Composi1on    
We  commit  the  fallacy  of  composi>on  when  we  mistakenly  impute  the  aLributes  of  a  part  of  a  
whole  to  the  whole  itself.  
 
Example:  “A  strand  of  rope  is  weak,  and  cannot  possibly  support  the  weight  of  a  full-­‐grown  
person.  A  rope  is  nothing  but  a  collec>on  of  weak  strands.  Therefore,  a  rope  cannot  possibly  
support  the  weight  of  a  full-­‐grown  person.”  
 
11.  Division.  This  fallacy  is  the
 reverse  of  the  fallacy  of  com
when  we  mistakenly  argue  tha posi>on.  We  commit  the  falla
t  aLributes  of  a  whole  must   cy  of  division  
that  whole.   also  be  present  in  each  part  
or  cons>tuent  of  
 
Example:  “A  rope  is  strong,  a
nd  can  easily  support  the  wei
a  collec>on  of  individual  stran ght  of  a  full-­‐grown  person.  A
ds.  Therefore,  a  strand  of  rop  rope  is  nothing  but  
a  full-­‐grown  person.”   e   i s   s trong,  and  can  easily  support
 the  weight  of  
12.  Argument  from  Ignorance.  An  argument  is  fallacious  when  it  maintains  that  a  proposi>on  is  true  because  it  has  not  been  proved  false  
or  false  because  it  has  not  been  proved  true.  
Example:  On  the  Senate  floor  in  1950,  Joseph  McCarthy  said  of  a  State  Department  employee  suspected  to  be  a  Communist,  “there  is  
nothing  in  the  files  to  disprove  his  Communist  connec>ons.”  

13.  Aback  Against  the  Person.  This  fallacy  occurs  when  the  thrust  of  an  argument  is  directed,  not  at  a  conclusion,  but  at  the  
person  who  asserts  or  defends  it.  This  is  some>mes  referred  to  as  an  ad  hominem  argument.  
Example:  A  lawyer  tells  a  jury  that  evidence  of  a  witness’s  criminal  past  proves  that  the  witness  was  lying.  

14.  Argument  from  Force.  An  argument  is  fallacious  when  it  subs>tutes  veiled  threats  for  logical  persuasion  or  when  it  asserts  that  something  
must  be  the  case  because  “that’s  just  the  way  things  are.”  
Example:  White  House  Chief  of  Staff  Howard  Baker  once  opened  a  cabinet  mee>ng  over  allega>ons  of  misconduct  on  the  part  of  ALorney  
General  Ed  Meese  as  follows:  “The  President  con>nues  to  have  confidence  in  the  ALorney  General  and  I  have  confidence  in  the  ALorney  
General  and  you  ought  to  have  confidence  in  the  ALorney  General,  because  we  work  for  the  President  and  because  that’s  the  way  things  are.  
And  if  anyone  has  a  different  view  of  that...he  can  tell  me  about  it  because  we’re  going  to  have  to  discuss  your  status.”14  

15.  Appeal  to  Emo1on.  This  fallacy  occurs  when  expressive  language  designed  to  excite  an  emo>on  like  outrage  or  pity  is  used  
in  place  of  logical  argumenta>on.  
Example:  “It  is  >me  to  put  an  end  to  these  ‘crea>ve’  accoun>ng  prac>ces.  Millions  have  lost  their  pensions  due  to  the  excesses  
of  these  corporate  elites.  Hopes  have  been  dashed.  Lives  have  been  ruined.  This  cannot  be  allowed  to  con>nue.  For  all  these  
reasons,  I  urge  you  to  find  the  defendant  guilty  as  charged.”  

S-ar putea să vă placă și