ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

NOTES ON ATTY. GALLANT'S POWERPOINT PRESENTATION

TOPIC #1: DEFINITION OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
JANUARY 18, 2018

DEFINITIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

SENSE MEANING KEY CONCEPT

 entire system of laws
 laws
 under which the machinery of the State
 state
WIDEST SENSE works
 and which the State perform all
 acts
government acts

 provide a structure of government and

 government
prescribe its procedure
 the law which controls or is intended to
VERY BROAD  laws
control the administrative operations of
the government
 control
 the law of governmental administration

 part of public law

 law
LESS  which fixes the organization and
 administrative
COMPREHENSIVE determines the competence of the
authorities
(FRANK GOONOW, administrative authorities, and
 fixes, determines
1891)  indicates to the individual, remedies for
 remedies
the violation of his rights
 branch of modern law
 under which the executive department of  law
government  executive
NARROWER
SIGNIFICATION  acting in a quasi-legislative or quasi- department
judicial capacity,  acts
(NATHAN POUND)
 interferes with the conduct of the  interferes
individual for the purpose of promoting  purpose
the well-being of the community

Discussion:
Example of government interference: UBER - right to drive other people for compensation
- only the PH requires franchise due to its appreciation of "private property rights"
- this requirement stems from the fact that Uber offers their services to the public

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 1 of 8
 ELEMENTS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW BASED ON POUND'S DEFINITION

DEFINITION DISCUSSION

 branch of modern law indicates that it is of recent discovery

refers only to the executive department
 under which the executive department of
includes agencies, departments, bureaus, and
government
instrumentalities
GEN. RULE: only the agency to whom such quasi-
legislative or quasi-judicial power was delegated to
can exercise such authority.
 acting in a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial
capacity,
*the only exception for the doctrine of separation of
powers and non-delegation of powers

when it denies benefits and places restriction on

 interferes with the conduct of the individual
individuals
 for the purpose of promoting the well-being carry out declared policy of legislative: health,
of the community safety, morals

RECITATION PROPER: (Magboo, Mangasep, Ouano, Gobole, Calvo, Catipay, Plantilla, Reyes R.)

1. Luzon Developement Bank (LDB) vs. Assoc. of Luzon Development Bank Employees (ALDBE)
- What was allegedly violated by LDB?
Ans: CBA provision and memorandum on promotion
- To whom did LDB and ALDBE submit their position papers for arbitation?
Ans: Atty. Ester Garcia
- Were the the position papers filed?
- What is the definition of Arbitration based on our Labor Law?
Ans: defined in Art. 261 and Art 217 of the Labor Code
- Can a decision from a voluntary arbitrator be elevated for an appeal?
- What do you mean by instrumentality?
- Who has appellate jurisdiction over decisions from voluntary arbitrators?
-
2. Iron and Steel Authority vs CA
- This case talks about the juridical existence of Non-incorporated agencies
- Did the negotiations between ISA and MCFC prosper?
- What were the two contentions of ISA on why the it has the right to continue on with the
expropriation hearing.
- Is ISA's right to have its juridical existence continued until the winding up of its affairs be
completed?

3. PLDT vs City of Bacolod

- This case talks about the nature of the Bureau of Finance
- What was the basis for the City of Bacolod to demand the payment of local franchise and
business tax from PLDT?
- What is this "most-favored-treatment clause" all about?
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano
Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 2 of 8
 - What did the Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) issue?
- Why is it important to say that the BLGF is not an agency?

4. How did Administrative Law evolve?

*Answer copied from the Book of De Leon on Administrative Law (2010)*
Origin and development of administrative law.
(1) Recognition as a distinct category of law. — Administrative law is of comparatively recent
origin. Under the Anglo-American system, administrative law is not one of the traditionally
recognized parts of the law, such, for example, as the criminal law, the common law, and equity.
However, it is only in the last few decades with the rapid expansion of administrative agencies
and their increased functions that a substantial body of jurisprudence has developed in the field
and general recognition has been given to "administrative law" as a distinct category of law.

(2) Multiplication of government functions. — Originally, the government had but few functions
as there were but few activities to regulate and control. But as modern life became more complex,
the subjects of government regulations correspondingly increased, which, in turn caused a
multiplication of government functions, necessitating an enormous expansion of public
administration. And so the legislature had to create more and more administrative bodies, boards
or tribunals specialized in the particular fields assigned to them and to which the legislature and
the courts were found not to be equipped to administer properly and efficiently.

