ADMIN LAW G02

Atty. Luie Guia

Trisha Ruzol
I. BASIC CONCEPTS AND GENERAL PRINCIPLES Administration
A. Nature  Institution
Administrative Law o Administration as the aggregate of individuals in
 Branch of modern law under which the executive whose hands the reins of government are for the
department of the government, acting in a quasi- time being.
legislative or quasi-judicial capacity, interferes with the  Function
conduct of the individual for the purpose of promoting o Actual running of the government by the
the well-being of the community executive authorities
 The legislative and judicial departments no longer had o Through the enforcement of laws and
either the time or the needed expertise to attend to these implementation of policies
new problems o Ex: collecting taxes, prosecuting lawbreakers,
o Solution: delegation of power enforcing sanitary rules ets.
 Regulates a private right for public welfare Administration is internal or external
 Fixes organization of the government and determines the  Internal
competence of authorities to execute the la o Rules laid down in a particular agency which are
imposed (work assignments, uniforms)
Major powers of the administrative agency o Relations of officers with each other/with
administration itself
 Quasi-legislative authority– rule making power o Involve law of public officers (qualifications,
 Quasi-judicial power – adjudicatory function selection, powers, duties etc)

Sources of Administrative Law  External

1. Constitution or statutory enactments o Relations between admin agency and individuals
a. Social Security Act which established the Social affected by quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative
Security Commission. activities
2. Decisions of courts interpreting the charters of
administrative bodies Government (as distinguished from administration) is the
3. Rules and regulations issued by the administrative agency or instrumentality through which the will of the State is
bodies formulated, expressed and realized
a. Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code
b. Rules by SEC amd IPO
Administration Law
4. Determinations and orders of the administrative bodies
in the settlement of controversies Preventive, personal; Punitive, impersonal;
a. Awards by the NLRC Seeks to spare individuals Maintains an eye on those
from punishment by who violate the law
persuading him to observe

its commands
B. Governing Constitutional Principles - Separation of
Powers and the Exercise of Executive Power
 Rules are laid down by legislature
 Enforced by the executive
 Subject to the application and interpretation of the
judiciary
Delegation of Powers
 No branch of government can abdicate authority by
delegating it to another body
o Xpn: when delegation is authorized by Consti (to
LGUs and Admin bodies)
o Legislature can delegate quasi-legislative and
quasi-judicial function (as long as incident to
admin functions)
Belgica vs. Ochoa
 Pork barrel case (corruption via kickbacks)
 Allocation of money from which they can identify which
project the money goes
 Congress’ power to appropriate should be prior to law
being effective (Congress cannot choose a mode of
budgeting)
 Malampaya funds = there was discretion by the President
for fund allocation = fund allocation is congressional
function
ABAKADA v. Purisima
 Attrition Act – rewards system and sanctions to those
who exceed their revenue targets
 Created an oversight committee = unconstitutional for
violating separation of powers
 Involves supervision through legislative veto
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
o Encroaches on power of executive by giving
Congress a direct role in enforcing
o Encroaches on judiciary when it gives Congress
the discretion to approve/disapprove admin
regulations on WON they conform with the law
 GR: Oversight Committee can only scrutinize, investigate,
and supervise
AMIN Party-List Group v. Executive Secretary
 President has the power to reorganize the executive
branch
 Power of control of the President over exec department,
bureaus, and offices
 Administrative powers – supervise and enforce laws
Lacson-Magallanes v. Pano
 President has power of control of the executive
o Power to rule on the correctness of a decision of a
department secretary
 Executive Secretary may reverse the decision when he is
acting by authority of the President
II. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
Administrative agency
 A body endowed with quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial
powers for the purpose of enforcement or execution of
the law
 An arm of the legislature - it is authorize to promulgate
rules
 A court - performs functions of a particular judicial
character, as when it decides factual and sometimes even
legal questions as an incident of its general power of
regulation.
 Created by the Constitution or by a statute

