ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

Concept of administrative law powers of government and duties of the

● It has been defined in the widest sense as “the entire system of laws under which the
machinery of the State works and by which the State performs all government acts.”
Scope of administrative law
• law which fixes the administrative organization and structure of the government;
• law, the execution or enforcement of which is entrusted to administrative authorities;
• law which governs public officers including their competence (to act), rights, duties,
liabilities, election, etc.;
• law which creates administrative agencies, defines their powers and functions,
prescribes their procedures, including the adjudication or settlement by them of
contested matters involving private interests;
• law which provides the remedies, administrative or judicial, available to those
aggrieved by administrative actions or decisions;
• law which governs judicial review of, or relief against, administrative actions or
decisions;
• rule, regulations, orders and decisions (including presidential proclamations) made by
administrative authorities dealing with the interpretation and enforcement of the law
entrusted to their administration; and
• body of judicial decisions and doctrines dealing with any of the above
Meaning of administrative authorities
• By the term administrative authorities is meant all those public officers and organs
(i.e., administrative agencies) of the government that are charged with the
amplification, application, and execution of the law.
Concerns of administrative law
• Private rights
o The chief concern of administrative law is the protection of private rights,
and its subject matter is, therefore, the nature and the mode of exercise
administrative power and the system of relief against administrative action.
• Delegated powers and combined powers
o Administrative law is concerned with officers and agencies exercising
delegated powers and NOT with the exercise of the constitutional powers of
the President.
Distinguished from international law
Administrative Law International Law
It lays down the rules which shall guide the It cannot be regarded as binding upon the
officers of the administration in their actions officers of any government.
as agents of the government.
citizens.
It prescribes limitations on the powers of the It indicates to individuals, remedies for the
government to protect the rights of violation of their rights.
individuals against abuse in their exercise.
• Insofar as it fixes or regulates the administrative organization of the government,
administrative law is the necessary supplement of constitutional law. But
administrative law not only supplements constitutional law; it also complements
constitutional law insofar as it determines the rules relative to the activity of the
administrative authorities.
Distinguished from criminal law
• Criminal law or penal laws consist really of a body of penal sanctions which are
applied to all branches of the law, including administrative law.
Distinguished from law of public administration
• Public administration has to do with the practical management and direction of the
various organs of the State and the execution of state policies by the executive and
administrative officers entrusted with such functions.
• The subject matter of administration law is public administration.
• The true filed of administrative law refers only to the external aspect of public
administration. Thus, administrative law is the narrower branch but it constitutes the
bulk of the law of public administration.
Principal subdivisions of administrative law
• In general
o Public administration may be examined in its internal or external aspect.
• The law of internal administration
o It treats of the legal relations between the government and its administrative
officers, and of the legal relations that one administrative officer or organ
bears to another.
o It considers the legal aspects of public administration on its institutional side,
i.e., as a going concern. This include the legal structure or organization of
public administration; the legal aspects of its institutional activities, e.g.,
personnel, material, fiscal and planning activities; and the legal questions
involved in overall management of these activities.
o It comprehends such topics as the nature of public office, de jure and de
facto officers, and incompatible and forbidden offices.
• The law of external administration
o It is concerned with the legal relations between administrative authorities
and private interests.

Distinguished from constitutional law Classification of administrative law

Constitutional Law Administrative Law • As to source
It prescribes the general plan or framework It gives and carries out this plan in its A. Law that controls administrative authorities
of governmental organization. minutest details. ▪ Constitution;
It treats of the rights of the individual. It lays It treats them from the standpoint of the ▪ statutes;
stress upon the rights. powers of the government. It emphasizes the ▪ judicial decisions;
▪ executive orders of the President; and

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
▪ administrative orders of administrative superiors o Many administrative functions could NOT be directly performed by
B. Law made by administrative authorities Congress.
▪ general regulations; and • Limitations upon exclusively judicial enforcement
▪ particular determinations o The many courts would vary in their application of the law.
• As to purpose • Advantages of continuity of attention and clearly allocated responsibility
A. Adjective or procedural administrative law • Need for organization to dispose of volume of business and to provide the
▪ establishes the procedure which an agency must or may follow in necessary records
the pursuit of its legal purpose
B. Substantive Criticisms against administrative action
▪ establishes primary rights and duties • tendency towards arbitrariness;
• As to applicability • lack of legal knowledge and aptitude in sound judicial technique;
A. General administrative law • susceptibility to political bias or pressure, often brought about by uncertainty of tenure;
▪ of a general nature and common to all, or most, administrative • disregard for the safeguards that insure a full and fair hearing;
agencies • absence of standard rules of procedure suitable to the activities of each agency; and
▪ chiefly but NOT exclusively procedural law • dangerous combination of legislative, executive, and judicial functions
B. Special or particular administrative law
▪ pertains to particular agencies Relation between administrative agencies and courts
• Collaborative instrumentalities
Origin and development of administrative law
o Courts may entertain action brought before them, but call to their aid the
• Recognition given as a distinct category of law appropriate administrative agency on questions within its administrative
o comparatively recent origin competence.
o powers were delegated or assigned to agencies rather than these
• Role of courts
constitutionally prescribed organs
o to accommodate the administrative process to the traditional judicial system;
• Multiplication of government functions o to accommodate private rights and the public interest in the powers reposed
o Modern life became more complex. in administrative agencies; and
o The legislature had to create more and more administrative bodies, board or o to reconcile in the field of administrative action, democratic safeguards and
tribunals specialized in the particular fields standards of fair paly with the effective conduct of government
• Growth and utilization of administrative agencies • Discharge of judicial role
o Administrative law developed as the natural accompaniment of the growth
of administrative agencies and their utilization in response to the needs of a Administrative of government distinguished from administration of justice
changing society.
Administration of Government Administration of Justice
• Fusion of different powers of government in administrative agencies
It is NOT necessarily, or even often, the It consists in the decision of controversies
o Administrative law resulted from the increased functions of government.
result of any controversy and is NOT merely between individuals and government
• A law in the making dependent on the solution of the question officers.
o Administrative law is still in its formative stages and is being developed as “what is the law” but made also as a result of
part of our traditional system of law. consideration of expediency.
• Philippine administrative law
o derived from American and English jurisprudence Administration as a separate power
• As a function
Scope of the administrative process
o “Administration” is the execution, in non-judicial matters, of the law or will of
• The term administrative process includes the whole of the series of acts of an the State as expressed by the competent authority.
administrative agency whereby the legislative delegation of a function is made o It is the activity of the executive officers of the government.
effectual in particular situations. o It had to do with the carrying of laws into effect.
• As an organization
Advantages of the administrative process
o It is that group or aggregate of persons in whose hands the reins of the
• Advantages of administrative adjudication as compared with executive action government are for the time being.
• Limitations upon the powers of the courts o It is the entire administrative organization extending from the Chief
o Congress has resorted to the administrative process as an alternative to Executive down to the most humble of his subordinates.
executive action.
• Trend toward preventive legislation Administration as an organization distinguished from government
• Limitations upon effective legislative action Government Administration