(3) Growth and utilization of administrative agencies. — Administrative law developed as the
natural accompaniment of the growth of administrative agencies and their utilization in response
to the needs of a changing society.
(a) It has developed from a combination of forces, some pressing on the legal system
from without, and some others from within, and it is, in effect, a major response of the law
to the complexities of a modern age. To a large extent, administrative law has developed
in response to the need for broad social or governmental control over complex conditions
and activities which in their detail cannot be dealt with directly in an effective manner by
the legislature or the judiciary. It has as its dominant purpose the promotion and
conservation of the interests and convenience of the public.
(b) The theory which underlies a good part of administrative law is that the issues with
which it deals ought to be decided by experts, and not by a judge, at least not in the first
instance, or until the facts have been sifted and arranged. One thrust of the multiplication
of administrative agencies is that the interpretation of certain contracts and agreements
and the determination of private rights under them is no longer a uniquely judicial function
exercisable only by our regular courts.

(4) Fusion of different powers of government in administrative agencies.— Administrative

law, then, resulted from the increased functions of government, the recent tremendous growth in
administrative agencies, and the fact that the agencies created in this period of growth were
much more than conventional administrative officials such as had existed under earlier legislation.

(a) With their extensive investigation, rule-making, and adjudicating powers, these
administrative agencies represent a provocative fusion of different powers of government.
(b) They are vested with the power to promulgate rules and regulations to better carry out
some legislative policies, and to decide on controversies within the scope of their

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 3 of 8
 activities. The laws which created administrative agencies, the rules and regulations
promulgated by them, and the body of decisions that they have from time to time
rendered in the adjudication of cases brought before them, now constitute the bulk of
administrative law.

(5) A law in the making. — Administrative law is still in its formative stages and is being
developed as part of our traditional system of law. The administrative process and its agencies
are newcomers in the field of law but administrative agencies are now established as very
important tribunals in the administration of justice, making decisions sometimes of vast
importance and equal to matters determined by the courts.

A substantial part of the principles of administrative law in the Philippines is derived from
American and English jurisprudence on this branch of law. It has persuasive, though not
controlling, force in our jurisdiction.

5. Solid Homes vs Paywal

- What was being demanded by Paywal?
- What did Solid Homes do?
(remember the legal terms used)
Ans: Petition to dismiss
- What was the reason for the creation of administrative agencies?

Atty. Gallant: "Remember that Laws are derived from human experience"

-END OF CLASS DISCUSSION-

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 4 of 8
CASES:
(1) LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK vs. ASSOCIATION OF LUZON DEVELOPMENT BANK
EMPLOYEES

FACTS: The parties on this case agreed to submit their dispute to a voluntary arbitration to
settle whether or not Luzon Development Bank violated the Collective Bargaining Agreement
provision and Memorandum of Agreement on promotion. Respondents (ALDBE) was able to
submit their position paper to Atty. Ester Garcia (voluntary arbitrator) but LDB was unable to do
so. Atty. Garcia rendered a decision in favor of respondents. Petitioners (LDB) filed a petition
for certiorari and prohibition.

HELD:

The voluntary arbitrator or the panel of voluntary arbitrators may not strictly be considered as a
quasi-judicial agency, board or commission, still both he and the panel are comprehended
within the concept of a "quasi-judicial instrumentality."

An "instrumentality" is anything used as a means or agency. Thus, the terms governmental

"agency" or "instrumentality" are synonymous in the sense that either of them is a means by
which a government acts, or by which a certain government act or function is performed. The
word "instrumentality," with respect to a state, contemplates an authority to which the state
delegates governmental power for the performance of a state function.

The voluntary arbitrator no less performs a state function pursuant to a governmental power
delegated to him under the provisions therefor in the Labor Code and he falls, therefore, within
the contemplation of the term "instrumentality" in the aforequoted Sec. 9 of B.P. 129.

A fortiori, the decision or award of the voluntary arbitrator or panel of arbitrators should likewise
be appealable to the Court of Appeals, in line with the procedure outlined in Revised
Administrative Circular No. 1-95

(2) IRON AND STEEL AUTHORITY, petitioner, v s . THE COURT OF APPEALS

FACTS: Petitioner (ISA) was created by PD 272 to develop and promote the iron and steel
industry in the Philippines. The National Steel Corp. pursuant to Proclamation No. 2239 entered
expropriation proceedings with Maria Cristina Fertilizer Corp. (MCFC), for the compensation of
the subject land. ISA exercising its power of eminent domain initiated the expropriation
proceedings. While trial was on-going, the statutory existence of ISA expired. MCFC then filed a
motion to dismiss as no valid judgment can be had for ISA ceased to be a juridical person.