o If created by the Constitution, the administrative
body can be altered or abolished only by
Constitution (CSC, COMELEC, COA)
o If created by statute, the legislature that breathed
life into it can amend or even repeal its charter,
thereby resulting in its abolition which is justified
if made in good faith (BIR, PRC, SEC, BSP)
Types of Administrative Agencies
1. Agencies where the government is offering a grant or
special privilege
a. Philippine Veterans Administration
2. Agencies where the government is seeking to carry out
certain functions
a. CSC, BSP, BIR, Bureau of Immigration
3. Agencies performing some business service for the public
a. MWSS, Bureau of Posts, Postal Savings Bank
4. Agencies regulating business affected with public interest
a. Phil Patent Office, Fiber Inspection Board
5. Agencies regulating private business and individuals
under police power
a. SEC, MTRCB, PRC, Board of Food Inspectors
6. Agencies that adjust individual controversies because of
some strong social policy
a. NLRC, Bureau of Labor Standards, Court of
Agrarian Relations
Mactan-Cebu International Airport Authority v. City of Lapu-
Lapu
 regular courts and cannot impose its judgment upon the
 Airport was created by Congress = MCIAA is a
Government Instrumentality NOT a GOCC
 Gov’t instrumentalities are exempt from real property tax
 Xpn to xpn: airport is not a taxable entity because it is a
government entity, for public purpose
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
Fertilizer and Pesticide Authority v. Manila Pest Control Co.
 FPA is an Attached Agency to DA
 FPA only has jurisdiction over agricultural/farm
pesticides not urban pest control products
 Used STATCON, “fertilizer” and “pesticide” always came
with “agriculture”
UP vs. Dizon
 UP is a government instrumentality whose funds are
public funds = not subject to garnishment
 Funds are already appropriated hence diversion of funds
that disrupt public services is not allowed
 Remedy of Stern Builders = file money claim with COA
Liban v. Gordon
 Declared that Gordon has forfeited his seat in Senate for
Red Cross
 PNRC (Red Cross) is sui generis institution that performs
public function but not a government agency
 PNRC was created by Pres. Roxas as a non-profit
organization to bring humanitarian assistance
 PNRC is not government-owned but privately owned and
gets its funds through donations
United Residents of Dominican Hills, Inc. v. COSLAP
 COSLAP is an administrative agency performing quasi-
judicial function and not a court
 It may not assume jurisdiction over cases pending in
judiciary
Philippine Anti-Dollar Salting Task Force v. CA
 Dollar salting = stashing of foreign money in bank
accounts abroad without authority from the CB

 The PADS task force is not mean to exercise quasi-
judicial functions = only determines probable cause and
conduct preliminary investigation
Creation, Reorganization, and Abolition of Administrative
Agencies
 President is vested with the power to reorganize
executive agencies
Biraogo vs. Philippine Truth Commission
 The creation of a fact-finding body to investigate cases of
graft and corruption is within the powers of the
President under his mandate of faithfully executing the
laws
 Constitutionality of EO 1, creating the PTC
Banda v. Ermita
 Authority of the President to reorganize in line with its
power of control and by virtue of valid delegation of
legislative power
 Reorganize the National Printing Office; it was not
abolished nor were its functions transferred to another
agency
Pichay v. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal
Affairs Investigative and Adjudication Division
 Authority of the President to Reorganize the Presidential
Anti-Graft Commission to the ODESLA
DENR v. DENR Region 12 Employees
 Power to reorganize can be delegated under the doctrine
of Qualified Political Agency
 The doctrine of Qualified Political Agency recognizes the
establishment of a single executive, all executive and
admin orgs are adjuncts of the Exec. Dept and the heads
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
of the various departs are agents of the President,
pursuant to Sec. 17 of the Consti
 President can delegate his powers to the Cabinet
members except when required by the Consti to
personally act
 DENR Sec. can validly reorganize the DENR as an alter
ego of the president
De la Llana v. Alba
 Under Sec. 1, Art. X, courts are not entailed to their
judges; power of legislative to establish inferior courts
presupposes the power to abolish those courts
 If the inferior court is abolished, the presiding judge will
lose his position
 Abolition must be made in good faith
III. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
A. Powers of Administrative Agencies in General
Genuino v. De Lima
 There is no enabling law allowing the DOJ to issue rules
and regulations on the issuances of HDO, WLO, and ADO
 GMA requested from DOJ an ADO to seek medical
assistance abroad; denied
Smart Communications v. NTC
 Power of administrative agencies must be within the
confines of the granting legislation and doctrine of non-
delegability and separability of powers
Soriano v. Laguardia
 Power of Administrative Agencies are granted or
delegated to them expressly or impliedly by law
 To determine the powers of an admin agency, the inquiry
should be from the enabling law