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
It is the aggregate of authorities which rule a It refers to the aggregate of those persons in
society. whose hands the reins of government are
entrusted by the people for the time being.
CASES
Heirs of Zoleta vs. Land Bank of the Philippines (2017)
● Jurisprudence has settled that Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board
(DARAB) possesses no power to issue writs of certiorari.
● Article VIII, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution exclusively vests judicial power in the
Supreme Court (SC) “and in such lower courts as may be established by law.”
o Judicial power includes the power of the courts to declare the acts of the
executive and legislative branches of the government void, when they act
beyond the powers conferred to them by law.
● Administrative agencies are created to aid the government in the regulation of the
country’s “ramified activities.”
o The creation of these agencies has become necessary because of “the
growing complexity of the modern society.” These agencies are considered
specialists, which “can deal with the problems [in their respective fields] with
more expertise and dispatch than can be expected from the legislature or
the courts of justice.” Administrative agencies are part of the executive
branch of the government. However, due to their highly specialized nature,
they are not only vested executive powers but also with quasi-legislative
and quasi-judicial powers.
● Quasi-judicial power is “the power to hear and determine questions of fact to which the
legislative policy is to apply and to decide in accordance with the standards laid down
by the law itself in enforcing and administering the same law.”
o It is limited to the adjudication of the rights of the parties that are incidental
to the agency’s functions under the law. Its exercise does not amount to the
executive’s overreach into or appropriation of actual judicial competence:
Quasi-judicial or administrative adjudicatory power is the power of the
administrative agency to adjudicate the rights of persons before it. The
MVL
administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a
judicial manner an act which is essentially executive or administrative in
nature, where the power to act in such manner is incidental to or reasonably
necessary for the performance of the executive or administrative duty
entrusted to it. (Emphasis supplied) Quasi-judicial power is vested in
administrative agencies because complex issues call for “technical
knowledge and speed in countless controversies which cannot possibly be
handled by regular courts.” Congress may, by law, grant administrative
agencies the exclusive original jurisdiction over cases within their
competence. Consistent with their specialized but narrowly limited
competencies, the scope of the quasi-judicial power vested in administrative
agencies is delineated in an agency’s enabling statute: In general, the
quantum of judicial or quasi-judicial powers which an administrative agency
may exercise is defined in the enabling act of such agency. In other words,
the extent to which an administrative entity may exercise such powers
depends largely, if not wholly, on the provisions of the statute creating or
empowering such agency.
● Executive Order (EO) No. 229 vested the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) with
quasi-judicial powers to resolve agrarian reform cases and incidental powers to punish
for contempt and to issue subpoenas and enforcement writs.
● Executive Order (EO) No. 129-A created Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication
Board (DARAB), which was tasked to “assume the powers and functions with respect
to the adjudication of agrarian reform cases.”
● Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board’s (DARAB’s) exercise of the
innately judicial certiorari power is an executive encroachment into the judiciary. It
violates the separation of powers; it is unconstitutional.
● Under no circumstance may an administrative agency arrogate unto itself the power of
judicial review and to take cognizance of petitions for certiorari.
-oOo-
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
CHAPTER II
NATURE AND ORGANIZATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

