ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

I. INTRODUCTION

II. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

A. In general

Calalang vs. Williams

B. Express and Implied Powers

Philippine Association of Service Exporters vs. Torres

JMM Promotion vs. CA

GTEB vs. CA

C. Ministerial and Discretionary Powers

Mateo vs. CA

D. Mandatory and permissive duties and powers

Tanada vs. Cuenco

E. Errors in the exercise of powers

U.S.A vs Reyes

III. POWER OF CONTROL, SUPERVISION AND INVESTIGATION

A. President as chief executive and administrative officer

Marcos vs. Manglapus

Angangco vs. Castillo

Carpio vs. Executive Secretary

Malayan Integrated Industries Corp. vs. CA

Lacson-Magallanes Co. vs. Puno

Macailing vs. Andrada

Tuale vs. Santos

Philippine Gamefowl Commission vs. IAC

1
 B. Power to reorganize

Larin vs. Executive Secretary

Miller vs. Mardo

Eugenio vs. CSC

C. Power of investigation

Evangelista vs. Jarencio

Carino vs. CHR

IV. QUASI-LEGISLATIVE POWER

A. In general

People vs. Maceran

Smart Communications vs. NTC

Central Bank vs. Cloribel

B. Delegation of legislative power

Panama Refining Corp. vs. Ryan

A.L.A Schecter Poulty Corp. vs. U.S.

Mistretta vs. US

Eastern Shipping Lines vs. POEA

Tatad vs. Sec. of the Dept. of Energy

People vs. Vera

Araneta vs. Gatmaitan

Ynot vs. IAC

Santiago vs. Comelec

Pelaez vs. Auditor General

Edu vs. Ericta

Calalang vs. Williams

Solicitor General vs. MMDA

2
 MMDA vs. Garin

Beltran vs. Secretary of Health

C. Ascertainment of facts

Lovina vs. Moreno

D. Rate-fixing

Vigan Electric Light Co. vs. PSC

PhilComSat vs. Alcuaz

KMU vs. Garcia

E. Rule-making and administrative interpretation

Victorias Milling vs. Social Security Commission

Tayug Rural Bank vs. Central Bank

Nestle Phils. vs. CA

PHAP vs. Duque

Lupangco vs. CA

F. Effectivity of rules

Tanada vs Tuvera

V. QUASI JUDICIAL POWER

A. In general

Santiago vs. Bautista

Carino vs. CHR

B. Jurisdiction

Antipolo Realty Corp. vs. NHA

Azarcon vs. Sandiganbayan

Boiser vs. CA

Energy Regulatory Board vs. CA

3
 C. Administrative procedure

First Lepanto Ceramics vs. CA

American Tobacco Co. vs. Director of Patents

D. Due process in quasi-judicial proceedings

Ang Tibay vs. CIR

Air Manila vs. Balatbat

Morrisey vs. Brewer

Fabella vs. CA

Mabuhay Textile Mills vs. Ongpin

Central Bank vs. CA

Vinta Maritime Co., Inc. vs. NLRC

Matthews vs. Elridge

E. Cease and desist orders

Pollution Adjudication Board vs. CA

F. Right to counsel

Lumiqued vs. Exevea

G. Decision, appeal and judicial review

Fortrich vs. Corona

VI. DISTINCTION BETWEEN RULE-MAKING AND ADJUDICATION

Londoner vs. City and County of Denver

Bi-Metallic Investment Co. vs. State Board of Equalization

Corona vs. United Harbor Pilots Assn. of the Phil.

4
VII. PRIMARY JURISDICTION AND EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES

A. Primary jurisdiction

Villaflor vs. CA

Philippine Veteran’s Bank vs. CA

B. Exhaustion of administrative remedies

Paat vs. CA

VIII. JUDICIAL REVIEW

A. In general

Beautifont, Inc. vs. CA

Fuentes vs. CA

B. Limitations on judicial review

C. Petition for review

D. Certiorari, prohibition, mandamus

E. Appeal by certiorari

IX. RIGHT TO INFORMATION

Legaspi vs. Civil Service Commission

Valmonte vs. Belmonte

Chavez vs. PCGG