HELD:

"A government regulatory agency exercising sovereign functions," did not have the same rights
as an ordinary corporation and that the ISA, unlike corporations organized under the
Corporation Code, was not entitled to a period for winding up its affairs after expiration of its
legally mandated term, with the result that upon expiration of its term on 11 August 1987, ISA
was "abolished and [had] no more legal authority to perform governmental functions."

Clearly, ISA was vested with some of the powers or attributes normally associated with juridical
personality. There is, however, no provision in P.D. No. 272 recognizing ISA as possessing

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 5 of 8
general or comprehensive juridical personality separate and distinct from that of the
Government. The ISA in fact appears to the Court to be a non-incorporated agency or
instrumentality of the Republic of the Philippines, or more precisely of the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines. It is common knowledge that other agencies or instrumentalities of
the Government of the Republic are cast in corporate form, that is to say, are incorporated
agencies o r instrumentalities, sometimes with and at other times without capital stock, and
accordingly vested with a juridical personality distinct from the personality of the Republic.

When the statutory term of a non-incorporated agency expires, the powers, duties and functions
as well as the assets and liabilities of that agency revert back to, and are reassumed by, the
Republic of the Philippines, in the absence of special provisions of law specifying some other
disposition thereof such as, e.g., devolution or transmission of such powers, duties, functions,
etc. to some other identi;ed successor agency or instrumentality of the Republic of the
Philippines. When the expiring agency is an incorporated one, the consequences of such expiry
must be looked for, in the ;rst instance, in the charter of that agency and, by way of
supplementation, in the provisions of the Corporation Code

(3) PLDT vs. City of Bacolod

FACTS: PLDT is a holder of a legislative franchise under Act No. 3436 to render local and
international telecommunications services. Invoking Sec. 137, Sec. 151 and Sec. 193 of the
Local Government Code, the City of Bacolod made an assessment for the payment of franchise
tax due to the city. PLDT then began paying for said tax from 1994 until the third quarter of
1998. Under Republic Act No. 7082, embodied the so-called "in-lieu-of-all-taxes" clause,
whereunder PLDT shall pay a franchise tax equivalent to three percent (3%) of all its gross
receipts. The Bureau of Local Government Finance (BLGF) issued a ruling stating that PLDT is
among those telecommunication companies exempted from local franchise tax. PLDT stopped
paying for said tax. But when PLDT applied for the issuance of a Mayor's permit, the City of
Bacolod withheld the issuance thereof pending the payment of its franchise tax liability
amounting to P1,782,836.40.

HELD:

The "in-lieuof-all-taxes" clause does not refer to "tax exemption" but to "tax exclusion" and
hence, the strictissimi juris rule does not apply, explaining that these two terms actually mean
the same thing, such that the rule that tax exemption should be applied in strictissimi juris
against the taxpayer and liberally in favor of the government applies equally to tax exclusions.

Furthermore, the BLGF is not an administrative agency whose findings on questions of fact are
given weight and deference in the courts. The BLGF was created merely to provide consultative
services and technical assistance to local governments and the general public on local taxation,
real property assessment, and other related matters, among others.

(4) Solid Homes Inc. vs. Terisita Paywal

FACTS: Respondent Teresita Payawal bought a subdivision lot from petitioner Solid Homes Inc.
Upon payment of the total price, Payawal demanded the delivery of the deed of sale but Solid
Homes failed to do so. Respondent then filed complaint against Petitioner before the RTC of
Quezon City asking for delivery of the title or the return of all amounts paid. Petitioner moved to

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 6 of 8
dismiss the complaint as the court has no jurisdiction over the case, it being vested in the
National Housing Authority under PD No. 957.

HELD: PD. No. 957, as amended by PD No. 1344 vests unto the National Housing Authority the
authority 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 administrative bodies to help in the regulation of its ramified activities.
Hence, statutes conferring powers on their administrative agencies must be liberally construed
to enable them to discharge their assigned duties in accordance with the legislative purpose.
Pursuant to the law on statutory construction, PD. No. 1334 being a special law should prevail
over BP 129. Therefore, the complaint must be filed before the HLURB.