A. STATUS AND CHARACTERISTICS o NOT courts in the strict sense

o Courts in the broad sense
Creation, reorganization, and abolition of administrative agencies o Functions primarily regulatory
• In general • As legislative or executive agencies
o Some from constitutional provisions o Certain administrative agencies are deemed to be agents of the legislative
o Most from legislative enactments branch.
• Administrative agencies of statutory origin o Certain administrative agencies or administrative agencies generally are
o These agencies are subject to expansion or contraction of their powers and deemed to be agents of the executive.
functions, or to reorganization or abolition at the will of Congress, hamstrung • As independent or subordinate bodies
only by constitutional limitations. o AA is often used either to designate an agency independent of the executive
o Congress can delegate the power to create positions. branch or one NOT subject to a superior head of department
▪ Reorganization is regarded as valid provided it is pursued in good ▪ Civil Service Commission (CSC)
faith. ▪ Commission on Elections (COMELEC)
▪ Commission on Audit (COA)
Meaning of administrative agency • As corporate bodies or legal entities
• Administrative agency is the term used generally to describe an agency exercising o with legal capacity to sue and be sued in courts
some significant combination of executive, legislative, and judicial powers.
• It covers: Main characteristics of administrative agencies
o boards; 1. Size
o commissions; o Reflects both their nationwide jurisdiction and the character of their work
o divisions; 2. Specialization
o bureaus; and o Prevention or reduction of controversies
o departments. ▪ How to bring the available technical resources to bear so as to
• The term is usually employed to denote the functionaries with which administrative law reduce the points of controversy to an understandable record for
is concerned. agency decision and judicial review
• Under the Administrative Code of 1987, the term agency of the Government is used o Adjudication and rule-making
to refer to any of the various units of the Government, including a department, bureau, 3. Responsibility for results
office, instrumentality, or government-owned or -controlled corporation, or a local o Productive attitude towards issues
government or a district unit therein. ▪ Agencies CANNOT take a wholly passive attitude toward the
o It is a national agency if it refers to a unit of the national Government. issues which come before them
o It is a local agency if it refers to a local government or a distinct unit o Responsibility for effective enforcement of public policy
therein. 4. Variety of administrative bodies
o Within a single agency as well as between different agencies
Administrative agency or body and court distinguished
Administrative Agency/Body Court Consequence of characteristics
It is generally a large organization staffed by It is a tribunal which is presided by one or • Each of the four (4) characteristics of administrative agencies to a greater or lesser
persons who are deemed to become more jurists learned in the law. degree, in turn, contributes to, and necessitates, a highly important characteristic of
something of experts in their particular fields. administrative procedure: delegation of function and authority.
It performs a variety of functions. It has only one function—judicial. o Allocation of functions among the members and staff of the agency
It uses a varying degree of discretion in It is more or less governed by fixed rules that o Major work of the heads of an agency is normally supervision and direction
arriving at decisions and often proceeds NO final adjudication is to be made until after ▪ May persons in the agency other than the heads must do the bulk
without being bound by technical rules of due notice to the parties with opportunity for of this work
evidence or procedure. a full and fair hearing. ▪ Delegation of function and authority be a predominant feature o
their organization and procedure
Status or character of particular administrative agencies • For this reason, the term “administrative body or
• As public or governmental agencies agency” includes the subordinate officials.
o While their exact status and character are thus variable, generally they may o hearing officers
be said to be agencies of the state or government. o examiners
o investigators
• As judicial bodies or courts

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o National Electrification Administration (NEA)
Delegation of function and authority o National Food Authority (NFA)
• Types o National Housing Authority (NHA)
a. Delegation of internal management; D. Seeking to regulate businesses affected with public interest
b. Delegation of authority to dispose of routine matters; o Insurance Commission
c. Delegation of authority to dispose of matters informally, or to initiate formal o Bureau of Air Transportation
proceedings; and o Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board (LTFRB)
d. Delegation of authority and function in formal proceedings o Energy Regulatory Board (ERB)
• Degree o Bureau of Mines and Geo-sciences (BMG)
o It is NOT true that authority must be delegated completely or NOT at all. o National Telecommunications Commission (NTC)
o Delegation may be combined with supervision and control. o Housing and Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB)
E. Seeking under the police power to regulate private businesses and individuals
Types of administrative agencies o Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
A. Offering some gratuity, grant, or special privilege o Movie and Television Review and Classification Board (MTRCB)
o Philippine Veterans Administration (PVA) o Games and Amusement Board (GAB)
o Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) o Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB)
o Social Security System (SSS) o Bureau of Trade Regulation and Consumer Protection (BTRCP)
o Public Attorney’s Office (PAO) F. Seeking to adjust controversies because of some strong social policy involved
o Philippine Medical Care Commission (PMCC) o National Labor Relations Commission (NLRC)
B. Seeking to carry on certain functions of government o Employees Compensation Commission (ECC)
o Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) o Social Security Commission (SSC)
o Bureau of Immigration (BI) o Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
o Land Registration Authority (LRA) o Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR)
C. Performing some business service for the public o Commission on Audit (COA)
o Philippine Postal Corporation (PHLPost)
o Philippine National Railways (PNR) -oOo-
o Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS)
o Government Telephone System

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
B. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION ▪ free central officials from administrative details concerning field
operations; and
Distribution of powers of government ▪ relieve them from unnecessary involvement in routine and local
• Administrative organization refers to the administrative structure of the governments matters
including its political subdivisions and the allocation of powers, functions, and duties to • Department proper
its various units or agencies. o Includes the Office of the Secretary and the staff units directly under it
• Traditional branches o Secretary assisted by such number of Undersecretaries
1. Legislative o Assistant Secretary whenever necessary
2. Executive o Services:
3. Judiciary ▪ Planning Service;
• Special bodies or agencies ▪ Financial and Management Service;
o three (3) independent Constitutional Commissions ▪ Administrative Service;
1. Civil Service Commission (CSC) ▪ Technical and Legal Services (when necessary)
2. Commission on Elections (COMELEC) • Jurisdiction over bureaus, etc.
3. Commission on Audit (COA) o bureaus;
o Ombudsman o regulatory agencies; and
o Commission on Human Rights (CHR) o government corporations
• Assignment of offices and agencies
Organization of the Office of the President o The President shall, by executive order, assign offices and agencies NOT
• Office of the President Proper otherwise assigned by law to any department, or indicate to which
o Private Office department a government corporation or board may be attached.
▪ direct services to the President
o Executive Office Secretaries, Undersecretaries, and Assistant Secretaries
▪ fully responsive to the specific needs and requirements of the • Secretary
President to achieve the purposes and objectives of the Office o vested with the authority and responsibility for the exercise of the mandate
• Office of the Executive Secretary of the Department and for the discharge of its powers and functions
• Deputy Executive Secretaries o shall have supervision and control of the Department
• Assistant Executive Secretaries • Undersecretary
o Staff Support System o advise and assist the Secretary in the formulation and implementation of
▪ development and management, general government department objectives and policies
administration, and internal administration • Assistant Secretary
o Presidential Special Assistants/Advisers Systems o perform such duties and functions as may be provided by law or assigned to
▪ special assistants or advisers as may be needed by the President him by the Secretary
• Agencies under the Office of the President
o those under the chairpersonship of the President; Department Services [FAT-PL]
o those under the supervision and control of the President; • Financial and Management Service
o those under the administrative supervision of the President; o budgetary, financial, and management matters
o those attached to it for policy and proper coordination; and • Administrative Service
o those that are NOT placed by law or order creating them under any special o relating to personnel legal assistance, information, records, delivery and
department receipt of correspondence, supplies, equipment, collections, disbursement,
security and custodial work
Organization of Departments • Technical Service
• Department refers to an executive department created by law. o technical staff activities essential
o It includes any instrumentality having or assigned the rank of a department, • Planning Service
regardless of its name or designation. o relating to planning, programming, and project development
• Number, purpose, and decentralization • Legal Service
o Necessary for the functional distribution of the work of the President and for o provide legal advice to the department
the performance of their functions
o Organized and maintained to insure their capacity to plan and implement Organization of Bureaus
programs in accordance with established national policies • Bureau refers to any principal subdivision or unit of any department.
o Functions decentralized in order to:
▪ reduce red tape;

