You are on page 1of 17

Chapter 1

General Considerations
Administrative Law
Dean Roscoe Pound - That branch
of modern law under which the
executive
department
of
the
government, acting in a quasi-judicial
capacity, interferes with the conduct
of the individual for the purpose of
promoting the well-being of the
community, as under the laws
regulating
the public interest;
professions; trades and callings; rates
and prices; laws for protection of
public health and safety; and the
promotion of public convenience.
Professor Goodnow - That part of
the public law which fixes the
organization of the government and
determines the competence of the
authorities who execute the law and
indicates to the individual remedies for
the violation of his right.
Justice Frankfurter - Branch of law
which deals with the field of legal
control exercised by law-administering
agencies other than courts, and the
field of control exercised by courts
over such agencies.
Object and scope of Admin Law:
The regulation of private right for
public welfare.
Origin of Admin Law Legislation
Justification of Admin Law
Expediency
Admin law resulted from the
following:
(a) pervasive prolixity of the modern
age
(b) the increasing difficulties
confronting the government
Two Major Powers of an
Administrative Agency
(1) Quasi-legislative authority or rulemaking power
(2) Quasi-judicial power or
adjudicatory function
Development of administrative law
Separation of
Powers

Legislative

Duties

Laid down all

Difficulties as
the
population
grew and
people's
activities
multiplied
To deal directly

1 | Administrative Law Reviewer

rules of
conduct
Executive

Direct and
enforcement of
rules of
conduct

Judiciary

Application
and
interpretation
of rules of
conduct

&
expeditiously
w/
every
problem
To
directly
decide
controversies
w/c presented
mostly
only
factual issues
Task
of
enforcement of
the
law
became more
complicated

Other reasons for development


Separation of
powers

Legislative

Executive

Judiciary

No longer had either


the time or the
needed expertise to
attend to these new
problems.
Lack of interest as
most
of
these
problems
did
not
immediately
affect
the constituent of its
members.
No longer had either
the time or the
needed expertise to
attend to these new
problems
Natural reluctance to
interfere with this
problems which they
felt were the concern
of and should be
resolve the executive
department

The
obvious
solution
was
DELEGATION OF POWER.
Effect of delegation: The legislature
is able to relieve itself of the
responsibility to legislate directly on
relatively minor matters and of
attending as well to the adjudication of
essentially factual questions that more
properly pertain to the executive
authorities. In this manner, the
legislature can concentrate on matters
of national and greater significance.
Present status of administrative law:
(a) Still in the state of flux
(b) Boundaries are as yet undefined
(c) Still undergoing a process of
experimentation

(d) Proceeds on a trial-and-error basis as


it seeks to discover the most
acceptable ways
Sources of Administrative Law
(1) Constitutional or Statutory enactments
creating administrative bodies.
(2) Decisions of courts interpreting the
charters of administrative bodies and
their
defining
powers,
rights,
inhibitions, among others, and the
effects of their determinations and
regulations.
(3) Rules and regulations issued by the
administrative bodies in pursuance of
the purpose for which they were
created.
(4) Determinations and orders of the
administrative bodies in the settlement
of controversies arising in their
respective fields.

Administration
Distinguish Government from
Administration
Government

Administration

Agency
/
instrumentality
through which the
will of the State is
formulated,
expressed
and
realized.

Transitional
in
nature,
which
actually mans the
government and is
more
or
less
permanent fixture in
every State.

implementation of the policies.


Administration as an activity
(1) Internal Administration
(2) External Administration
Internal Administration
Covers those rules defining the
relations of public functionaries inter
se
Embraces the whole range of the law
of public officials.
Rules laid down in a particular agency
or office
Examples:
prescribing
work
assignments or job descriptions and
uniforms; procedures for submission of
reports
External Administration
Defines the relations of the public
office with the public in general
Do
not
necessarily
affect
the
personnel of the office but are
promulgated by observance by those
who have dealings or transactions
with the said office
These rules are promulgated by the
administrative agency in the exercise
of its quasi-legislative authority for the
regulation of specific matters placed
under its jurisdiction.
Examples: Energy Regulatory Board
on adjustments in the rates charged
by distributors of electricity; POEA on
recruitment for overseas employment
Administration distinguished from law
Administration

Administration understood in 2
senses
(1) Institution
(2) Function
Administration as an Institution
Refers to the aggregate individuals in
whose hands the reins of government
are for the time being
Refers to the persons who actually run
the
government
during
their
prescribed term of office
Includes all the personnel in the
executive branch who are charged
with the enforcement of the law
Administration as a Function
Actual running of the government by
the executive authorities through the
enforcement of the law and the
2 | Administrative Law Reviewer

Law

Preventive

Punitive
(command
with sanctions to be
applied in case of
violation)

Personal

Impersonal

Has
more
sympathetic
regard
for the individual

Steps back and fold


its arm and maintains
a watchful eyes on
those who violate its
order

Seeks to spare the


individual from the
punishment

Pounced upon
visited
with
threatened
punishment

Clarify
certain
ambiguous provisions

and
the

Refers within the framework of the


Government organization, to
any
major functional unit of a department
or bureau, including Regional office.

in statutes through
the issuance of the
interpretative
regulations
Viewed as welcome
balancing factor

Instrumentality
Any
agency
of
the
National
Government, not integrated within
the department framework, vested
with special function.