 Ang Dating Daan is regulated by the MTRCB pursuant to
PD 1986
Provincial Bus Operators Association of the PH v. DOLE
 How to determine if the act under review is quasi-
legislative or quasi-judicial
 If validity or constitutionality of a rule issued by admin
agency thru quasi-legislative, regular courts have
jurisdiction
 If quasi-judicial, Congress may require certain quasi-
judicial agencies to take cognizance before resorting to
courts (exhaustion)
 Primary Jurisdiction
o Courts should not resolve a question which is
within the jurisdiction of an admin tribunal
 Exhaustion
o Parties should exhaust all remedies in admin
agencies before going to court
o Court and admin agency have concurrent
jurisdiction
B. Administrative/Enforcement Power
Jalosjos v. COMELEC
 Enforcing a final decision imposing perpetual
disqualification to hold public office is administrative in
nature
Bautista v. CA, G.R. No. 143375
 Preliminary Investigation is merely inquisitorial and not
a Quasi-Judicial function
 Prosecutor in PI does not determine the guilt or
innocence of the accused, only a means of discovering the
person to be charged
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
C. Quasi-Legislative Power of Administrative Agencies
Quasi-Legislative Power
 Authority delegated by the legislature to the
administrative body to adopt rules and regulations
intended to carry out the provisions of a law and
implement legislative policy
 Rules are legally binding and have statutory force
 Formulate interpretative rulings that are accorded great
weight but no statutory force
 Legislation on the administrative level = subordinate
legislation
 intended to enable it to implement the policy of the law
and to provide for the more effective enforcement of its
provisions
 construed as a whole and to be part of the powers of
admin bodies
 no retroactive effect unless intended to
Kinds of Administrative Regulations
A. Legislative
a. Implement a primary legislation by
supplementing the statute, filling in the details, or
“making the law”, and usually acting pursuant to
a specific delegation of legislative power
b. Legislative regulation is issued by the admin body
pursuant to a valid delegation of legislative
power
c. intended to have the binding the force and effect
of a law enacted by the legislature itself
d. implement existing law, impose general, extra-
statutory obligations pursuant to authority
delegated by Congress
e. Supplementary

i. Intended to fill in the details of the law
and “to make explicit what is only
general.”
f. Contingent
i. Issued by admin authority based on the
existence of certain facts upon which the
enforcement of the law depends on
ii. issued upon the happening of a certain
contingency which the administrative
body is given the discretion to determine
or to ascertain some circumstances and
on the basis thereof may enforce or
suspend the operation of a law
iii. whether a statute shall go into effect
B. Interpretative
a. Interpret the statute being administered, to say
what it means; construction of a statute.
b. Issued as an incident to its power to enforce the
law and is intended merely to clarify its
provisions for proper observance by the people.
c. have the force of law, are entitled to great
respect, and have in their favor a presumption of
legality
Republic v. Drugmaker’s Laboratories
 GR: admin regulation must comply with prior notice,
hearing, and publication in order to be valid and binding
 XPN: if it is merely interpreative
SEC v. Interport Resources Corporation
 Mere absence of IRRs cannot invalidate a statute where a
reasonable construction that will support it may be given
 The necessity for Administrative Agencies to promulgate
rules = impracticability of lawmakers providing
regulations for various details of management
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
Executive Secretary v. South wing Heavy Industries
 Requisites for a valid admin issuance [see below]
Requisites of Administrative Regulation
A. Its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature
B. It must be within the scope of the authority given by the
legislature
C. It must be promulgated in accordance with the
prescribed procedure
D. It must be reasonable.
First Requisite: Promulgation Must Be Authorized by the
Legislature
 Authority to promulgate the regulation is usually
conferred by the Charter itself of the administrative body
or by the law it is supposed to enforce.
 All that is required is that the regulation be not in
contravention with it, but to conform to the standards
that the law prescribes.
Review Center Association of the PH v. Executive Secretary
 An admin order is an ordinance issued by the President
which related to administrative operations of
government. It must be in harmony with the law and
should implement the law and carry out legislative policy
Second Requisite: Regulation Must Be Within the Scope of
the Authority Given by the Legislature
 Assuming a valid authorization, it is still necessary that
the regulation promulgated must not be ultra vires or
beyond the authority conferred.
Lokin v. COMELEC
 The function of promulgating IRRs may be exercised only
for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of a law