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o It shall include any principal subdivision or unit of any instrumentality given • Exercise jurisdiction over all bureaus, offices, agencies and corporations under the
or assigned the rank of a bureau, regardless of actual name or designation, Department…
as in the case of department-wide regional offices. • Delegate authority…
• A staff bureau shall primarily perform policy, program development and advisory • Perform such other functions…
functions.
• A line bureau shall directly implement programs adopted pursuant to department Authority of Department Secretary
policies and plans. • shall have supervision and control over the bureaus, offices, and agencies under him,
subject to the following guidelines:
Organization of Field Offices o initiative and freedom of action on the part of subordinate units shall be
• Regional Offices encouraged and promoted
o established according to law defining field service areas o with respect to functions involving discretion, experienced judgment or
o provincial and district offices may be established only by law whenever expertise
necessary o with respect to any regulatory function of an agency subject to department
• Administration control
o RO headed by a Regional Director who may be assisted by one (1)
Assistant Regional Director, EXCEPT as may otherwise be provided by law Delegation of authority
• Supervision • shall be to the extent necessary for economical, efficient, and effective implementation
• Organization of national and local programs;
• Functions of a Regional Office • shall be in writing;
• shall indicate to which officer or class of officers and employees the delegation is
Definition of administrative relationship made; and
• Supervision and control – shall include authority to: • shall vest sufficient authority to enable the delegate to discharge his assigned
o act directly whenever a specific function is entrusted by law or regulation to responsibility
a subordinate;
o direct the performance of duty; restrain the commission of acts; Line bureau authority
o review, approve, reverse or modify acts and decisions of subordinate • Line bureaus of a department shall exercise supervision and control over their regional
officials or units; and field offices.
o determine priorities in the execution of plans and programs; and o They shall be directly responsible for the development and implementation
o prescribe standards, guidelines, plans, and programs of plans and programs within their respective functional specializations.
• Administrative supervision
o shall govern the administrative relationship between a department or its Relationship of government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCCs) to the
equivalent and regulatory agencies or other agencies as may be provided Department
by law • Government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCCs) refer to any agency
o shall be limited to the authority of the department or its equivalent to: organized as a stock or non-stock corporation, vested with functions relating to public
▪ oversee the operations needs whether governmental or proprietary in nature, and owned by the government
▪ require the submission of reports directly or through tis instrumentalities either wholly, or, where applicable as in the
▪ take such action as may be necessary for the proper performance case of stock corporations, to the extent of at least 50% of its capital stock.
of official functions o may be further categorized
▪ review and pass upon budget proposals o shall be attached to the appropriate department
• Attachment o at least one-third (1/3) of the members of the Board of such corporations
o refers to the lateral relationship between the department or its equivalent should either be a Secretary, or Undersecretary, or Assistant Secretary
and the attached agency or corporation for purposes of policy and program
coordination Relationship of regulatory agencies to the Department
• A regulatory agency refers to any agency expressly vested with jurisdiction to
Powers and functions of Department Secretary regulate, administer, or adjudicate matters affecting substantial rights and interest of
• Advise the President… private persons, the principal powers of which are exercised by a collective body, such
• Establish the policies and standards… as commission, board, or council.
• Promulgate rules and regulations…
• Promulgate administrative issuances… Mandates of the different Departments
• Exercise disciplinary powers… • Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) – foreign relations
• Appoint all officers and employees of the Department EXCEPT those whose • Department of Finance (DOF) – fiscal policies
appointments are vested in the President or in some other appointing authority… • Department of Justice (DOJ) – principal law agency