Harshness

Chapter 2
Administrative Agency
Administrative Agency
A
body
endowed
with
quasilegislature and quasi- judicial powers
for the purpose of enabling it to carry
out
laws
entrusted
to
it
for
enforcement or execution.
Agency
Any
department,
bureau,
office,
commission, authority or officer of
National Government authorized by
law or executive order to make rules,
issue
licenses,
grant
rights
or
privileges
and
adjudicate
cases;
research institutions with respect to
the licensing functions; government
corporation with respect to function
regulating private rights, privileges,
occupation or business; and officials in
the exercise of disciplinary power as
provided by law.
Government instrumentality
Agency of the National Government
not integrated within the department
framework,
vested
with
special
functions or jurisdiction by
law,
endowed with some or ifnot all
corporate
powers, administering
special
funds,
and
enjoying
operational autonomy.( Malaga
vs.
Penachos Jr.)
Chartered institution
Agency organized or operating under a
special charter, and vested by law
with
fictions relating the specific
constitutional policies or objectives.
Department
An executive department created by
law.
Bureau
Any
principal
department

subdivision

of

Office
3 | Administrative Law Reviewer

Agency attached to the department


Lateral relationship between the
department or its equivalent and the
attached agency or corporation for the
purpose of policy and program
coordination.
Note: An attached agency has a
larger measure of independence from
the Department to which it is attached
than one which is under departmental
supervision
and
control
or
administrative supervision.
Note: The purpose of attachment is
merely for policy and program
coordination.
Note:
The
Administrative
Code
provides that supervision and control
shall
not
apply
to
chartered
institutions attached to a Department.
Authority
Term
used
to
designate
both
incorporated and non-incorporated
agencies or instrumentalities of the
government.
Government owned and controlled
corporation
Any agency organized as a stock or
non-stock corporation vested with
functions related to public needs
whether governmental or proprietary
in nature, and owned by the
government directly or through its
instrumentalities, either wholly or,
where applicable, as in the case of
stock corporations, to the extent of at
least 51% of its capital stock, is a
government-owned
or
controlled
corporation.
Nature of an Administrative Agency
It is an arm of the legislature in so far
as it is authorized to promulgate rules
that have the force of law by virtue of
valid delegation of legislative power.
May be considered as a court
because it performs a function of a
particular judicial character, as when
it decides factual and sometimes
even legal questions as an incident of
its general power of regulation.

(such as salary and


emoluments
or
appropriations attached
thereto) altered in the
discretion
of
the
legislature.

Basically, an administrative agency


pertains to the executive department
because its principal function is the
implementation
of
the
law
in
accordance with the policies and
instructions
laid
down
by the
legislature.

Effect: The legislature


exerts a great deal of
influence
upon
the
administrative
body
that can impair its
independence.

*Administrative
bodies
(board,
commission,
authority,
administration,
bureau, agency, council, committee, office)

Classification of administrative bodies


(1) Those set up to offer some gratuity,
grant or special privileges. (Philippine
Veterans Association)
(2) Those set up to carry on certain actual
business of government. (Bureau of
Customs)
(3) Those set up to perform some business
service for the public. (now defunct
Bureau of Posts)
(4) Those set up to regulate business
affected with public interest. (LTFRB)
(5) Those set up to regulate private
business and individuals under the
police power. (SEC)
(6) Those set up to adjust individual
controversies because of some strong
social policy involved. (NLRC)

Executive
Department

Note: The President


may issue his own
orders
to
the
administrative
agency and review
and,
if
necessary
revise
or
even
reverse its decisions.

Creation and Abolition of Administrative


Agencies
Constitution - may be altered or
abolish ONLY through constitutional
amendments.
Statute - may be amended or
repealed by legislature in good faith.

Effects:
- The administrative
agency
cannot
claim independence
from the executive
department
given
the power of control
exercised by the
President.
- Anomalous situation
where a delegate of
the legislature must
not only

Advantages
of
Administrative
Agency
(1) Expertise derived from specialized
training and experience.
(2) Adaptability to change and ease in
reacting to a new emergency
situation.
Relation to Regular Departments
The
administrative
body acts as an agent
of the law-making body
and so is bound to obey
and
implement
the
legislative will.

Legislative
Department

Note: Insofar as it is a
creature
of
the
legislature,
it
(administrative
body)
may be abolished at its
will, or its incidents

4 | Administrative Law Reviewer

The
administrative
agency pertains to
the
executive
department and so
comes
under
the
constitutional control
of
the
President,
which control cannot
be
withdrawn
or
limited even by the
legislature.

Judicial
Department

The
courts
may
review the factual
findings
of
administrative offices
by authority of law,
or when necessary
under
the
due
process
clause,
if
such determinations
have
been
made
arbitrarily.
The
courts
review,
or
reverse,

can
even
the

administrative
even of the
Executive.

acts
Chief

Note:
Courts
of
justice as a matter of
policy,
review
administrative
adjudications only as
a last resort and,
usually, only when
questions of law are
involved.

Includes the power to


issue
administrative
rules and regulations. It
also gives discretion to
administrative
bodies
to determine how the
law shall be enforced.

The
power
to
promulgate laws and
the kind of discretion
given to the legislature
is to determine what
the law shall be.

Source: The power to promulgate


administrative regulations is derived
from the legislature by virtue of a valid
delegation. This may be expressed or
implied.
Tests of Delegation

Chapter 3
Powers of Administrative
Agencies
Classification of the powers of the
administrative bodies:
(1) Quasi-legislative
(2) Quasi-judicial
Quasi-legislative
Otherwise known as the power of
subordinate legislation. It permits the
body to promulgate rules intended to
carry out the provisions of particular
laws.
The
jurisdiction
of
the
administrative body is quasi-legislative
if it prescribes a rule for the future.
The nature of the quasi-legislative
power is public.
Quasi-judicial
Otherwise known as the power of
adjudication.
It
enables
the
administrative body to resolve in a
manner essentially judicial, factual
and sometimes even legal questions
incidental to its primary power of
enforcement of law. It prescribes a rule
for the past and is private in nature.

The Quasi-Legislative Power


It may be defined as the authority
delegated by the law-making body to
the administrative body to adopt rules
and regulations intended to carry out
the provisions of a law and implement
legislative policy.
Distinction of Legislative Power from
Quasi-Legislative power
Quasi-legislative
power

Legislative power

5 | Administrative Law Reviewer

(1) Completeness test the law must


be complete in all its terms and
conditions when it leaves the legislature
so that when it reaches the delegate, it
will have nothing to do but to enforce it.
(2) Sufficient Standard test the law
must offer a sufficient standard to
specify the limits of the delegates
authority, announce the legislative
policy, and specify the conditions under
which it is to be implemented. The
standard is usually embodied in the law
itself.
Among the accepted sufficient standards
are: public interest, simplicity, economy
and efficiency, and public welfare.