 Admin regulations cannot extend the law and amend a
legislative enactment
GMA News Network v. COMELEC
 Aggregate basis for allowable time went beyond
authority provided by law
 COMELEC is the office authorized to enforce election
laws but it cannot exercise its powers without limits or
reasonable basis
 Its discretion must be exercised within the limit and
intent of the law
Bito-onon v. Fernandez
 DILG Issuance providing resort to Courts in Liga elections
beyond what is required by law
 Amendment of guidelines is more an exercise of
supervision but exercise of control which the president
does not have over the Liga
Third Requisite: Regulation Must Be Promulgated in
Accordance with the Prescribed Procedure
 Does not require previous notice and hearing
o XPN when the legislature itself requires it
 In the absence of such a requirement, the administrative
body can promulgate the regulation in its exclusive
discretion.
 If the regulation is a settlement of a controversy between
specific parties, it is considered an administrative
adjudication and so will require notice and hearing.
Publication
 Art. 2, NCC: laws “shall take effect after 15 days following
the completion of their publication either in the Official
Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided.
 GR: if it is of general application and penal in nature
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
o XPN: merely interprets a law or internal in nature
 Publication must be in full or it is no publication at all =
inform the public of the contents of the law
Tanada v. Tuvera
 Requirement of publication for issuances of public nature
or of general applicability
Abella v. CSC
 Prior notice and hearing not essential in validity of rules
applicable to future conduct
CIR v .CA
 Fortune tobacco case
 Prior notice and hearing required when rule adds
substantial burden on the governed
Villanueva v. JBC
 Submission of Rules to the Office of National
Administrative Register (ONAR) is confined to issuances
of admin agencies under Exec branch
 Since JBC is under the SC, it is not covered by publication
under the Admin Code
 JBC policy of requiring 5 years of service for judges
should be published = seeks to implement a
constitutional provision requiring proven competence
GSIS v. Daymiel
 Publication is indispensable in the validity of legislative
rules of admin agencies
 Accountant, retirement benefits from GSIS
 Assailed resolution creates a burden to those governed
when it is implemented, hence needs to be published
Fourth Requisite: Regulation Must Be Reasonable