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
• Department of Agriculture (DA) – promotion of agricultural development
• Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH) – safety of all infrastructure
facilities; public works and highways
• Department of Education (DepEd) – formal and non-formal basic education
• Commission on Higher Education (CHED) – Philippine higher education system
• Department of Labor and Employment (DOLE) – promotion of gainful employment
opportunities; advancement of workers’ welfare; maintenance of industrial peace
• Department of National Defense (DND) – guarding against external and internal
threats to national peace and security
• Department of Health (DOH) – health
• Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) – trade, industry, and investments
• Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) – national agrarian reform program
• Department of Interior and Local Government (DILG) – general supervision over
local governments; ensuring autonomy, decentralization and community
empowerment
• Department of Tourism (DOT) – promotion of tourism industry
• Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) – judicious
disposition, utilization, management, renewal, and conservation of the country’s
natural resources
• Department of Transportation and Communications (DOTC) – transportation and
communications systems
• Department of Social Welfare and Development (DSWD) – needs and interests of
the population
• Department of Budget and Management (DBM) – national budget
• Department of Science and Technology (DOST) – scientific and technological
efforts
• Department of Energy (DOE) – energy exploration, development, distribution, and
conservation
• National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA) – social and economic
policies, plans and programs
CASES
Presidential Anti-Dollar Salting Task Force vs. Court of Appeals (CA) (1989)
● A quasi-judicial body has been defined as “an organ of government other than a
court and other than a legislature, which affects the rights of private parties through
either adjudication or rule making.
● Presidential Anti-Dollar Salting Task Force was not meant to exercise quasi-judicial
functions.
o Its undertaking is simply to determine whether or not probable cause exists
to warrant the filing of charges with the proper Court judgment on the
accused, not the fiscal.
o Presidential Anti-Dollar Salting Task Force cannot be said to be co-equal or
coordinate with the Regional Trial Court.
o Fact that the Presidential Task Force has been empowered to issue
warrants of arrest, search and seizure does not make it a semi-court
Boy Scouts of the Philippines vs. NLRC (1991)
● BSP’s functions as set out in its statutory charter do have a public aspect.
o Firstly, BSP’s functions as set out in its statutory charter do have a public
aspect. BSP’s functions do relate to the fostering of the public virtues of
citizenship and patriotism and the general improvement of the moral spirit
MVL
and fiber of our youth. The social value of activities like those to which the
BSP dedicates itself by statutory mandate have in fact, been accorded
constitutional recognition. Article II of the 1987 Constitution includes in the
“Declaration of Principles and State Policies,” the following: “Sec. 13. The
State recognizes the vital role of the youth in nation-building and shall
promote and protect their physical, moral, spiritual, intellectual, and social
well-being. It shall inculcate in the youth patriotism and nationalism, and
encourage their involvement in public and civic affairs.” At the same time,
BSP’s functions do not relate to the governance of any part of territory of the
Philippines; BSP is not a public corporation in the same sense that
municipal corporations or local governments are public corporations. BSP’s
functions can not also be described as proprietary functions in the same
sense that the functions or activities of government-owned or controlled
corporations like the National Development Company or the National Steel
Corporation can be described as proprietary or “business-like” in character.
Nevertheless, the public character of BSP’s functions and activities must be
conceded, for they pertain to the educational, civic and social development
of the youth which constitutes a very substantial and important part of the
nation.
Philippine Gamefowl Commission vs. Intermediate Appellate Court (1986)
● When it comes to ordinary, local cockpits, it is the mayor with the authority of the
Sanggunian and on the basis of guidelines issued by the Philippine Gamefowl
Commission, who has primary authority to issue permits. PGC licensing power is
limited to international derbies only.
● The power of Philippine Gamefowl Commission over mayors in granting local cockpit
licenses is merely to supervise that the latter complies with its guidelines. It cannot
disapprove a license granted by the mayor and ipso facto issue a cockpit license to
another.
o As thus defined, the power of supervision does not allow the supervisor to
annul the acts of the subordinate, for that comes under the power of control.
What it can do only is to see to it that the subordinate performs his duties in
accordance with law. The power of review is exercised to determine
whether it is necessary to correct the acts of the subordinate. If such
correction is necessary, it must be done by the authority exercising control
over the subordinate or through the instrumentality of the courts of justice,
unless the subordinate motu proprio corrects himself after his error is called
to his attention by the official exercising the power of supervision and review
over him.
Beja, Sr. vs. Court of Appeals (CA) (1992)
● Preventive suspension distinct from the administrative penalty of removal from office
such as one mentioned in Sec. 8 (d) of P.D. No. 857.
o Imposed during the pendency of an administrative investigation, preventive
suspension is not a penalty in itself. It is merely a measure of precaution so
that the employee who is charged may be separated, for obvious reasons,
from the scene of his alleged misfeasance while the same is being
investigated.
● The PPA general manager is the disciplining authority who may by himself and without
the approval of the PPA Board of Directors subject a respondent in an administrative
case to preventive suspension.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
● Preventive suspension may be lifted even if the disciplining authority has not finally
decided the administrative case provided the ninety-day period from the effectivity of
the preventive suspension has been exhausted.
● By vesting the power to remove erring employees on the General Manager, with the
approval of the PPA Board of Directors, the law impliedly grants said officials the
power to investigate its personnel below the rank of Assistant Manager who may be
charged with an administrative offense.
Pichay, Jr. vs. Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs-Investigative and
Adjudicatory Division (ODESLA-IAD)
● Section 31 of Executive Order No. 292 (E.O. 292), otherwise known as the
Administrative Code of 1987, vests in the President the continuing authority to
reorganize the offices under him in order to achieve simplicity, economy and
efficiency.
● The abolition of the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) and the transfer of its
functions to a division specially created within the Office of the Deputy Executive
Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA) is properly within the prerogative of the
President under his continuing “delegated legislative authority to reorganize” his own
office pursuant to E.O. 292; Only Section 31(1) gives the President a virtual freehand
in dealing with the internal structure of the Office of the President Proper by allowing
him to take actions as extreme as abolition, consolidation or merger of units, apart
from the less drastic move of transferring functions and offices from one unit to
another.
MVL
● Since both the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) and the Office of the
Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA) belong to the Office of the
President Proper, the reorganization by way of abolishing the PAGC and transferring
its functions to the ODESLA is allowable under Section 31 (1) of E.O. 292
● The abolition of the Presidential Anti-Graft Commission (PAGC) did not require the
creation of a new, additional and distinct office as the duties and functions that
pertained to the defunct anti-graft body were simply transferred to the Office of the
Deputy Executive Secretary for Legal Affairs (ODESLA), which is an existing office
within the Office of the President Proper.
● A reorganization is said to be carried out in good faith if it is done for purposes of
economy and efficiency.
● The Investigative and Adjudicatory Division, Office of the Deputy Executive Secretary
for Legal Affairs (IAD-ODESLA) is a fact-finding and recommendatory body to the
President, not having the power to settle controversies and adjudicate cases.
● The Ombudsman’s authority to investigate both elective and appointive officials in the
government, extensive as it may be, is by no means exclusive. It is shared with other
similarly authorized government agencies.
● Having the power to remove and/or discipline presidential appointees, the President
has the corollary authority to investigate such public officials and look into their
conduct in office.
-oOo-
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
CHAPTER III
POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