Quasi-Judicial Power
It has been defined as the power of
the administrative authorities to make
determinations
of
facts
in
the
performance of their official duties and
to apply the law as they construe it to
the facts so found. The exercise of this
power is only incidental to their main
function, which is the enforcement of
the law. However, their determination
of legal questions is subject to review
by the courts of justices.
The quasi-judicial power is incidental
to the power of regulation vested in
the administrative body but it is often
expressly conferred by the legislature
through specific provisions in the
charter of the agency. This power is
needed to enable the administrative
officers to perform their executive
duties.
Determinative Powers
Classification of determinative powers:
(1) Enabling powers are those that
permit the doing of an act which the

law undertakes to regulate and which


would be unlawful without government
approval.
(2) Directing powers order the doing
or performance of particular acts to
ensure compliance with the law and
are often exercised for corrective
purposes.
o Dispensing power allows the
administrative officer to relax
the general operation of a law
or
exempt
from
the
performance of a general duty.
o Summary power are those
involving
the
use
by
administrative authorities of
force upon persons or things
without
the
necessity
of
previous judicial warrant.
o Examining power enables
the administrative body to
inspect
the
records
and
premises, and investigate the
activities, of persons or entities
coming under its jurisdiction.
This will include:
Issuance of subpoenas
Swearing in of witnesses
Interrogation of witnesses
Calling for production of
books, papers and
records
Requiring that books,
papers and records be
made available for
inspection
Inspection of premises
Requiring written answers
to questionnaires
Requiring the filing of
statements
Exercise of Powers
The duties of administrative bodies are
generally
considered
discretionary,
especially as they involve the interpretation
or construction and enforcement of the law
and the appreciation of factual questions
that may be submitted to it for resolution.
Some administrative duties are ministerial
which means that no judgment or discretion
is required or allowed in their exercise.

Chapter 4
The Quasi-Legislative
Power
Kinds of Administrative Regulations
(1)
Legislative Regulation
(2)
Interpretative Regulation
6 | Administrative Law Reviewer

Legislative Regulation
Accorded by the courts or by express
provision of statute the force and
effect of law immediately upon going
into effect
The
administrative
agency
is
supplementing the statute, filling in
the details or making the law, and
usually acting pursuant to a specific
delegation of legislative power

In the nature of subordinate


legislation designed to implement a
primary legislation providing the
details thereof
Issued pursuant to a valid delegation
of legislative power
Classification of Legislative
Regulation:
(1)
Supplementary - intended to
fill in the details of the law and to
make explicit what is only general
(2)
Contingent - issued upon the
happening of a certain contingency
which the administrative body is given
the discretion to determine or to
ascertain some circumstances and on
the basis thereof
may enforce or
suspend the operation of a law.
Interpretative Regulation
Are those which purport to do no more
than interpret the statute being
administered, to say what it means
Constitutes
the
administrator's
construction of a statute
Issued by the administrative body as
an incident to its power to enforce the
law and is intended merely to clarify
its provisions for proper observance by
the people.
At best advisory for it is the courts
that finally determine what the law
means (Peralta vs. CSC)
Requisites of Administrative
Regulation
(1) Its promulgation must be authorized
by the legislature.
(2) It must be within the scope of the
authority given by the legislature.
(3) It must be promulgated in accordance
with the prescribed procedure.
(4) It must be reasonable.
Its promulgation must be authorized by
the legislature.
Authority to promulgate the regulation
is usually conferred by the Charter
itself of the administrative body or by
the law it is supposed to enforce.

Limitation:
When
Congress
authorizes
promulgation
of
administrative rules and regulations to
implement given legislation, all that is
required is that the regulation be not
in contravention with it, but to
conform to the standards that the law
prescribes.
It must be within the scope of the
authority given by the legislature.
Assuming a valid authorization, it is
still necessary that the regulation
promulgated must not be ultra vires or
beyond the authority conferred.
The rule-making power of a public
administrative body is a delegated
legislative power, which it may not use
either to abridge the authority given
by congress or the Constitution or to
enlarge its power beyond the scope
intended. (Conte vs. COA)
In the case of People vs. Maceren, the
issued
a
regulation
prohibiting
electro-fishing was challenged on
the ground that the Secretary of DENR
exceeded the powers conferred upon
him since the law did not prohibit
fishing byy electricity. The SC ruled
that the Secretary of Agriculture and
Commissioner
of
Fisheries
were
powerless to penalize it.
The rule-making power must
be confined to details for
regulating the mode or
proceeding to carry into effect
the law as it has been enacted.
The power cannot be extended
to amending or expanding the
statutory requirements or to
embrace matters not covered
by the statute.
In Bautista vs Juinio, the SC sustained
a letter of instruction prohibiting
private
extra-heavy
and
heavy
vehicles from using public streets on
weekends and holidays but annulled
as ultra vires the administrative
regulation calling for the impounding
of the offending vehicles. As the
penalty imposed by the law was only a
fine and suspension of registration,
the Court declared that the
impounding of a vehicle finds no
statutory justification.
In Metropolitan Traffic Command vs.
Gonong, the SC declared the removal
by traffic enforcers of the license
plates of illegally parked vehicle as
illegal. Said law did not include the
removal of license plates, or even the
confiscation of the license of the
offending driver as a penalty for illegal
parking.
7 | Administrative Law Reviewer

It must be promulgated in accordance


with the prescribed procedure.
As in the enactment of laws, the
promulgation
of
administrative
regulations of general application does
not require previous notice and
hearing, the only exception being
where the legislature itself requires it .
In the absence of such a requirement,
the
administrative
body
can
promulgate the regulation in its
exclusive discretion.
But where the regulation is in effect a
settlement of a controversy between
specific parties, it is considered an
administrative adjudication and so will
require notice and hearing.
As for publication, the applicable rule
is now found in Executive Order No.
200 which provides that laws shall
take effect after fifteen (15) days
following the completion of their
publication either in the Official
Gazette or in a newspaper of general
circulation in the Philippines, unless it
is otherwise provided.
Interpretative regulations and those
merely internal in nature, that is,
regulating only the personnel of the
administrative agency and not the
public, need not be published.
Publication must be in full or it is no
publication at all since its purpose is to
inform the public of the contents of
the law.
The Supreme Court, it would seem,
requires
publication
of
the
administrative regulation only if it is of
general application and penal in
nature.
It must be reasonable.
Like statutes, administrative
regulations promulgated thereunder
must not be unreasonable or arbitrary
as to violate due process.
In Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila
vs. Board of Transportation, the SC
declared the regulation phasing out
taxicabs more than 6 years old as
reasonable, holding that its purpose
was to promote the convenience and
comfort and protect the safety of the
passengers. (police power)
Penal Regulations
The power to define and punish crime
is exclusively legislative and may not
be delegated to the administrative
authorities.
While administrative
regulations may have the force and
effect of law, their violation cannot