 Must not be unreasonable or arbitrary as to violate due
process; must accomplish the spirit and intent of the
statute
 Depends on the character and nature of the conditions
met
Taxicab Operators of Metro Manila v. Board of
Transportation
 Not denied due process = they were called to a
conference or required to submit position papers
 6 year ceiling for a car to be operated as a taxi =
reasonable standard
Penal Regulations
 The power to define and punish crime is exclusively
legislative; cannot be delegated to the administrative
authorities
 Admin regulations cannot give rise to criminal
prosecution unless the legislature makes such violation
punishable and imposes the corresponding sanctions.
Special requisites of a valid administrative regulation with a
penal sanction:
A. The law itself must make violation of the administrative
regulation punishable
B. The law itself must impose and specify the penalty for
the violation of the regulation
C. The regulation must be published.
People v. Santos
Construction and Interpretation
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
 Regulation should be read in harmony with the statute
and not in violation of the authority conferred on the
administrative authorities
 The admin regulation that contravenes the statute is
invalid
PAGCOR v. Philippine E-Gaming Jurisdiction, Inc.,
 Interpretation of OP deserves respect = doctrine of
respect for admin or practical construction
Enforcement
 Power to promulgate admin regulations carries with it
the implied power to enforce them
 May be effected through judicial action or through
sanctions that the statute itself may allow the admin
body to impose.
Amendment or Repeal
 Admin regulations promulgated are subject to
amendment or repeal by the authorities that
promulgated them in the first place
 May be changed directly by the legislature
D. Quasi-Judicial Power
 Power to determine questions of fact to which the
legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with the
standards laid down by the law
 Incidental or in connection to performance
 Enabling powers
o Allows something to be done (licenses)
o SEC – allows issuance of securities
o Phil Patent Office – issue patents, copyrights,
trademarks
 Directing powers
o Definition, valuation, classification, fact-finding
 ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
B. Due process must be observed in the conduct of the
Quasi-Judicial Judicial proceedings
 Hear and  Determine
determine questions of A. Jurisdiction
controversies legal rights  Competence of an office or body to act on a given matter
or decide a certain question
incident to  By courts
 Without jurisdiction, the determination is null and
admin duty  Legal questions without any legal effect whatsoever
 By admin  Legislature that has the power to confer jurisdiction and
authorities so limit or expand its authority
 Factual  Admin body has its own jurisdiction as conferred upon it
questions by its charter
 The law may allow some admin bodies to award certain
kinds of damages while denying the same power to other
SEC v. Universal Rightfield Property Holding, Inc administrative bodies
 Due process: opportunity to be heard and to file motion  Ex. SEC and NLRC are allowed to award damages but not
for reconsideration NTC
 Defect can be cured by filing an MR  unless expressly empowered, administrative agencies
are bereft of quasi-judicial power
LBP v. Natividad
 Primary jurisdiction is vested in the DAR to determine Davao New Town Development Corp v. COSLAP
just compensation for lands under ARP but can be  Tribunals of limited jurisdiction could only wield such as
challenged before the courts that granted them by enabling statute
 Rules of Procedures need to be followed  Grant of exclusive and primary jurisdiction of ARP cases
to the DAR means that no other court, tribunal or agency
Cariño v. CHR is authorized to resolve cases cognizable by the DAR
 CHR does not have quasi-judicial powers; It can
investigate and fact-find but cannot try and decide cases Unduran v. Aberasturi
 “investigate” = examine, inquire or probe  Jurisdiction of Administrative Agency v. RTC
 “adjudicate” = judge, settle, rule on  RTC exercises exclusive original jurisdiction in all civil
actions
2 Conditions:
A. Jurisdiction must be properly acquired by the Continental Micronesia, Inc. v. Basso
administrative body  Jurisdiction over a foreigner in a labor case

 Foreign corps doing business in the PH be licensed to do
so is subject to PH jurisdiction
San Miguel Properties v. Sec. Hernando Perez, et.al.
 Primary jurisdiction = Rely on expertise, special skills,
and knowledge of agency to determine questions of facts
 Relief must first be obtained in admin proceedings before
going to the courts
 Action for specific performance can be brought only in
the HLURB
Smart Communications v. NTC
 Primary jurisdiction of administrative agencies applies
only in the exercise of their quasi-judicial function
 In cases involving specialized disputes, refer the same to
an administrative agency of special competence
 The courts will not determine a controversy involving a
question within the jurisdiction of the admin tribunal
prior to the resolution of that question by the admin
tribunal
 discretion requiring the special knowledge, experience
and services of the admin tribunal to determine technical
and intricate matters of fact, and a uniformity of ruling is
essential to comply with the premises of the regulatory
statute administered.
Office of the OMB v. Masing
 Jurisdiction by the Ombudsman on administrative cases
against all public officers and employees
Honasan II, v. Panel of Investigating Prosecutors of the DOJ
 Ombudsman’s jurisdiction to investigate public officers,
though primary, is not exclusive but concurrent
Power to Promulgate Rules of Procedure
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
 Where expressly granted the power of adjudication, it is
deemed also vested with the implied power to prescribe
the rules to be observed in the conduct of its proceedings
 rules must not violate fundamental rights or encroach
upon constitutional prerogatives
Angara v. Electoral Commission
Philippine Lawyers Association v. Agrava
DARAB v. Lubrica
 Rules of procedures must not expand jurisdiction
Power to Issue Subpoena
 The power to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum
is not inherent in administrative bodies
 Admin bodies may summon witnesses and require the
production of evidence only when duly allowed by law,
and always only in connection with the matter they are
authorized to investigate
 Unless otherwise provided by law, the agency may
invoke the aid of RTC within whose jurisdiction the
contested case falls
 The Court may punish customacy or refusal as contempt
Carmelo v. Ramos
Power to Investigate
 to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain information.
Power to Adjudicate
 to settle in the exercise of judicial authority
Contempt Power
 Power to punish for contempt is essentially judicial and
cannot be claimed as an inherent right by the admin body