A. IN GENERAL
What constitutes administrative power or administrative function
Meaning of powers and functions ● convenient rather than a technical term
● function – that which one is bound or which it is one’s business to do ● powers NOT explicitly legislative, executive, and judicial
● powers – denotes a broader filed of activities than the former o An administrative power has been said to be any power NOT explicitly
allocated in the Constitution, although in its nature, legislative, executive, or
Source of powers judicial.
● Constitution ● powers involve exercise of judgment and discretion
● statutes
Powers of administrative agencies classified
Scope of powers A. as to nature
● express and implied powers a. investigatory;
o The jurisdiction and powers of administrative agencies are measure and b. quasi-legislative or rule-making powers; and
limited by the Constitution or law creating them or granting their powers, to c. quasi-judicial or adjudicatory
those conferred expressly or by necessary or fair implication. B. as to degree of subjective choice
o Where a general power is conferred or duty is enjoined by law, every a. discretionary
particular power necessary for the exercise of one or the performance of the b. ministerial
other is also conferred.
● inherent powers Discretionary and ministerial powers
o An administrative agency has NO inherent powers, although implied powers discretionary ministerial
may sometimes be spoken of as “inherent.” ● very essence: person or persons ● nothing is left to discretion
● quasi-judicial powers exercising it may choose, in the ● ministerial act – one performed in
o Unless expressly empowered, administrative agencies are bereft of quasi- exercise of discretion, which of several response to a duty which has been
judicial powers. courses will be followed positively imposed by law and its
● discretion – power or right conferred performance required at a time and in a
Nature of powers upon them by law of acting officially manner or upon conditions specifically
● jurisdiction limited under certain circumstances, according designated, the duty to perform under
o Administrative officers and agencies possess only such powers and to the dictates of their own judgment the conditions specified not being
authority as have been specifically conferred upon them by the Constitution and conscience, and not controlled by dependent upon the officer’s judgment
or specifically granted to them by their enabling statutes and those as may the judgment or conscience of others or discretion
be necessarily implied in the exercise thereof or incidental to the attainment
of their purposes or objectives. Separation of functions within the agency itself with combined power structure
● powers within their jurisdiction broad ● The hallmark of the administrative process is its ability to combine legislative,
o commensurate with the duties to be performed and the purpose to be investigative, prosecutorial, and adjudicatory functions.
lawfully effected
● powers subject to the Constitution, applicable law, or administrative regulation -oOo-
o NOT authorized to substitute its own judgment for any applicable law or
administrative regulation with the wisdom or propriety of which it does NOT
agree

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
B. INVESTIGATORY POWERS
Generally
● scope
o inspect the records and premises
o investigate the activities of persons and entities coming under its jurisdiction
o secure or to require the disclosure of information by means of accounts,
records, reports, statements, testimony of witnesses, production of
documents, or otherwise
● as sole powers granted
o Some administrative agencies act merely as investigatory or advisory
bodies.
● as aid to other powers
o consists in gathering, organizing, and analyzing evidence
o useful aid or tool in an administrative agency’s performance of its rule-
making or quasi-judicial functions
● as distinguished from judicial functions
o An investigatory body with the sole power of investigation does NOT
exercise judicial functions and its power is limited to investigating the facts
and making findings and recommendation in respect thereto.
Scope and extent of powers
● initiation of investigation
o on a complaint; or
o on own motion
● conduct of investigation
o usually, and may properly be held in private
o that harmful publicity will NOT be used in lieu of sanctions provided by law
● inspection and examination
o enter premises and inspect or examine such premises or things or
operations therein, particularly books and records
● requirements as to accounts, records, reports, or statements
o Regulatory bodies have been given power to prescribe forms and methods
of accounts, records, and memoranda for the business under their control,
power to inspect the books, papers, and records, and power to require the
filing of reports or statements, or answers to specific questions.
● requiring attendance of witnesses, giving of testimony, and production of
evidence
o basic to the power of investigation
o compulsion must be exerted through judicial process
o application to a court to enforce obedience to a subpoena of an
administrative agency or the giving of testimony before it
● hearing
o General Rule: A hearing is NOT a necessary part of an investigation by an
administrative agency or official.
● contempt proceedings
o Persons failing to attend, give testimony, and produce records at an
investigative proceeding may be punished for contempt.
MVL
o An administrative body, however, cannot exercise its power to punish a
person for contempt in the absence of any statutory grant, for such power is
inherently judicial in nature.
● application of technical rules of procedure and evidence
o It is NOT totally uncommon that a government agency is given a wide
latitude in the scope and exercise of its investigative powers. After all, in
administrative proceedings, technical rules of procedure and evidence are
NOT strictly applied.
Administrative power to obtain information
● need for good information
o Effective and sensible regulation requires good information.
● information as a regulatory means to serve regulatory ends
o Good information is a necessary means to the successful accomplishment
of regulatory ends.
o Information can be both a regulatory means and a regulatory end.
● different approaches to obtain withheld information
a. by subpoenaing witnesses or documents;
b. by invoking statutory authority requiring that records be regularly kept and
reports routinely provided; or
c. by engaging in physical, on-site inspections to obtain the needed
information
Right to counsel in administrative investigations
● hearing NOT part of criminal prosecution
o A party in an administrative inquiry may or may not be assisted by counsel,
irrespective of the nature of the charges and of the respondent’s capacity to
represent himself.
o The right to counsel is NOT always imperative in administrative
investigations.
▪ It is because such inquiries are conducted merely to determine
whether there are facts that merit disciplinary measure against
erring public officers and employees.
● exclusionary rule in custodial investigation NOT applicable
Importance of administrative investigations
● The lifeblood of the administrative process is the flow of fact, the gathering, the
organization, and the analysis of evidence.
● Investigations are useful for all administrative functions:
o rule-making;
o adjudication;
o licensing;
o prosecuting;
o supervising and directing;
o determining general policy;
o recommending legislation; and
o illuminating obscure areas to find out what if anything should be done
-oOo-
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
C. RULE-MAKING POWERS o agency must issue a public notice of its proposed rule
▪ enables citizens who oppose or support the proposal to alert the
Generally President and members of Congress to the existence of the
● definition of terms proposal and to express their views of the agency’s proposal to
o rule-making – agency process for “formulating, amending, or repealing a those politically accountable officials
rule” 3. efficiency advantages
o rule – “a statement of general . . . applicability and future effect designed to o avoid adjudicatory hearings of issues of legislative fact
implement, interpret, or prescribe law or policy” o avoid duplicate hearings
● nature 4. legislative rules are easier to enforce
o Administrative rules and regulations are in the nature of new or o issues can easily be resolved in a brief hearing to determine compliance or
additional legal provisions that have the effect and force of law. non-compliance with the rule
o What may be granted to an administrative agency is rule-making power to 5. fairness advantages
implement the law it is entrusted to enforce. It necessarily includes the o provide affected parties with clearer advance notice of permissible or npn-
power to amend, revise, alter, or repeal its rules and regulations. permissible conduct
● necessity 6. superior notice of rules
o impracticability of the lawmakers providing general regulations for various o provide clear answers to questions arising from the great difficulty of
and varying details of management; determining the precise conduct that conforms to the “rule” thereby
o to adapt to the increasing complexity of modern life and variety of public enhancing fairness of the administrative process
functions; and 7. simultaneous application of rules
o “filing in” only the details which the Legislature may neither have time nor o avoids sources of unfairness
competence to provide 8. broad public participation
● conditions o issues can easily be resolved in a brief hearing to determine compliance or
1. completeness test – statute is complete in itself, setting forth the policy to non-compliance with the rule
be executed by the agency; and
2. standard test – said statute fixes a standard, mapping out the boundaries Limitations of the rule-making power
of the agency’s authority to which it must conform ● It may NOT make rules and regulations which are inconsistent with the provisions of
● binding force and effect the Constitution or a statute;
o has the force and effect of law ● It may NOT, by its rules and regulations, amend, alter, modify, extend, supplant,
o binding on the agency and on all those dealing with the agency enlarge or expand, restrict or limit the provisions or coverage of the statute;
o enjoys the same presumption of validity and constitutionality given to statute ● It may make only such rules and regulations as are within the limits of the powers
● prospective/retroactive application granted to it or what is found in the legislative enactment itself;
o General Rule: Statute operates prospectively and NOT retroactively. ● In case of discrepancy between the basic law and a rule or regulation issued ti
▪ Exception: legislative intent to the contrary implement said law, the basic law prevails because said rule or regulation cannot go
o same principle is applicable to rules and regulations beyond the terms and provisions of the basic law.

