Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Points to consider:
1. Difference between Civil Law and Common Law
2. Distinguish strains of common law: What are the bases?
3. How did the Court arrive at the conclusion that there is Anglo-American tradition?
4. What system is in place?
5. References to American jurisprudence
6. Laws superseded or modified
7. Identify what is that important question the Court needed to Resolve and how it helped solve
the Shoop case.
FACTS
- Max Shoop is applying for admission to practice law in the Philippines under Par. 4 of
the Rules for the Examination of Candidates for Admission to the Practice of Law. It was shown
in his application that he was practicing for more than 5 years in the highest court of the State of
New York.
- The said rule requires that: New York State by comity confers the privilege of admission
without examination under similar circumstances to attorneys admitted to practice in the
Philippine Islands. (Aside from comity, the satisfactory affidavits of applicants must show they
have practiced at least 5 years in any (district or circuit or highest) court of the US or territory of
it. But admission is still in the discretion of the court.)
- The rule of New York court, on the other hand, permits admission without examination in the
discretion of the Appellate
ISSUE
WON under the New York rule as it exists the principle of comity is established
HELD
- The Philippines is an UNORGANIZED TERRITORY of the US, under a civil gov't.
established by the Congress.
- In interpreting and applying the bulk of the written laws of this jurisdiction, and in
rendering its decisions in cases NOT covered by the letter of the written law, this court
relies upon the theories and precedents of Anglo-American cases, subject to the limited
exception of those instances where the remnants of the Spanish written law present well-
defined civil law theories and of the few cases where such precedents are inconsistent with
local customs and institutions.
- The jurisprudence of this jurisdiction is based upon the ECL in its present day form of
Anglo-American Common Law to an almost exclusive extent.
- New York permits conferring privileges on attorneys admitted to practice in the Phils. similar
to those privileges accorded by the rule of this court.
- Petition granted. Decision is based on the interpretation of the NY rule; doesn’t establish a
precedent with respect to future applications.
Reasoning
On TERRITORY:
a. Comity would exist if we are a territory of the US
b. We are NOT an organized territory incorporated into the United
States but
c. We are NOT a "foreign country" or "another country" either
d. Like Puerto Rico, we may not be incorporated but we are a territory since the US
Congress legislates for us and we have been granted a form of territorial government, so to that
extent we are a territory according to the US Atty. Gen.
e. It is not believed that the New York court intended the word "territory" to be limited
to the technical meaning of organized territory or it would have used the more accurate
expression.
f. Therefore, We have a basis of comity to satisfy the first requirement since the full
phraseology indicates a SWEEPING INTENTION to include ALL of the territory of the US.
o. COLLATERAL INFLUENCES
i. There are no digests of Spanish decisions to aid the study of Bench and Bar
vs. The abundance of digests/reports/textbooks on English/Am. courts.
ii. There is a prolific use of Anglo-Am authorities in the decisions of the court,
plus, the available sources for study and reference on legal theories are mostly Anglo-
Am
iii. Therefore, there has been developed and will continue a common law in our
jurisprudence (i.e. Phil Common Law) based upon the ECL in its present day
form of an Anglo-Am CL, which is effective in all of the subjects of law in this
jurisdiction, in so far as it does not conflict with the express language of the
written law (where the remnants of the Spanish written law present well-defined
civil law theories) or with the local customs and institution.