give rise to criminal prosecution unless


the legislature makes such violation
punishable
and
imposes
the
corresponding sanctions.
Special
requisites
of
a
valid
administrative regulation with a
penal sanction:
(1) The law itself must make violation of
the
administrative
regulation
punishable;
(2) The law itself must impose and
specify the penalty for the violation of
the regulation;
(3) The regulation must be published.
Construction and Interpretation
Regulation should be read in harmony
with the statute and not in violation of
the authority conferred on the
administrative authorities.
The administrative regulation that
contravenes the statute is, of course,
invalid.
Enforcement
It is established that the power to
promulgate administrative regulations
carries with it the implied power to
enforce them. This may be effected
through judicial action or through
sanctions that the statute itself may
allow the administrative body to
impose.
Amendment or Repeal
Like the statute, the administrative
regulation promulgated thereunder is
subject to amendment or repeal by
the authorities that promulgated them
in the first place.
May be changed directly by the
legislature.

Chapter 5
The Quasi-Judicial Power
Quasi-Judicial Power
Also known as the administrative
agencys power of adjudication, is
the power of the administrative
agency to determine questions of fact
to which the legislative policy is to
apply,
in
accordance
with
the
standards laid down by the law itself.
Doctrine of Primary Administrative
Jurisdiction
8 | Administrative Law Reviewer

Under the doctrine of primary


administrative jurisdiction, courts will
not determine a controversy where the
issues for resolution demand the exercise
of
sound
administrative
discretion
requiring
the
special
knowledge,
experience,
and
services
of
the
administrative tribunal to determine
technical and intricate matters of fact.
Will adherence to the doctrine of
primary
administrative
jurisdiction
result to overlapping with the functions
of regular courts of justice? No. If a case is
such that its determination requires the
expertise, specialized training, and knowledge of
an administrative body, relief must first be
obtained in an administrative proceeding before
resort to the court is had even if the matter may
well be within the latter's proper jurisdiction.
The objective of the doctrine of primary
jurisdiction is to guide the court in determining
whether it should refrain from exercising its
jurisdiction until after an administrative agency
has determined some question or some aspect of
some question arising in the proceeding before
the court.
Quasi-judicial function
Refers to the actions or discretions of
public administrative officers or bodies
, that are required to investigate facts,
or ascertain the existence of facts,
hold hearings and draw conclusions
from them, as a basis for their official
action and to exercise discretion of a
judicial nature.
Requisites to exercise quasi-judicial
power
(1) Jurisdiction (must be properly acquired
by the administrative body)
(2) Due process (must be observed in the
conduct of the proceedings)

JURISDICTION
The competence of an office or body
to act on a given matter or decide a
certain question. Without jurisdiction,
the determination made by the
administrative bodies are absolutely
null and without any legal effect
whatsoever.
Which entity has the power to confer
jurisdiction?
It is the legislature that has the power to
confer jurisdiction upon the administrative
body and so limit or expand its authority.It is
a well-settled principle that unless expressly

empowered, administrative agencies


bereft of quasi-judicial power.

are

adjudged under the provisions of the Civil


Code and not the Public Service Act.

Are the courts of justice vested with


jurisdiction over commissions in the
exercise of quasi-judicial functions?

Manila Electric Company v. Court of


Appeals

In the exercise of quasi-judicial functions, the


Commission is a co-equal body with the RTC
and co-equal bodies have no power to
control the other. (PCGG v. Pea).
Are there scope and limits in the
exercise of quasi-judicial functions of
administrative bodies?
The law may allow some administrative
bodies to award certain kinds of damages
while denying the same power, for no
apparent reason, to other administrative
bodies.
For example, the SEC and NLRC are allowed
to award damages virtually to the same
extent as a court of justice. Yet similar
authority has not been conferred by its
charter to NTC.
Cases:
Cario v. Commission on Human Rights
Commission on Human Rights has no power
to adjudicate over certain cases like alleged
human rights violations involving civil or
political rights. The most that may be
conceded to the Commission in the way of
adjudicative power is that it investigate (factfinding).
Lastimosa v. Vasquez
The Ombudsmans power to investigate and
prosecute includes the investigation and
prosecution of any crime committed by a
public official regardless of whether the acts
or omissions complained of are related to, or
connected
with,
or
arise
from
the
performance of his official duty.
International Broadcasting Corporation
v. Jalandoon
The Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) has jurisdiction over any intracorporate controversy which may have
arisen from ownership of shares of stocks.
Syquia v. Board of Power and Water
Works
The regulatory board has no jurisdiction over
over petitioner'scontractual relations with
respondents-complainants as her tenants,
since petitioner is not engaged in a public
servicenor in the sale of electricity without
permit or franchise. This case gives rise to a
question purely civil in character that is to be
9 | Administrative Law Reviewer

It is the regular courts power to adjudicate


cases involving violations of rights which are
legally demandable and enforceable.
RCPI v. Board of Communications
The respondent administrative body did not
have the power to impose fines upon
petitioner for non-delivery of telegrams,
resulting in mental anguish and extra
expenses to addressees.
Lepanto Consolidated Mining Compnay
v. WMC Resources Intl Pty. Ltd
The Mines and Geosciences Bureau has
jurisdiction over a controversy pertaining to
mining rights.
Boiser vs. Court of Appeals
The
National
Telecommunications
Commission is not authorized to adjudicate
breach of contract cases, much less award
moral and exemplary damages.
Davao New Town Devt Corp. v.
Commission on the Settlement of Land
Problems (COSLAP)
The jurisdiction of COSLAP is confined only to
disputes over lands in which the government
has proprietary or regulatory interest.

National Federation of Labor v. Eisma


The labor arbiterhas the power to award
damages arising from picketing.
Hydro
Resources
Contractors
Corporation
v.
National
Irrigation
Administration
The National Irrigation Administrator (NIA)
Administrator has the power of granting
claims. Said power can necessarily be
implied
from
its
express
power
of
adjudication.
Southern Cross Cement Corp. v. Cement
Manufacturers Assoc. of the Phils.
The Department of Trade and Industry has no
intrinsic right, absent statutory authority, to
reverse the findings of the Tariff Commission.