Legislation on the administrative level Rules, regulations, and orders or rulings distinguished
1. rule-making power of an administrative agency ● rules and regulations
o power to make implementing or interpretative rules or regulations o duly made general rules relative to the subject on which the administrative
o legislative in character agency acts
o results in “delegated legislation” o actions in which the legislative element predominates
o legislation on the administrative level ● orders – actions in which there is more of the judicial function and which deal with a
▪ legislation within the confines or scope of the granting statute particular present situation
o also called: ● ruling – interpretation or an application of a rule or statute to a particular situation
▪ administrative legislation;
▪ delegated legislation;
▪ ordinance-making; and Kinds of rule-making/rules and regulations
▪ quasi-legislation ● rule-making powers
A. supplementary or detailed legislation – rule-making by reason of
Many advantages of rule-making particular delegation of authority;
1. rule-making produces higher quality rules B. interpretative legislation – rule-making by the construction and
o All potentially affected members of the public are given an opportunity to interpretation of a statute being administered;
participate in a rule-making proceeding. C. contingent legislation or determination – whether a statute shall go into
2. rule-making enhances political account ability effect

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
● administrative rules ● nothing essentially legislative in ascertaining the existence of certain facts or
A. discretionary or legislative; conditions as the basis of the taking into effect of a law
B. interpretative; or
C. contingent Procedural rules
● agency rules may also be: ● rules describing the methods by which the agency will carry out its appointed functions
o internal – issued by an administrative superior to his subordinates; and ● mere tools aimed at facilitating the attainment of justice
o penal – prescribe criminal sanctions ● construed liberally in order to promote their object to assist the parties in obtaining a
just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of their respective claims
Legislative rules and regulations
● form of subordinate legislation Ordinance power of the President
o Administrative rules may describe the general discretionary policies to be A. executive order – rules of a general or permanent character I implementation or
followed by the agency. execution of constitutional or statutory powers;
● characteristics B. administrative order – relate to particular aspects of governmental operations in
1. The statute has delegated power to the agency to adopt the rule; and pursuance of his duties as administrative head;
2. It provides that the rule shall, if within the delegated power, have C. proclamation – fixing a date or declaring a status or condition of public moment or
authoritative force. interest, upon the existence of which the operation of a specific law or regulation is
made to depend;
Interpretative rules and regulations D. memorandum order – matters of administrative detail or of subordinate or temporary
● resemble judicial adjudication interest which only concern a particular officer or office of Government;
o interpret, explain, or clarify the statute being administered, to say what it E. memorandum circular – matters relating to internal administration, which the
means President desires to bring to the attention of all or some of the departments, agencies,
o constitute administrator’s construction of a statute bureaus or office of the Government, for information or compliance; and
o have validity in judicial proceedings only to the extent that they correctly F. general or special order – acts and commands in his capacity as Commander-in-
construe the statute Chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP)
● entitled to great weight and respect
o have the force of law Administrative issuances of Secretaries and heads of bureaus, offices, or agencies
o not conclusive ● general classification of issuances
o at best advisory for it is the courts that finally determine what the law means A. circular – issuances prescribing policies, rules and regulations, and
procedures promulgated pursuant to law, applicable to individuals and
Legislative and interpretative rules, distinguished organizations outside the Government and designed to supplement
legislative rules interpretative rules provisions of the law or to provide means for carrying them out, including
power to create new law/interpret existing law information relating thereto; and
product of the power to create new and product of interpretation of previously B. order – issuances directed to particular offices, officials, or employees,
additional legal provisions that have the existing laws concerning specific matters including assignments, detail, and transfer of
effect of law personnel, for observance or compliance by all concerned
may embody new law merely clarify to provide guidelines to the law ● numbering system of issuances
they interpret ● official logbook
need for express delegation ● government-wide application of the classification of issuances
may be issued only under express may be issued as a necessary incident of the
delegation of law administration of a regulatory statute Practical necessity of the rule-making power
presence of statutory sanction ● regulation of highly complex changing conditions
said to have the force and effect of law are but statutory interpretations, which have ● gradual change in regulatory role of Congress
UNLESS they are ultra vires or were issued behind them no statutory sanction ● inability of legislative bodies to anticipate future situations
under an unconstitutional delegation
binding force and effect Special advantages of the rule-making power