 To be validly exercised, it must be expressly conferred
upon the body and, additionally, must be used only in
connection with its quasi-judicial functions
 If subpoena of the admin body is disregarded, the person
summoned may not be directly discipline by that body
 The proper remedy is for the administrative body to seek
assistance of the courts of justice for the enforcement of
its order.
 The power to hold in contempt must be exercised not on
the vindictive, but on the preservative principle
 COMELEC, NLRC, CIR
Tolentino v. Inciong
 An administrative agency cannot cite a Judge in contempt
as it has no power to do so
Guevarra v. COMELEC
 Contempt citation can only be made in matters related to
an agency’s exercise of Quasi-Judicial function
Bedol v. COMELEC
 COMELEC is granted power to issue contempt citation
because it is provided by law
Simon v. CHR
 CHR has power to provide in its rule the power to issue
contempt citation
B. Notice and Hearing
 Essential to due process and its non-observance will
invalidate the administrative proceedings
 Persons are entitled to be notified of any pending case
affecting their interests so that they may claim the right
to appear and present their side or refute the position of
opposing parties
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
 Instances when notice and hearing can validly be omitted
 Urgency of immediate action and the fact that the right
had previously been offered but not claimed
IV. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
A. Administrative Due Process
 There is no requirement for strict adherence to technical
rules as are observed in truly judicial proceedings
 GR: unrestricted by the technical or formal rules of
procedure which govern trials before a court. This rule is
applied to questions of evidence, pleading and other
matters
 Essential that due process must be observed = fair play
7 CARDINAL RIGHTS
A. Right to a hearing
a. Present one’s case and submit evidence in
support of this
b. Liberty and property = fair play
B. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented
a.
C. The decision must be supported by evidence
a.
D. evidence must be substantial evidence – relevant
evidence that a reasonable mind may accept as
adequate to support a conclusion
E. the decision must be rendered on the evidence presented
at the hearing, or at least contained in the record and
disclosed to the parties
F. the court must act on its or their own independent
consideration of the law and facts of controversy, and not
simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a
decision
G. the court should 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
 It is basic to due process that the tribunal considering the
administrative question be impartial, to ensure a fair
decision.
 The law does not require another notice and hearing for
a review of the decision of the board
 Unless otherwise provided by law or executive order, an
appeal from a final decision of the administrative agency
may be taken to the department head, whose decision
may further be brought to the regular courts of justice, in
accordance with the procedure specified by law.
Ang Tibay v. CIR
GSIS v. CA
Estrada v. Office of the OMB
Samalio v. CA
DLSU v. CA
Perez v. People
Montemayor v. Bundalian
Enforcement of Decision
 In the absence of any statute providing for the
enforcement of an administrative determination, the
same cannot be enforced except possibly by appeal to the
force of public opinion.
 Usually, however, the administrative body is allowed
certain sanctions that it may impose directly for the
enforcement of its own decisions, i.e. revocation of or
refusal to renew licenses, destruction of unlawful
articles, summary closure of stores, refusal to grant
clearances, issuance of cease and desist orders, detention
and deportation of aliens, and imposition of fines.
 Significantly, many administrative bodies, such as the
SEC and the NLRC, have been vested with authority to
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
grant provisional reliefs, such as writs of preliminary
attachment or injunction, intended to ensure the
enforcement of their adjudications.
 It is established that administrative agencies who have
not been conferred the power to enforce their quasi-
judicial decisions may invoke court action for the
purpose.
Soriano v. Laguardia
Pharmaceutical and Health Care Association v. Duque
Res Judicata
 GR: is that an administrative decision is not considered
res judicata so as to preclude its subsequent
reconsideration or revocation.
 Decisions of the previous incumbents of the
administrative body may be modified or reversed by
their successors in the exercise of their own powers of
adjudication.
 Where the administrative decision has been affirmed by
a court decision, the doctrine of res judicata is applicable
 The effect of res judicata attaches to the judgment of the
reviewing court rather than to the administrative
judgment
 Decisions and orders of administrative agencies,
rendered pursuant to their quasi-judicial authority, have
upon their finality, the force and binding effect of a final
judgment within the purview of the doctrine of res
judicata.
 This principle is, however, not applicable to all
administrative proceedings, such proceedings that are
non-litigious and summary in nature without regard to
legal technicalities obtaining in courts of law.
Montemayor v. Bundalian