1. Rules of Procedure

2. The Subpoena Power

Where an administrative body is expressly


granted the power of adjudication, it is also
deemed vested with the implied power to
prescribe the rules to be observed in the
conduct of its proceedings (Angara v.
Electoral Commission).

General Rule: The power to issue subpoena


and subpoena duces tecum is not inherent
in administrative bodies. Administrative
bodies may summon witnesses and require
the production of evidence only when 1) duly
allowed by law, and 2) in connection with the
matter they are authorized to investigate.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the
agency may, in case of disobedience, invoke
the aid or Regional Trial Court within whose
jurisdiction the contested case falls.

Doctrine of Implication
States that what is implied in the
language of a statute is as much a
part of it as that which is expressed.
Thus,
the
incidental
power
to
promulgate the rules necessary for the
proper exercise of its exclusive power
must be deemed necessary by
implication
to
be
lodged
in
administrative bodies such as the
Electoral Commission.
What method of procedure should be
used?
When the statute does not require any
particular method of procedure to be
followed by an administrative agency, the
agencymay adopt any reasonable method to
carry out its functions (Provident Tree
Farms, Inc. v. Batario, Jr).
However, the rules of the agency must not
violate fundamental rights or encroach upon
constitutional
prerogatives(Phil.Lawyers
Assoc. v. Agrava).
How should the administrative rules of
procedure be construed?
Administrative rules of procedure should be
construed liberally. In order to:1) to
promote their object; and, 2) to assist the
parties in obtaining a just, speedy and
inexpensive determination of their respective
claims and defenses(Agusmin Promotional
Enterprises, Inc.v. CA).
The provisions of the Rules of Court may be
applied suppletorily to the rules of procedure
of administrative bodies exercising judicial
powers unless otherwise provided by law or
the rules of procedure of the administrative
agency concerned (Samalio v.CA).
Rules of procedure of special courts and
quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective
unless
disapproved
by
the
SC
(Constitution Art.8, Sec. 5(5)).
The power of administrative agencies to
promulgate rules of procedure does not or
cannot be construed as allowing it to grant
itself jurisdiction since rules of procedure
areremedial in nature and cover only rules
on
pleadings
and
practice(DARAB
v.Lubrica).
10 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

Exception: The power to issue subpoena


may be expressly granted in the charter
of the administrative body.
The Court may punish contumacy or refusal
to obey as contempt.
In Cario v. Commission on Human
Rights,
the
Supreme
Court
distinguishedbetween
the
power
to
investigate and the power to adjudicate
Power to
Investigate
Means to examine,
explore, inquire,
delve or probe into;
to follow up step by
step by patient
inquiry or
observation
Purpose is tofind
out, to learn, obtain
information

Power to
Adjudicate

Means to adjudge,
arbitrate, judge,
determine, resolve,
rule on, settle;
to settle in the
exercise of judicial
authority
Purpose is tosettle,
decide or resolve a
controversy
involved in the
facts inquired into
by application of
the law

Cases:
Carmelo v. Ramos
Authority to conduct an investigation does
not necessarily mean it can also summon
witnesses and take testimony in the absence
of a clear grant of this power from the
legislature
Pascual v.Board of Medical Examiners
The constitutional guarantee against selfincrimination extends to administrative
proceedings which possess a criminal or
penal aspect. The Board of Medical
Examiners cannot compel the person
proceeded against to take the witness stand
without his consent.
3. The Contempt Power
Like the subpoena power, the power to
punish for contempt is essentially judicial

and cannot be claimed as an inherent right


by the administrative body.
To be validly exercised, it must be expressly
conferred upon the body and, additionally,
must be used only in connection with its
quasi-judicial as distinguished from its purely
administrative or routinary functions.
As a rule, where, say, a subpoena of the
administrative body is disregarded, the
person summoned may not be directly
discipline by that body. The proper remedy
id for the administrative body to seek
assistance of the courts of justice for the
enforcement of its order.
The power to hold in contempt must be
exercised not on the vindictive, but on the
preservative principle.
Cases:
Tolentino v. Inciong
A labor officials power to hold a person for
contempt for refusal to comply with its order
cannot extend to a CFI judge; remedy of
administrative official- seek a dismissal of
the case before the court precisely on the
ground that the matter did not fall within the
domain of the powers conferred on it.
Dumarpa v.Dimaporo
The power to hold in contempt must be
exercised on the preservative principle.
Land Bank of the Phils.v. Listana
Quasi-judicial agencies that have the power
to cite persons for indirect contempt can only
do so by initiating them in the proper RTC.
DUE PROCESS
General Rule: The right to notice and
hearing is essential to due process and its
non-observance will as a rule invalidate the
administrative proceedings.
Persons are
entitled to be notified of any pending case
affecting their interests so that, if they are
minded, they may claim the right to appear
therein and present their side or refute the
position of opposing parties.
When can the administrative agency
deny notice and hearing? (EXP to GR)
The right to notice and hearing can
be dispensed with in the following
instances:
(1) Urgency of the immediate action
(2) Tentativeness of the administrative
action
(3) The right had previously been offered
but not claimed
11 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

Some accepted exceptions:


Summary abatement of a
nuisance per se e.g. mad dog
on the loose which can be killed
outright
as a matter of selfdefense
Preventive suspension of a
public
servant
facing
administrative charges
Padlocking of filthy restaurants
or theatres showing obscene
movies threat to public health
and decency
The cancellation of a passport
of a person sought for criminal
prosecution
The summary distraint and levy
of property of a delinquent
taxpayer
Replacement of a temporary or
acting appointee
What rights or principles should be
observed
in
administrative
proceedings?
The cardinal rights or principles to be
observed
in
administrative
proceedings are the following:
(1) right to a hearing- includes the
right of the party interested or
affected to present his own case and
submit evidence in support thereof;
(2) the tribunal must consider the
evidence presented;
(3) the evidence must have something to
support its decision;
(4) the evidence must be substantialrelevant evidence as a reasonable
mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion; Rationale- to
free administrative boards from the
compulsion of technical rules
(5) the decision must be rendered on the
evidence presented at the hearing, or
at least contained in the record and
disclosed to the parties affected;
boards of inquiry- their report and
decision are only advisory
(6) the Court of Industrial Relations or
any of its judges, therefore, must act
on its or his own independent
consideration of the law and facts of
the controversy, and not simply
accept the views of a subordinate in
arriving at a decision;
(7) the Court of Industrial Relations
should, in all controversial questions,
render its decision in such a manner
that the parties to the proceeding can
know the various issues involved and

the
reasons
rendered

for

the

decisions

It is basic to due process that the tribunal


considering the administrative question be
impartial, to ensure a fair decision.
Cases:
Montemayor v. Bundalian:
The burden is on the complainant to prove
by substantial evidence the allegations in his
complaint.Administrative decisions of the
executive branch of the government must be
respected so long as they are supported by
substantial evidence.
Administrative decisions in matters
within the executive jurisdiction can
only be set aside on proof of 1)gross
abuse of discretion, 2)fraud, or
3)error of law.

Sec. of Justice v. Lantin: Reqts of


Quasi-Judicial Proceeding- 1) taking and
evaluation of evidence, 2) determining facts
based on the evidence presented, 3)
rendering an order or decision supported by
the facts proved.
Phil.Merchant Marine School Inc. v. CA:
findings
of
fact
of
administrative
departments are generally accorded respect,
if not finality, by the courts.
American Tobacco Co.v. Dir. of Patents:
the officer who makes the determination
must consider and appraise the evidence
which justifies them.
Valladolid v.Inciong: no denial of the right
to due process on the basis of position
papers submitted by the parties.

Zambales Chromite v. CA: it is grave


abuse of discretion for a department
secretary to review his own decision while
Director of Mines; Remedy:he should ask his
undersecretary to review a decision rendered
by him.

GMCR, Inc.v. Bell Telecomm. Phils. Inc.:


the vote alone of the Chairman of
Commission is not sufficient to legally render
an NTC order, resolution or decision.
Quiambao v.CA: where opportunity to be
heard either through oral arguments or
through pleadings is accorded, there is no
denial of due process.

Rivera v. CSC: the reviewing officer must be


other than the officer whose decision is
under review.

Autencio v. Manara: appeal/motion


reconsideration- remedy to cure defects in
procedural process

Corona v.CA: the aggrieved party should


not be one and the same official upon whose
lap the complaint he has filed may
eventually
fall
on
appeal;
nemopotestessesimul actor etjudex- No man
can be at once a litigant and judge.

Boyboy v.Yabut: Gen. Rule- trial-type


proceeding is not required; Exceptionwhere the findings are necessarily to be
based on the credibility of the witnesses or
complaints.

Caoile v. Vivo: the law does not require


another notice and hearing for a review of
the decision of the board of special inquiry
on the basis of the evidence previously
presented.
Marvel Bldg.v. Ople: no denial of due
process if petitioners received notice of the
scheduled investigation the day before said
date of the hearing or investigation
Alvarez v.Ople: there was denial where the
decision was rendered against a person who
was not a party to or even notified of the
proceedings taken before a labor arbiter.

ELEMENTS OF DUE PROCESS:


(1) there must be a court or tribunal
clothed with judicial power to hear and
determine the matter before it;
(2) jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired
over the person of the defendant or
property which is the subject of the
proceedings;
(3) the defendant must be given an
opportunity to be heard; and
(4) judgment must be rendered upon
lawful hearing (NAPOCOR v.Chiong).
Javier v. COMELEC

Globe v. NTC: hearing is essential before a


fine may be imposed.

The judge must not only be impartial but


must also appear to be impartial as an added
assurance to the parties that his decision will
be just.

Pefianco
v.
Moral:
administrative
resolution- basis for any further remedies
that a respondent in an administrative case
might wish to pursue.

ERB v. CA
Complainants have the burden of proving by
substantial evidence the allegations in their
complaints.

12 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

Administrative Appeals and Review

(3) exercise of administrative powers,


(4)judgments based on prohibited or null
and void contracts.

General Rule: An appeal from a final


decision of the administrative agency may
be taken to the department head, whose
decision may further be brought to the
regular courts of justice, in accordance with
the procedure specified by law.
Exception: Unless otherwise provided by
law or executive order

An administrative officer may


revoke, repeal or abrogate the
acts or previous rulings of his
predecessor in office if he
becomes
satisfied
that
a
different construction should be
given.

Enforcement of Decision
How can appeal be made?
In the absence of any statute providing for
the enforcement of an administrative
determination, the same cannot be enforced
except possibly by appeal to the force of
public opinion.
It is an administrative penalty which
administrative officers are empowered to
impose without criminal prosecutions (CAB
vs. PAL).

Chapter 6
Judicial Review
General Rule: Administrative decisions
are not reviewable by courts of justice.
(Non appealable to courts of justice)
Exceptions:
(1)If the Constitution or the law
permits it.
(2)If the issues to be reviewed
involve questions of law.

A writ of mandamuslies to enforce a


ministerial duty or the performance of an act
which the law specifically enjoins as a duty
resulting from office, trust or station (San
Luis v. CA).
Sanctions
for
Enforcement
of
decisions:
(1) Revocation of or refusal to
renew licenses
(2) Destruction of unlawful articles
e.g. pornographic materials and
narcotic drugs or marijuana
(3) Summary closure of stores
found engaged in profiteering
or hoarding
(4) Refusal to grant clearances
(5) issuance of cease and desist
orders
to
public
utility
companies
from
charging
excessive rates
(6) Detention and deportation of
aliens
(7) Imposition of fines
Res Judicata
General Rule: The decisions and orders of
administrative agencies rendered pursuant
to their quasi-judicial authority, have, upon
their finality, the force and binding effect of a
final judgment within the purview of the
doctrine res judicata (Brillantes v. Catro).
Exceptions:
(1)when it is repugnant to law, morals,
good customs, public order or public
policy(Republic v. CA)
(2)labor relations proceedings(Nasipit
Lumber Company, Inc. v. NLRC)
13 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

