Power of administrative agencies to modify their administrative agencies become final and executory,

decisions. fifteen (15) days after receipt of a copy thereof by the

party adversely affected unless within that period an
Conditions. — Broadly expressed, administrative administrative appeal or judicial review, if proper, has
determinations are subject to reconsideration and been perfected. One motion for reconsideration is
changes so long as no rights have vested in the allowed. A final resolution or decision of an
meantime by reason thereof, and so long as they have administrative agency also binds the Office of the
not passed beyond the control of the administrative President even if such agency is under the
authorities, administrative supervision and control of the latter.
Administrative decisions must end sometime, as fully
Grounds. — In particular, administrative authorities as public policy demands that finality be written on
have the power to modify their determinations on the judicial controversies.
ground of fraud of imposition, mistake, surprise,
inadvertence, or newly discovered evidence, or to Enforcement of administrative determinations. (1)
meet the changed conditions. Generally.—Admin istrative determinations are
enforceable only in the manner provided by statute.
RES JUDICATA Administrative enforcement. — In the absence of
statute, administrative authorities may not enforce
The Supreme Court said that decisions and orders of their own determinations.
administrative agencies have upon their finality, the Judicial enforcement. — Except as may be otherwise
force and binding effect of a final judgment within provided by statute, administrative bodies, generally,
the purview of the doctrine of res judicata. These have no power to enforce their decisions or orders but
decisions and orders are as conclusive upon the rights such decisions or orders can be enforced only by the
of the affected parties as though the same had been courts.'
rendered by a court of general jurisdiction. The rule of
res judicata thus forbids the reopening of a matter Rules governing appeals from judgments of quasi-
once determined by competent authority acting within judicial agencies.
their exclusive jurisdiction.
(1) Where to appeal. — An appeal may be taken
The principle of res judicata may not be invoked in to the Court of Appeals within the period and
labor relations proceedings considering that such in the manner provided, whether the appeal
proceedings are "no litigious and summary in nature involves questions of fact, of law, or mixed
without regard to legal technicalities obtaining in questions of fact and law.
courts of law." (2) Period of appeal. — The appeal shall be
taken within fifteen (15) days from notice of
Where an administrative determination has been the award, judgment, final order or resolution
reviewed by the courts, the res judicata, if any or from the date of its last publication, if
attaches to the court's judgment rather than to the publication is required by law for its
administrative decision effectivity, or of the denial of petitioner's
motion for reconsideration duly filed in
Administrative appeal and review accordance with the governing law of the
court or agency a quo. Only one (1) motion
A review may be had within the administrative system for reconsideration shall be allowed. Upon
itself of the action of lower administrative authorities proper motion and the payment of the full
by their superiors'56 or a particular administrative amount of the docket fee before the expiration
body is authorized to hear and decide appeals from, of the reglementary period, the Court of
and review the determinations of, certain other Appeals may grant an additional period of
administrative bodies or officers. fifteen (15) days only within which to file
the petition for review.
Reviewing officer must be other than officer whose
decision is under review. — In order that the review Finality of administrative action for purposes of
of the decision of a subordinate officer might not turn review
out to be a farce, the reviewing officer must perforce
be other than the officer whose decision is under Policy of courts. — Courts are reluctant to interfere
review; otherwise, there could be no different view or with action of an administrative agency prior to its
there would be no real review of the case. The completion or finality, the reason being that absent a
decision of the reviewing officer would be a biased final order or decision, power has not been fully and
view. finally exercised, and there can usually be no
irreparable harm. It is only after judicial review is no
Final and executory decisions not subject to review. longer premature that a court may ascertain in proper
— Under Section 15, Chapter III of Book VII of the cases whether the administrative action or findings are
Administrative Code of 1987, decisions of not in violation of law,
 determination and for that reason a party has no cause
Doctrine of primary jurisdiction. of action to ventilate in court.

