Judicial review

Any form of judicial scrutiny of a matter which arises when such action is brought
into question before a court.
Why resort to judicial review
1. Collaboration of courts and admin agencies
So that the conflict between admin process and judicial process will be
settled and also the relative roles of the admin agency and the courts will
be determined

Both are government agencies for public purpose

2. Accommodation of admin process to the judicial system

To secure that the function of AA is exercised within the democratic
safegurads and standards of fair play set by law for the effective conduct of
the government

Judicial review- questions of law /validity of law

AA- questions of facts, policy/ discretion

That’s why when an AA issues an opinion/ statement of policy, it is

considered only as mere interpretation of the law and the court still has the
final say whether the law is valid or not. Or what the law is all about.

3. Policy of courts
The court has no right to interfere with how the agency execute or
implement the law for the agency is deemed to have the knowledge and
specific expertise to do such function UNLESS the exercise of such function
there is a clear showing of capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment or
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of juriscdiction
considering that by their nature and functions they are in the best position
to know the limits of their powers under prevailing circumstance or
situation.
RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW
Refer to both power and right granted to courts to grant the review
sought and the right of any person who invokes the power of the court

1. Where right granted by the statute

The right is granted in the statute. Specifically provided where to file an
appeal or judicial review.
Ex. Decisions of NLRC are not appealable to RTC but to CA
Actions of Collector of Customs are appealable to the Commisioner
of Customs then to CTA then CA then SC for certiorari.

2. Where review is not provided in the statute

There is no inherent right to judicial review of the action of an AA but is
doesn’t mean an appeal cannot be made. Appeal is a statutory right. So
if there is a showing of capricios and whimsical exercise of judgement
and grave abuse of discretion then an appeal can be made.

3. Where review precluded or restricted by statute

This is rare for a statute to withhold judicial review. But there is a
considerable area where the legislative discretion may narrow, grant or
withhold the exercise of JR. see page 328

A ‘political question’ is one the resolution of which has been vested by

the Constitution exclusively in either the people, in the exercise of their
sovereign capacity, or in which full discretionary authority has been
delegated to a co-equal branch of the Government.

Thus, while courts can determine questions of legality with respect to

governmental action, they cannot review government policy and the
wisdom thereof, for these questions have been vested by the
Constitution in the Executive and Legislative Departments.

4. Where review a matter of constitutional necessity

 a. Due to constitutional supremacy of the law- which lodges in court
the inherent authority to determine the constitutionality of the law
b. Congress is without right to nullify the power given by the
Constitution to determine the constitutionality of the law.

5. Where administrative decision has become final and executory

Principle of res judicata which forbids the reopening of a matter once
judicially determined by the competent authority
Requisites:
a. Final judgment or order;
b. Jurisdiction of the court/ agency over the subject matter and the
parties;
c. Identity of parties, identity of subject matter and identity of cause of
action

6. Where administrative decisions declared final and unappealable by

statute.
Still subject to judicial review if they fail the test of arbitrariness.

Rules governing appeal from judgment of quasi judicial admin agencies

1. Appeal to ca
2. Within 15 days from notice of award
Only 1 MR is allowed
May grant another 15 days
Again may grant another 15 for most compelling reasons

3. How appeal taken 7 copies shall be filed with proof of service to the
adverse party

ADMINISTRATIVE FINDINGS AND CONSTRUCTIONS GENERALLY CONCLUSIVE

Reviewing court cannot anymore weigh or examine the factual basis and
sufficiency of the evidence
All that is needed is there is substantial evidence to support the finding of facts.
The general rule is that, courts will not disturb on appeal the factual findings of
AA acting within the parameters of their own competence so long as such findings
are supported by substantial facts.
SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE RULE- so long as there is a finding that the decision is
supported by substantial evidence the appellate court will not anymore dwell into
questions of facts.
Except when there is a finding that there are compelling reasons to delve into
such like there is fraud mistake illegality imposition collusion fact finding is
irregular or there are palpable errors committed.

FINALITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION FOR PURPOSES OF REVIEW

The court cannot exercise judicial review unless the AA has already issued a final
order or decision. It will be premature. There is nothing to correct yet when there
is no decision or order issued.
It must be an order or decision not a mere recommendation or pronouncement
to be subject to a judicial review.
The mere informality of a decision does not prevent its review if it is otherwise
final.
Dapat hindi anticipated o threat lang. dapat final
Dapat approved ng superior. Pending approval it is not yet final
Purely administrative matters may not be interfered by court. They have no
supervising power over the proceedings and actions of the administrative
departments of the government. This is generally true with respect to acts
involving the exrcise of discretion and findings of facts except where the agency
or official has gone beyond its or his statutory authority.
No appeal for interlocutory orders. Page 350. When the substantial rights are not
yet determined. Orders issued by the court while the case is ongoing.

EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOCRINE OF FINALITY

1. Review at an initial or intermediate stage of administrative action page 354
2. In cases of declaratory judgment wherein it is filed before an act deemed as
breach or violation of any of the subject matter is committed. The relief
include asking the court to interpret or determine the validity of any of the
subject matter and to declare the rights and duties under the subject
matter in question.

Executive order, regulation, ordinance or any other governmental

regulation.

TIMING OF APPLICATION TO COURTS

1. The doctrine of primary jurisdiction- where the initial action should be

filed
Courts should not hear controversy involving a question which is within
the jurisdiction of an admin tribunal
Reason
a. To take full advantage of the the admin expertise
b. To attain uniformity of application of regulatory laws

2. The doctrine of exhaustion of admin remedies- resort first to all the

admin remedies available before going to court
Pre requisite of judicial review
Ground for dismissal of the action for lack of cause of action dapat
maraise kaagad ung issue ng failure to exhaust admin remedy at the
earliest time possible to be a ground for a motion to dismiss

3. Doctrine of ripeness of review- if all the remedies are exhausted that is

the time you can file an appeal to the court