General Rule: Administrative decisions are


not reviewable by courts of justice. (Non
appealable to courts of justice)
Why? --- The right to appeal is not a
constitutional right nor is it embraced in the right
to be heard as guaranteed by due process
--- It is a recognized principle that courts
of justice will generally not interfere in the
executive and administrative matters which are
addressed to the sound discretion of government
agencies.
(eg. grant of licenses, permits, leases or the
approval, rejection or revocations of applications
thereof)
Effect --- The administrative decision may be
validly rendered final and non appealable at the
administrative
level
without
allowing
the
aggrieved party a final resort to the courts of
justice.
Exceptions:
(1) If the Constitution or the law permits
it.1
1

Constitution --- In the case of Constitutional Commissions


(COMELEC, COA, CSC), unless otherwise provided in this
Constitution or by law, any decision, order or ruling of each
Commission may be brought to the Supreme Court on
certiorari by the aggrieved party within 30 days from receipt
of a copy thereof ART. IX, A, Section 7

Note:
-Petition for review (appeal) shall be perfected
within 15 days from the receipt of the final
administrative decision.
-1 motion for reconsideration may be allowed.
-If the motion is denied, the movant shall
perfect his appeal during the remaining period
for appeal reckoned from receipt of the resolution
of denial.
-If
the
decision
is
reversed
on
reconsideration, the appellant shall have 15
days from receipt of the resolution to perfect his
appeal.

Extent --- There can be appeal even without


legislative permission (kahit walang batas na
nagsasabi na pwede) or even against legislative
prohibition (kahit sabihin pa ng batas na di
pwede mag-appeal)
>> Why?
-

The court cannot be deprived of their


inherent authority to decide questions of
law, initially or by way of review of
administrative decisions.

It is generally understood that, as to


administrative agencies exercising quasijudicial or legislative power, there is an
underlying power in the courts to
scrutinize the acts of such agencies on
questions of law or jurisdiction even
though no right of review is given by
statute.

-It shall be filed in the court specified by the


statute or in its absence, in any court of
competent jurisdiction.
-It shall be supported by substantial evidence
except when specially provided otherwise by
law.
-In the absence of specific rules governing
appeals from administrative decisions, the
special civil action2s and other remedies provided
for in the Rules of Court may be availed in proper
cases by an aggrieved party.
(2) If the issues to be reviewed involve
questions of law.

Administrative Code --- Generally provides that an


appeal/petition for review from an agency decision shall be
perfected by filing with the agency within 15 days from
receipt of a copy thereof a notice of appeal, and with the
reviewing court a petition for review of the order.
RA 5434 decisions of the Social Security Commission and
the Civil Aeronautics Board, etc. appealable to the Court of
Appeals
-- An appeal from a final award, order or decision of
the Patent Office shall be taken by filling with the Patent Office
and with the CA a notice of appeal within 15 days from the
notice of such award, order or ruling.
PD 612 --- The aggrieved party in proceedings taken before
the Insurance Commissioner may appeal from its decisions in
the manner as provided by law and by the rules of court for
appeals from the Court of Tax Appeals to the Court of Appeals.
Interim Rules and Guidelines implementing Sec. 9 (3)
BP Blg. 129 the CA may review final decisions, orders,
awards or resolutions of regional trial courts and all of quasijudicial bodies except the COMELEC, the COA, the
Sandiganbayan, and decisions issued under the Labor Code of
the Philippines and by the Central Board of Assessments.
Other appeals prescribed by special laws eg. RA No.
1125 providing for appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals of any
decision rendered by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue,
the Commissioner of Customs, or any provincial or city board
of assessment appeals.

Habeas corpus, quo warranto, prohibition, mandamus, etc...

14 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

Note:
- The Supreme Court may review the decisions of
the Office of the President on questions of law
and jurisdiction when properly raised. (No judicial
supremacy in this case. WHY? --- It is the SCs
duty enjoined by the Constitution as part of the
system of checks and balances.)

Methods of review are prescribed


by:
(1) The Constitution
(2) Statutes
(3) Rules of Court
Methods of Review may be:
(1) Specific
(2) General

Requisites before there can be


judicial
review/appeal
through
certiorari
or
prohibition
of
determinations of administrative
officers or agencies
(1) Before certiorari or prohibition may be
entertained, it must be shown that all
the
administrative
remedies
prescribed by law or ordinance have
been exhausted.
(2) The administrative decision may be
annulled or set aside only upon a clear
showing that the administrative official
or tribunal has acted without or in
excess of jurisdiction, or with grave
abuse of discretion.

2 Doctrines that must be considered


in connection with the judicial review
of administrative decisions
(1) Doctrine of primary jurisdiction
(2) Doctrine
of
exhaustion
administrative remedies

Calls
for
the
determination
of
3
administrative
questions
by
administrative agencies rather than
courts of justice.

of

Does not warrant a court to arrogate


unto itself authority to resolve a
controversy the jurisdiction over which
is
initially
lodged
with
an
administrative
body
of
special
competence.

Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction


If the case is such that its
determination requires the expertise,
specialized skills and knowledge of the
proper administrative bodies because
technical
matters
or
intricate
questions of facts are involved, then
relief must first be obtained in an
administrative proceeding before a
remedy will be supplied by the courts
even though the matter is within the
proper jurisdiction of a court.
When does it apply? It applies
where a claim is originally cognizable
in the courts, and comes into play
whenever enforcement of the claim
requires the resolution of issues which,
under a regulatory scheme, have been
placed within the special competence
of an administrative body.
What is the effect when this
doctrine is applied?
The judicial
process is suspended pending referral
of such issues to the administrative
body for its review. (Note: The
application of the doctrine of primary
jurisdiction does not call for the
dismissal of the case. It need only be
suspended until after matters within
the competence of the administrative
bodies
are
threshed
out
and
determined.)

*It has been the jurisprudential trend to


apply the doctrine of primary jurisdiction in
many cases involving matters that demand
the special competence of administrative
agencies.
*In accordance with the doctrine of primary
jurisdiction, the administrative process must
continue up to the highest level before resort
to judicial tribunals may be sought.

