Administrative Law M3 Mon 6-9PM

Assignment

1. Compare and contrast the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction from the Doctrine of Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies.

The Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction holds that if a case is such that its determination requires the
expertise, specialized training and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies, relief must first be
obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy is supplied by the courts even if the matter may
well be within their proper jurisdiction.

The Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies holds that recourse through court action cannot
prosper until after all such administrative remedies have first been exhausted. If remedy is available within
the administrative machinery, this should be resorted to before resort can be made in courts. An
administrative decision must be appealed to the administrative superior up to the highest level before
elevating it to the Court of justice for review.

As to application, in the Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, the administrative agency

has authority to pass on every question raised by a person resorting to judicial relief and enables the
court to withhold its aid entirely until the administrative remedies had been exhausted. While in the
Doctrine of Primary Administrative Jurisdiction, both the court and administrative agency have jurisdiction
to pass on a question when a particular case is presented to court, as an original matter, rather than a
matter of review.

As to Jurisdiction, the Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative remedies, the claim or matter is cognizable
in the first instance by an administrative agency alone. While Doctrine of Primary Administrative
Jurisdiction, the claim or matter is cognizable by both the court and administrative agency.

As to Purpose, the Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative remedies, the purpose of the rule is to control
the timing of judicial relief from adjudicative action of an agency. While in the Doctrine of Primary
Administrative Jurisdiction, it is not concerned with judicial review but determines in some instances
whether initial action should be taken by a court or administrative agency.

2. There are many specific instances when, by the decision of the Supreme Court, the Doctrine of
Exhaustion has been held inapplicable even if there is general requirements of its observance.
Enumerate the established exceptions to this doctrine.
EXCEPTIONS:
1) Purely legal questions.
2) Steps to be taken are merely matters of form.
3) Administrative remedy not exclusive but merely cumulative or concurrent to a judicial
remedy.
4) Validity and urgency of judicial action or intervention.
5) No other plain, speedy, adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.
6) Resort to exhaustion will only be oppressive and patently unreasonable.
7) Where the administrative remedy is only permissive or voluntary and not a prerequisite to
the institution of judicial proceedings
8) Application of the doctrine will only cause great and irreparable damage which cannot be
prevented except by taking the appropriate court action.
9) When it involves the rule-making or quasi-legislative functions of an administrative
agency
10) Administrative agency is in estoppel.
11) Doctrine of qualified political agency
12) Subject of controversy is private land in land case proceedings
13) Blatant violation of due process.
14) Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction.
15) Administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
16) Resort to administrative remedy will amount to a nullification of a claim.
17) No administrative review provided for by law.
18) Issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies rendered moot.
19) In quo warranto proceedings.
20) Law expressly provides for a different review procedure.