Gonzales v. OP
United Pepsi Cola Supervisory Union v. Laguesma
V. JUDICIAL REVIEW
Art. VIII, Sec. 1, Consti
 Judicial power is vested in the SC and lower courts
 Duty of the courts to settle actual controversies and to
determine whether or not there has been grave abuse of
discretion
Rule 43 - Appeals from the CTA and Quasi-Judicial Agencies to
the CA
Rule 64 - Review of Judgments and Final Orders or Resolutions
of the COMELEC and COA
Rule 65 - Certiorari, Prohibition and Mandamus
General Rules
 An administrative decision may be appealed to the courts
of justice only if the Constitution or the law permits it or
if the question to be reviewed is a question of law
 However, jurisprudence is replete with cases where the
Supreme Court has applied the exceptions rather than
the rule.
 In the case of the constitutional commission, i.e., the
Commission on Elections, the Commission on Audit, and
the Civil Service Commission, it is provided that “any
decision order or ruling of each Commission may be
brought to the Supreme Court on certiorari by the
aggrieved party within 30 days from receipt of a copy
thereof.”
 On the basis of Sec. 16 of the Interim Rules and Guideline
implementing Sec. 9 (3) of BP Blg. 129, the Court of
Appeals may “review final decisions, orders, awards or
resolutions or regional trial courts and of all quasi-
judicial bodies, except the Commission on Elections, the
Commission on Audit, the Sandiganbayan, and decisions
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
issued under the Labor Code of the Philippines and by
the Central Board of Assessment Appeals.”
 Other appeals are prescribed by special laws, such as RA
No. 1125, providing for appeal to the Court of Tax
Appeals of any decision rendered by the Commissioner of
Internal Revenue, the Commissioner of Customs, or any
provincial or city board of assessment appeals.
Akbayan Youth v. COMELEC
Rentokil Philippines, Inc. v. Sanchez
Methods of review
 prescribed by the Constitution, statutes or the Rules of
the Court. These methods may be specific or general.
 It is provided in RA No. 5434 that an appeal from a final
award, order or decisions of the Patent Office shall be
taken by filing with said body and with the Court of
Appeals a notice of appeal within 15 days from notice of
such award, order or ruling, copies being served on all
interested parties.
 The Administrative Code generally provides that an
appeal from an agency decision shall be perfected by
filing with the agency within 15 days from receipt of a
copy thereof a notice of appeal, and with the reviewing
court a petition for review of the order. Copies of the
petition shall be served upon the agency and all parties of
record.
 The petition shall contain a concise statement of the
issues involved and the grounds relied upon for the
review, and shall be accompanied with a true copy of the
order appealed from, together with copies of such
material portions of the records as are referred to
therein and other supporting papers.
 The Supreme Court instructed certain universally
accepted axioms governing judicial review through the

