Note: The order of questions may vary on individual LMS Account.

Question 1
What is the quantum of Proof Required in Administrative Proceedings?
Please expound on such degree of proof required in agency actions.
Answer:
- The degree of proof by which a case must be established before an administrative tribunal is
not satisfied by proof creating an equipoise, but it does not require proof beyond reasonable
doubt as in criminal cases or preponderance of evidence as in civil cases. A statute may
specially provide for a greater or lesser degree of proof than simple preponderance

Question 2
 BONUS. How are coping with the distance learning procedure in the UB College of Law?
Answer:
- For me, it was hard, especially to those who has weak or slow internet connection. I was not
able to fully perform my obligations as student, it needs a lot of patience and perseverance in
order to cope with my studies specifically under distance learning procedure done by UB
College of Law.

Question 3
 7. Are administrative agencies bound by the strict rules of evidence in court proceedings?
Answer:
- YES. An administrative agency is not bound by the strict rules governing the reception of
evidence in court proceedings. Nevertheless, it may properly apply such rules or substantially
conform to them; or it may waive them if such waiver is necessary to ascertain the substantial
rights of all the parties to the proceedings. The obvious purpose is to free administrative
bodies from the compulsion of applying technical rules so that the mere admission of matter
which would be deemed incompetent in judicial proceedings would not invalidate the
administrative determination.'

Question 4
 4. Read this case of Ang Tibay vs. Court of Industrial Relations 69 Phil 635. Discuss and point out
the essential requirements of due process applicable to administrative proceedings.
Answer:
- National Labor Union, Inc. is entitled to a new trial. The records show that the newly
discovered evidence or documents obtained by NLU, which they attached to their petition with
the SC, were evidence so inaccessible to them at the time of the trial that even with the
exercise of due diligence they could not be expected to have obtained them and offered as
evidence in the Court of Industrial Relations. Further, the attached documents and exhibits are
of such far-reaching importance and effect that their admission would necessarily mean the
modification and reversal of the judgment rendered (said newly obtained records include
books of business/inventory accounts by Ang Tibay which were not previously accessible but
already existing).

- The SC also outlined that administrative bodies, like the CIR, although not strictly bound by the
Rules of Court must also make sure that they comply to the requirements of due process. For
administrative bodies, due process can be complied with by observing the following:

 The right to a hearing which includes the right of the party interested or affected to
present his own case and submit evidence in support thereof.
 Not only must the party be given an opportunity to present his case and to adduce
evidence tending to establish the rights which he asserts but the tribunal must
consider the evidence presented.
  While the duty to deliberate does not impose the obligation to decide right, it does
imply a necessity which cannot be disregarded, namely, that of having something
to support its decision. A decision with absolutely nothing to support it is a nullity, a
place when directly attached.
 Not only must there be some evidence to support a finding or conclusion but the
evidence must be “substantial.” Substantial evidence is more than a mere scintilla
It means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate
to support a conclusion.
 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.
 The administrative body 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.
 The administrative body 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 for the decisions rendered. The performance of this duty
is inseparable from the authority conferred upon it.

Question 5
 Differentiate between the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction and the Doctrine of Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies as applied in Administrative Actions.
Answer:
- In Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction, as applied in Administrative actions, the courts cannot and
will not determine a controversy involving a question which is within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal, especially where the question demands the exercise of sound
administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge, experience and services of the
tribunal to determine technical and intricate matters of fact and where a uniformity of ruling is
essential to comply with the purposes of the regulatory statute administered.

- While in Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, it requires that where a remedy

within an administrative agency is provided or available against the action of an administrative
board, body, or officer, and can still be resorted to by giving the said agency every opportunity
to decide correctly a given matter that comes within its jurisdiction, relief must be first sought
by availing this remedy before bringing an action in or elevating it to the courts of justice for
review. The thrust of the doctrine is to allow first the administrative agency to carry out its
functions and discharge its responsibilities within the specialized areas of its competence
before resort can be made to the courts.