Concept. —This principle has been also referred to as XPNs: such remedy is permissive warranting the
the doctrine of prior resort, or exclusive administrativeconclusion that the legislature intended to allow the
jurisdiction, or preliminary resort. The term "primary judicial remedy even though administrative remedy
jurisdiction" is the most common in recent treatment has not been exhausted; issue involves not a question
of the subject.52 It usually refers to cases involving of fact, but one of pure law; issue raised is the
specialized disputes which are referred to an constitutionality of the statute; questions involved
administrative agency of special competence to are essentially judicial; there is estoppel on the part
resolve the same. of the party invoking the doctrine,"' or where the
administrative body is in estoppel to invoke the
The doctrine applies only where the administrative doctrine; should appear that an irreparable damage
agency exercises its adjudicatory function. Strictly or injury will be suffered by a party; there is no other
speaking, the objective of the doctrine is to guide a plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the ordinary
court in determining whether it should refrain or not course of law; etc.
from exercising its jurisdiction. Under the doctrine,
"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 ELECTION LAW
of sound administrative discretion requiring the
special knowledge, experience and services of the Section 1. Suffrage may be exercised by all citizens of
tribunal to determine technical and intricate the Philippines, not otherwise disqualified by law,
matters of fact and where a uniformity of ruling is who are at least eighteen years of age, and who shall
essential to comply with the purposes of the have resided in the Philippines for at least one year
regulatory statute administered." and in the place wherein they propose to vote, for at
least six months immediately preceding the election.
Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies No literacy, property, or other substantive requirement
shall be imposed on the exercise of suffrage.
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
remedies requires that where a remedy within an Three Aspects of Suffrage 1. right to vote 2. right to
administrative agency is provided or available against be voted upon 3. right to participate in the resolution
the action of an administrative board, body, or officer, of political question
and can still be resorted to by giving the said agency
every opportunity to decide correctly a given matter REQUISITES OF THE RIGHT TO VOTE 3
that comes within its jurisdiction, relief must be first substantial requisites & 1 procedural requisite:
sought by availing this remedy before bringing an
action in or elevating it to the courts of justice for A - age
review. Requirement: at least 18 years old or 18 years old and
above. On the day of the election.
The premature invocation of a court's intervention is
fatal to one's cause of action. Absent any finding of C - citizenship
waiver or estoppel, the complaint is susceptible of - He must be citizen of the Philippines
dismissal for lack of cause of action. - EITHER natural-born Filipino citizen or
naturalized Filipino citizen
Thus, one of the reasons for the doctrine of
exhaustion is the separation of powers which Are dual citizens allowed to vote? - Yes, dual citizens
enjoins upon the judiciary a becoming policy of are allowed to vote under the Dual Citizenship Law
noninterference with matters primarily (albeit not RA 9225
exclusively) within the competence of the other
departments. Dual citizens are allowed to vote. There must be a
liberal application of the residence requirement.
In like manner, only judicial review of decisions of Three Kinds of Overseas Filipino: 1. OFWs 2. Green
administrative bodies made in the exercise of their card holders / immigrants - I would like to clarify that
quasi-judicial function (i.e., adjudicative, not rule- immigrants or holders of a green card, they are still
making or legislative power) is subject to the Filipino citizens. 3. Dual Citizens. They are all
exhaustion doctrine. allowed to vote! Under what system? - the Overseas
Absentee Voting System - they will cast their vote
Thus, the only effect of non-compliance with the abroad and their ballots will be transmitted to the
doctrine is to render the action premature, i.e., the Philippines for purposes of counting and canvassing.
claimed cause of action is not ripe for judicial
EXCEPTIONS — Dual citizens who are NOT
ALLOWED TO VOTE 1. Those who are employed in
the government service in the other country where
they are also citizens. 2. Those who run also in a
public office. The act of running shall bar the person
to vote.

R - residency
1 year in the Philippines and 6 months in the place
where he/she will vote.

Importance: To prevent foreign intervention in our

political affairs

Purpose: To enable the voter to vote wisely because if

he is residing in the place, he knows the problems, he
knows the issues, he knows the concern

R - registration as a voter

Section 9 of the Voter’s Registration Act, which

amended the Election Code, a Filipino who has left his
domicile of origin: (1) by reason of employment, (2)
by reason of education; and (3) by reason of military
service, they are NOT deemed to have lost their
domicile of origin.

So, if they have not lost their domicile of origin for all
legal intents and purposes, Ana is still a resident of the
Philippines; Ana is still a resident of the barangay
because it is by reason of employment.

What remedy is available?

- file an INCLUSION case before the MTC.
- Prove in the MTC that you possess the residency
requirement and if the MTC believe that you
possess the residence requirement, the MTC will order
the COMELEC to have your name
included in the list.

Flying voters – remedy Exclusion PETITION FOR

EXCLUSION, ONE PETITION PER PRECINCT

When the preparation of the list is attended by fraud,

irregularity of substantial number that will affect the
outcome of the election, ANNULMENT OF
VOTERS’ LIST which effect is there will be a
special registration where the flying voters will be
excluded.

Double Registration Effect: Second registration is

null and void Voter can still vote in the first place of
registration