extraordinary actions of certiorari or prohibition of
determinations of administrative officers or agencies:
 First, before said actions may be entertained, it must be
shown that all the administrative remedies prescribed by
law or ordinance have been exhausted; and,
 Second, that the administrative decision may properly be
annulled or set aside only upon a clear showing that the
administrative official or tribunal has acted without or in
excess of jurisdiction, or with a grave abuse of discretion.
Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction or Prior Resort
 simply calls for the determination of administrative
questions, which ordinarily questions of fact, by
administrative agencies rather courts of justice.
 If the case is such that its determination requires the
expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the proper
administrative bodies because technical matters or
intricate questions of facts are involved, then relief must
first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before
a remedy will be supplied by the courts even though the
matter is within the proper jurisdiction of the court
Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
 an administrative decision must first be appealed to the
administrative superior up to the highest level before it
may be elevated to a court of justice for review.
A. Reasons
1. The administrative superiors, if given the opportunity,
can correct the errors committed by their subordinates
2. Courts should as much as possible refrain from
disturbing the findings of administrative bodies in
deference to the doctrine of separation of powers
3. On practical grounds, it is best that the courts should not
be saddled with the review of administrative cases
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
4. Judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected
through the special civil actions of certiorari, mandamus
and prohibition, which are available only if there is no
other plain, speedy and adequate remedy.
Information Technology Foundation of the Philippines v.
COMELEC
Alexandra Condominium v. LLDA
Paat v. CA
Ruivivar v. OMB
B. Exceptions
1. When the question raised is purely legal (question of law
is involved)
2. When the administrative body is estoppel
3. When the act complained of is patently illegal
4. When there is urgent need for judicial intervention
5. When the claim involved is small
6. When irreparable damage will be suffered
7. When there is no other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy
8. When strong public interest is involved
9. When the subject of the controversy is private land
10. In quo warranto proceedings
Cuevas v. Macatangay
Jacinto-Henares v. Philippine Plaza Holdings, Inc.
Association of Non-Profit Club, Inc. v. BIR
Puerto Del Sol Palawan, Inc. v. Gabaen
Diocese of Bacolod v. COMELEC
Sangguniang Barangay of Don Mariano Marcos v. Martinez
PhilHealth v. Chinese General Hospital
Phillips Seafood Corp v. BOI
Penafrancia Shipping Corporation v. 168 Shipping Lines, Inc.
C. Appeal to the President

 Of special interest is the question of whether or not a
decision of the cabinet member has to be appealed first
to the President before it may be brought to a court of
justice. Jurisprudence on this matter is rather indecisive.
 In the early case of Demaisip vs. Court of Appeals, the
Court held that appeal to the President was not necessary
because the Cabinet member was after all his alter ego
and, under the doctrine of qualified political agency, the
acts of the secretary were the acts of the President.
 This view was abandoned in Calo vs. Fuertes, where it
was held that appeal to the President was the final step in
the administrative process and therefore a condition
precedent to appeal to the courts.
 In Bartulata vs. Peralta, however, the court reinstated
the Demaisip doctrine, again on the basis of alter ego
justification
 Tan vs. Director of Forestry, thereafter revived Calo
andagain required appeal to the President as a
prerequisite to an appeal of a Cabinet member's decision
to the courts of Justice.
D. Effect of Non-compliance
 The failure to exhaust administrative remedies does not
affect the jurisdiction of the court and merely results in
the lack of a cause of action which may be invoked in a
motion to dismiss.
 If this ground to dismiss the court action is not properly
or reasonably invoked, the court may proceed to hear the
case.
 As previously noted, the court has the discretion to
require the observance of the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies and may, if it sees fit, dispense
with it and proceed with the disposition of the case.
Questions Reviewable
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol
A. Questions of fact
 Review of the administrative decision lies in the
discretion of the legislature, which may or may not
permit it as it sees fit.
 Even if allowed to review administrative decisions on
questions of fact, courts of justice generally defer to such
decisions and will decline to disturb them except only
where there is a clear showing of arbitrariness or grave
abuse of discretion.
 The Supreme Court ruled in Osias Academy vs. DOLE that
“findings of administrative agencies which have
acquired expertise because their jurisdiction is
confined to specific matters are generally accorded
not only respect but finality.”
B. Questions of Law
 the administrative decision may be appealed to the
courts of justice independently of legislative permission
or even against legislative prohibition. The reason is that
the judiciary cannot be deprived of its inherent power to
review all decisions on questions of law, whether made
initially by lower courts and more so by an
administrative body.
 Administrative bodies may be allowed to resolve
questions of law in the exercise of their quasi-judicial
function as an incident of their primary power of
regulation.
 However as a rule, it is only the judicial tribunal that
can interpret and decide the question of law with
finality.
ADMIN LAW G02
Atty. Luie Guia
Trisha Ruzol