Doctrine
of
Exhaustion
Administrative Remedies

of

An administrative decision must first


be appealed to the administrative
superiors up to the highest level
before it may be elevated to a court of
justice for review.
Recourse through court action cannot
prosper
until
after
all
such
administrative remedies would have
first been exhausted. If a remedy is
available within the administrative
machinery, this should be resorted to
before resort can be made to the
courts.
Underlying
principle
of
this
doctrine:
Presumption
that
the
administrative agency, if afforded a
complete chance to pass upon the
matter, will decide the same correctly.

Why is the observance of this


doctrine important?
(1) To ensure the consistency in
administrative findings and also
because of the conceded expertise
of the administrative body as
compared to the judicial tribunal in
resolving administrative questions
in general.
(2) Compliance to the doctrine of
separation of powers.

Reasons for the doctrine: (law,


comity, and convenience)
(1) The administrative superiors, if
given the opportunity can correct
the errors committed by their
subordinates.
3

Ordinarily are questions of fact or technical matters which


only specialized administrative boards or commissions with
special knowledge and experience are capable of hearing and
deciding.

15 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

(2) Courts should as much as possible


refrain from disturbing the findings
of
administrative
bodies
in
deference to the doctrine of
separation of powers.
(3) On practical grounds, it is best that
the courts, which are burdened
enough as they are with judicial
cases, should not be saddled with
the review of administrative cases.
(4) Judicial review of administrative
cases is usually effected through
special civil actions of certiorari,
mandamus, and prohibition, which
are available only if there is no
other plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy.

General Rule: Application of the doctrine of


exhaustion of administrative remedies.
Exceptions:
(1) When there is a violation of due
process.
(2) When the issue involved is purely
legal.4
(3) When the administrative action is
patently illegal amounting to lack or
excess of jurisdiction.
(4) When there is estoppel on the part of
the administrative agency concerned.
(5) When there is irreparable injury 5.
(6) When the respondent is a department
secretary whose acts as an alter ego
of the President bears the implied and
assumed approval of the latter.
(7) When to require exhaustion of
administrative remedies would be
unreasonable (as when the claim
involved is small).
(8) When strong public interest is
involved.
(9) When the issues submitted have
become moot and academic.
(10)
When it would amount to the
nullification of the claim.
(11)
When the subject matter is a
private land in land case proceedings.
(12)
When the rule does not provide
a plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.
(13)
When there are circumstances
indicating the urgency of judicial
intervention.
4

E.g. Want of authority; interpretation of the scope of ones


constitutional right
5
The doctrine is relaxed when its application may cause great
and irreparable damage which cannot otherwise be prevented
except by taking opportune appropriate court action.

16 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

Effect of premature resort to the


courts: The case is susceptible of dismissal
for lack of cause of action. (The only effect of
noncompliance with this rule is that it will
deprive the complainant of a cause of action,
which is a ground for a motion to dismiss.
Failure to exhaust administrative remedies
does not affect the jurisdiction of the court.)
When
must
non
exhaustion
of
administrative remedies be raised or
invoked? It must be raised at the earliest
possible time, even before filing the answer
to the complaint or pleading asserting the
claim, by a motion to dismiss.
What is the effect when it is not
seasonably invoked? This ground for
dismissal (exhaustion of administrative
remedies) would be deemed waived and the
court may proceed to hear the case.
*The court has the discretion to require the
observance of the doctrine and may, if it
sees fit, dispense with it and proceed with
the disposition of the case.
*A motion for reconsideration must be filed
before the special civil action for certiorari
may be availed of.

Q: Is there a need to appeal the decision of a


Cabinet member to the President before it
may be brought to a court of justice?
A: No, appeal to the President need not be
resorted to, recourse to the courts could be
had immediately. The doctrine of exhaustion
of administrative remedies does not apply
when the respondent is a department
secretary who acts, as an alter ego of the
President, bears the implied approval of the
latter, unless actually disapproved by him.
2 Kinds of questions reviewable by
the courts of justice
(1) Questions of fact
(2) Questions of law
Questions of fact
Review of the administrative decision
lies in the discretion of the legislature,
which may or may not permit it as it
sees fit. Denial of this remedy does
not violate due process for the right to
appeal is generally not deemed
embraced in the right to a hearing.

Findings of fact are generally accorded


great respect, if not finality, by the
courts by reason of the special
knowledge and expertise of said
administrative agencies over matters
falling under their jurisdiction.
The
findings
of
fact
of
an
administrative
agency
must
be
respected so long as they are
supported by substantial evidence,
even if such evidence might not be
overwhelming or even preponderant.
General Rule: Findings of fact by an
administrative board or official, following a
hearing, are binding upon the courts and will
not be disturbed.
Exceptions: (When review is justified)
When there has been:

independently
of
legislative
permission or even against legislative
prohibition. The reason is that the
judiciary cannot be deprived of its
inherent power to review all decisions
on questions of law, whether made
initially by lower courts and more so
by an administrative body only7.
*When an administrative agency renders an
opinionor issues a statement of policy, it
merely interprets a pre-existing law and the
administrative is at best advisory for it is the
courts that finally determine what the law
means.
*The interpretation of an agency of its own
rules should be given more weight that the
interpretation by the agency of the law it is
merely tasked to administer.

(1) denial of due process


(2) mistake or error of law
(3) lack of jurisdiction
(4) fraud
(5) collusion
(6) arbitrary action in the administrative
proceeding
(7) an
irregular
procedure
in
the
determination of factual findings
(8) palpable errors committed
(9) manifest
abuse
of
discretion,
arbitrariness, and capriciousness6
*Decisions of administrative agencies which
are declared final by law are not exempt
from judicial review when so warranted.
Factual findings of administrative agencies
are not infallible and will be set aside where
they fail the test of arbitrariness, or upon
proof of grave abuse of discretion, fraud or
error of law.
Questions of law
Administrative bodies may be allowed
to resolve questions of law in the
exercise of their quasi-judicial function
as an incident of their primary power
of
regulation.
However,
their
determination on this matter is only
tentative at best and, whenever
necessary, may be reviewed and
reversed by the courts in proper
cases.
The administrative decision may be
appealed to the courts of justice
7
6

Exercised unconstitutional powers or clearly acted arbitrarily


without regard to his duty or with grave abuse of discretion.

17 | A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L a w R e v i e w e r

The decision of legal questions is an essentially judicial


power that may not be withheld or withdrawn from the courts
by legislation as the power is inherent in the judiciary.