(5) Christian General Assembly Inc. vs. Sps. Ignacio

FACTS: Petitioner CGA entered into a contract to sell a subdivision lot with Respondent
spouses. After some amendments on the extension of the payment period, CGA religiously paid
for its monthly instalments due until its administrative pastor discovered that the title covering
the subject property was actually under litigation. CGA filed a case for rescission of their
contract to sell before the RTC of Malolos, Bulacan. Respondents then filed a motion to dismiss
asserting that the RTC had no jurisdiction over the case, it being vested to the HLURB.

HELD:

The jurisdiction of the tribunal over the subject matter or nature of an action is conferred only by
law, not by the parties' consent or by their waiver in favor of a court that would otherwise have
no jurisdiction over the subject matter or the nature of an action. In this era of clogged court
dockets, the need for specialized administrative boards or commissions with the special
knowledge, experience and capability to hear and determine promptly disputes on technical
matters or essentially factual matters, subject to judicial review in case of grave abuse of
discretion, has become well nigh indispensable. Thus, in 1984, the Court noted that 'between
the power lodged in an administrative body and a court, the unmistakable trend has been
to refer it to the former'. In the exercise of such powers, the agency concerned must
commonly interpret and apply contracts and determine the rights of private parties under
such contracts. Hence, The expansive grant of jurisdiction to the HLURB does not mean,
however, that all cases involving subdivision lots automatically fall under its jurisdiction.

(6) Lolita Dadubo vs. Civil Service Commission

FACTS: Petitioner Dadubo, a teller of the Development Bank of the Philippines, was
administratively charged with conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service for the
P60,000 unaccounted withdrawal involving the saving account of the Tius. Upon investigation,
DBP found Dadubo guilty of embezzlement of bank funds and was dismissed from service.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 7 of 8
Dadubo appealed to the Merit Systems Protection Board which affirmed the decision of the
DBP. DBP was reversed by the Civil Service Commission. DBP moved for reconsideration and
CSC affirmed DBP's findings. Hence, Dadubo brought her case to this court.

HELD:

The rule is that the findings of fact of administrative bodies, if based on substantial evidence,
are controlling on the reviewing authority. It is settled that it is not for the appellate court to
substitute it own judgment for that of the administrative agency on the sufficiency of the
evidence and the credibility of the witnesses. Administrative decisions on matters within their
jurisdiction are entitled to respect and can only be set aside on proof of grave abuse of
discretion, fraud or error of law. The petitioner's invocation of due process due to her not being
sufficiently informed of the charges against her has no basis. It must be noted that the standard
of due process that must be met in administrative tribunals allows a certain latitude as long as
the element of fairness is not ignored

(7) Lianga Bay Logging Co. vs Hon. Manuel L. Enage

FACTS: The parties herein are both forest concessionaries whose licensed areas are adjacent
to each other. Since the concessions of petitioner and respondent are adjacent to each other,
they have a common boundary — the Agusan-Surigao Provincial boundary. Because of reports
of encroachment by both parties on each other's concession areas, the Director of Forestry
ordered a survey to establish on the ground the common boundary of their respective
concession areas. After the survey, respondent Ago protested it and filed an appeal to the
DANR. Petitioner elevated the case to the Office of the President. A new action was
commenced by Ago Timber in the CFI Agusan to which the judge issued a temporary
restraining order. Petitioner then moved for the dismissal of the complaint as the CFI has no
jurisdiction over the case.

HELD: Respondent Judge erred in taking cognizance of the complaint filed by respondent Ago,
asking for the determination anew of the correct boundary line of its licensed timber area, for the
same issue had already been determined by the Director of Forestry, the Secretary of
Agriculture and Natural Resources and the Office of the President, administrative officials under
whose jurisdictions the matter properly belongs. Under the principles of administrative law in
force in this jurisdiction, is that decisions of administrative officers shall not be disturbed by the
courts, except when the former have acted without or in excess of their jurisdiction, or with
grave abuse of discretion. Findings of administrative officials and agencies who have acquired
expertise because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not
only respect but at times even finality of such findings are supported by substantial evidence.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW under Atty. Gallant Soriano

Notes on 2D's (S.Y. 2017-2018) Class discussion
Prepared by: Brodit Page 8 of 8