PANTRANCO vs.

PSC, 70 Phil 229 (1940)

FACTS:

PANTRANCO, a holder of an existing Certificate of Public Convenience is applying to operate additional

buses with the Public Service Commission (PSC). The PSC granted the application but added several
conditions for PANTRANCO’s compliance.

ISSUE:

PANTRANCO is questioning whether PSC can impose said conditions. If so, wouldn’t this power of the
PSC, as provided for under sec. 15, CA 146, constitute undue delegation of powers?

HELD:

SC held that there was valid delegation of powers.

The theory of the separation of powers is designed by its originators to secure action at the same time
forestall overaction which necessarily results from undue concentration of powers and thereby obtain
efficiency and prevent deposition. But due to the growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication
of subjects of governmental regulation and the increased difficulty of administering laws, there is a
constantly growing tendency toward the delegation of greater powers by the legislature, giving rise to
the adoption, within certain limits, of the principle of “subordinate legislation.”

All that has been delegated to the Commission is the administrative function, involving the use of
discretion to carry out the will of the National Assembly having in view, in addition, the promotion of
public interests in a proper and suitable manner.
Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA, 166 SCRA 533 (1988)

FACTS:

Vitaliano Saco, the Chief Officer of a ship, was killed in an accident in Tokyo, Japan. The widow filed a
complaint for damages against the Eastern Shipping Lines with the POEA, based on Memorandum
Circular No. 2 issued by the latter which stipulated death benefits and burial expenses for the family of
an overseas worker. Eastern Shipping Lines questioned the validity of the memorandum circular.
Nevertheless, the POEA assumed jurisdiction and decided the case.

ISSUE:

W/N the issuance of Memorandum Circular No. 2 is a violation of non-delegation of powers

HELD:

SC held that there was valid delegation of powers.

In questioning the validity of the memorandum circular, Eastern Shipping Lines contended that POEA was
given no authority to promulgate the regulation, and even with such authorization, the regulation
represents an exercise of legislative discretion which, under the principle, is not subject to delegation.

It is true that legislative discretion as to the substantive contents of the law cannot be delegated. What
can be delegated is the discretion to determine how the law may be enforced, not what the law shall be.
The ascertainment of the latter subject is a prerogative of the legislature. This prerogative cannot be
abdicated or surrendered by the legislature to the delegate.
There are two accepted tests to determine whether or not there is a valid delegation of legislative
power, viz, the completeness test and the sufficient standard test. Under the first test, the law must be
complete in all its terms and conditions when it leaves the legislature such that when it reaches the
delegate the only thing he will have to do is to enforce it. Under the sufficient standard test, there must
be adequate guidelines or stations in the law to map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority and
prevent the delegation from running riot.

Both tests are intended to prevent a total transference of legislative authority to the delegate, who is not
allowed to step into the shoes of the legislature and exercise a power essentially legislative.

Xxx The delegation of legislative power has become the rule and its non-delegation the exception.

The reason is the increasing complexity of the task of government and the growing inability of the
legislature to cope directly with the myriad problems demanding its attention. The growth of society has
ramified its activities and created peculiar and sophisticated problems that the legislature cannot be
expected to reasonably comprehend. Specialization even in legislation has become necessary. Too many
of the problems attendant upon present-day undertakings, the legislature may not have the competence
to provide the required direct and efficacious, not to say, specific solutions. These solutions may,
however, be expected from its delegates, who are supposed to be experts in the particular fields.

The reasons given above for the delegation of legislative powers in general are particularly applicable to
administrative bodies. With the proliferation of specialized activities and their attendant peculiar
problems, the national legislature has found it more and more necessary to entrust to administrative
agencies the authority to issue rules to carry out the general provisions of the statute. This is called the
“power of subordinate legislation.”

With this power, administrative bodies may implement the broad policies laid down in statute by “filling
in” the details which the Congress may not have the opportunity or competence to provide.
Memorandum Circular No. 2 is one such administrative regulation.

Solid Homes, Inc. vs. Payawal, 177 SCRA 72, 79 (1989)

FACTS:

Payawal is a buyer of a certain subdivision lot who is suing Solid Homes for failure to deliver the
certificate of title. The complaint was filed with the RTC. Solid Homes contended that jurisdiction is with
the National Housing Authority (NHA) pursuant to PD 957, as amended by PD 1344 granting exclusive
jurisdiction to NHA.

ISSUE:

W/N NHA has jurisdiction to try the case and the competence to award damages

HELD:

SC held that NHA (now HLURB) has jurisdiction.

In case of conflict between a general law and a special law, the latter must prevail regardless of the dates
of their enactment. It is obvious that the general law in this case is BP 129 and PD 1344 the special law.

On the competence of the Board to award damages, we find that this is part of the exclusive power
conferred upon it by PD 1344 to hear and decide “claims involving refund and any other claims filed by
subdivision lot or condominium unit buyers against the project owner, developer, dealer, broker or
salesman.”

As a result of the growing complexity of the modern society, it has become necessary to create more and
more administrative bodies to help in the regulation of its ramified activities. Specialized in the particular
fields assigned to them, they can deal with the problems thereof with more expertise and dispatch than
can be expected from the legislature or the courts of justice. This is the reason for the increasing vesture
of quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers in what is now not unreasonably called the fourth
department of the government.

Statues conferring powers on their administrative agencies must be liberally construed to enable them to
discharge their assigned duties in accordance with the legislative purpose.