Question 6
 10. For being notoriously undesirable and a recidivist, A, and employee in the first level of his career
service in the Office of the Provincial Governor of Masbate, was dismissed by the Governor without
formal investigation pursuant to Sec. 40 of the Civil Service Decree (P.D. No. 807) which authorizes
summary proceedings in such cases.
You were hired as a lawyer for A, what steps, if any, will you take to protect his rights:
Answer:
- As a lawyer of A, we will file an appeal, said motion availed of within the administrative agency
is curative in character on the issue of alleged denial of due process.Thus, a plea of denial of
procedural due process does not lie where a defect consisting of an absence of notice of
hearing or lack of formal charges and formal investigation thereon. In the given case, even for
a fact that A was notoriously undesirable and a recidivist, A was deprived of formal
investigation in which constitutes denial of his right on procedural due process. Although, said
action of the Governor was in pursuant to Sec.40 of the CS Code, the constitutional right of A
to avail his right to due process was still violated and thus therefore unconstitutional. Thus, as
a lawyer of A we will assail the validity of the denial of his constitutional right of due process by
filing a necessary appeal.

Question 7
 9.b. Explain the essence of "due process" in administrative proceedings?
Answer:
- Administrative proceedings are not exempt from basic and fundamental procedural principles
such as the right to due process in investigations and hearings. An administrative proceedings,
particularly where the proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature, must be fair or as it is
frequently stated, "full and fair," or "fair and adequate," or "fair and open." Notice and actual
hearing are not always necessary in observing due process, as long as a party was given the
opportunity to defend his interests in due course, he cannot be said to have been denied due
process of law for this opportunity to be heard is the very essence of due process, and not
necessarily that an actual hearing or notice was conducted.

Question 8
 6. Distinguish between the doctrines of ripeness for judicial review and that of exhaustion of
administrative remedy.
Answer:
- In Doctrine of Ripeness for Judicial Review, the basic principle of ripeness is that the judicial
machinery should be conserved for problems which are real and present or imminent, and
should not be squandered on problems which are future, imaginary or remote. Because
problems of ripeness for administrative action and problem of ripeness of statutes for judicial
review are often inseparable, the two are considered together by writers.
- While in Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedy , it is designed primarily to control
the timing of judicial relief from adjudicative action of an agency. It is customarily applied to
adjudication and not to rule-making.

Question 9
 5. How are decisions of administrative agencies usually assailed?
Answer:
- It can be assailed in the special civil actions or certiorari, prohibition and mandamus which are
allowed only when there is in plain, speedy and adequate remedy available to the person
assailing the said decision, that is a remedy that will promptly relieve the petitioner from the
injurious effects of judgment, order, resolution or rule of the agency

Question 10
 8. In our jurisdiction, will failure of a party to exhaust the procedure of administrative remedies
provided by law affect his cause of action?
If so, will it be a ground for:
a. dismissal of action for lack of cause of action; or,
b. dismissal of action for want of jurisdiction over the subject matter?
Answer:
- a. YES. It will be a ground for dismissal due to lack of cause of action, Accordingly, absent any
finding of waiver or estoppel, the case is susceptible of dismissal for lack of cause of action.
- b. YES. It will be a ground for dismissal due to want of jurisdiction over the subject matter,
Factual findings of administrative agencies are not infallible and will be set aside when they fail
the test of arbitrariness, or upon proof of gross abuse of discretion, fraud or error of law.

Question 11
 Differentiate between the Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction and the Doctrine of Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies as applied in Administrative Actions.
Answer:
- In Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction, as applied in Administrative actions, the courts cannot and
will not determine a controversy involving a question which is within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal, especially where the question demands the exercise of sound
administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge, experience and services of the
tribunal to determine technical and intricate matters of fact and where a uniformity of ruling is
essential to comply with the purposes of the regulatory statute administered.

- While in Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies, it requires that where a remedy

within an administrative agency is provided or available against the action of an administrative
 board, body, or officer, and can still be resorted to by giving the said agency every opportunity
to decide correctly a given matter that comes within its jurisdiction, relief must be first sought
by availing this remedy before bringing an action in or elevating it to the courts of justice for
review. The thrust of the doctrine is to allow first the administrative agency to carry out its
functions and discharge its responsibilities within the specialized areas of its competence
before resort can be made to the courts.

Question 12
 9.a. Under the Administrative Code, how may Administrative Appeal be perfected?
Answer:
- Administrative appeals shall be perfected within fifteen (15) days after receipt of a copy of the
decision complained of by the party adversely affected, by filing with the agency which
adjudicated the case a notice of appeal serving copies thereof upon the prevailing party and
the appellate agency, and paying the required fees.