● The legislature can concentrate its attention upon the enactment of the fundamentals
have the same force and effect as valid are always subject to judicial determination
of policy.
statutes that they are erroneous, even when their
● It also has additional time to investigate the manner in which administrative authorities
issuance is authorized by statute
have concretized and enforced its policies.
● Since rules are more easily amended than statutes, it becomes easier to correct
Contingent rules and regulations
mistakes and to meet changing conditions.
● take effect upon the happening of future specified contingencies leaving to some other
● The administrators does NOT have to choose between defeating the central purpose
person or body the power to determine when the specified contingency has arisen
of the statute by trying to work the unworkable, and evading the letter of the law.

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
3. punishable or made a crime under the law itself; and
Requisites for validity of administrative rules and regulations 4. rules and regulations must be published in the Official Gazette
1. issued on authority of law; ● nature of powers to prescribe penalties – legislative function
2. not contrary to law and the Constitution;
3. promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure; and Legal force and effect of administrative rules and regulations
4. reasonable ● Courts accord great respect to actions of administrative authorities.
o doctrine of separation of powers
Grant of rule-making powers o presumed knowledgeability and expertise in the enforcement of laws and
A. by some legislative act regulations entrusted to their jurisdiction
B. by implication from the powers expressly granted implementing rules and interpretative rules and rules prescribing the
regulations regulations methods of procedure
Consistency with law and the Constitution ● have the force and ● do NOT have the force ● have the effect of law
effect of law of law (including ● binding on both the
Questions relevant in determining validity of rules ● just as binding upon all administrative agency and on
A. legislative rule the parties, as if they constructions) respondent parties
o relation to subject matter had been written in the ● statute itself which is
o conformity to standards prescribed original being interpreted
o validity on constitutional grounds remain the sole
B. interpretative rule criterion of what it
o correct interpretation of the statute means and NOT the
interpretative rules and
Tests applied in determining validity of rules regulations
● A rule is void/invalid if it: ● BUT: agency rules do
o exceeds the authority conferred to it; NOT prevent courts
o conflicts with the governing statute; from doing what justice
o extends or modifies the statute; and/or requires
o has no reasonable relationship to the statutory purpose. ● Courts are competent
● Courts will set aside rules deemed to be arbitrary or unreasonable. to deter an agency’s
own interpretation of its
Requirement of reasonableness procedural rules, where
● bear reasonable relation to the purpose sought to be accomplished it is felt that the ends of
● supported by good reasons justice so require.
● free from constitutional infirmities or charge of arbitrariness
Principles of administrative construction
Liberal interpretation of rules and regulations ● The best authority to interpret a rule is the source itself of the rule.
● justified in cases where their rigid enforcement will result in a deprivation of legal rights ● It is the intention with which the rule or regulation was adopted which is controlling.
● An administrative rule should ordinarily be given that construction which will, if
Internal rules and regulations possible, sustain its validity.
● definition – refers to administrative rules and regulations issued by a superior ● Ad administrative regulation providing punishment for the violation thereof should be
administrative or executive officer to his subordinate for the proper and efficient strictly construed.
administration of law ● Rules and regulations of a public administrative agency should be strictly construed
● object – efficient and economical administration of the affairs of the department or against it, and that any ambiguities contained therein should be resolved in favor of
agency in which they issued in accordance with the law governing the subject matter the adversary.
● nature – administrative in nature and do NOT pass beyond the limits of the ● The court must necessarily look to the administrative construction.
department or agency to which they are directed or in which they are published, and, ● Administrative rules of procedure are construed liberally in order to promote their
therefore, create NO rights in third persons object and assist the parties in claiming just, speedy, and inexpensive determination of
their respective claims and defenses.
Penal rules and regulations
● definition – rules and regulations carrying penal or criminal sanctions for violation of Effect of reliance on rules
the same ● invalid or unconstitutional rule – One who has relied on an invalid rule is in
● requisites for validity: substantially the same position as one who has relied on an unconstitutional statute.
1. law must itself provide for the imposition of a penalty for their violation;
2. fix or define such penalty;

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
● rule subsequently amended or repealed – Similarly, protection is accorded to
parties who had relied on an administrative rule that was subsequently amended or
repealed.
Retroactive operation of rules, regulations, and rulings
● The power of an administrative agency to adopt rules and regulations or make rulings
ordinarily includes the power to give them retroactive effect, within the limits specified
or contemplated by the statute, provided doing so does NOT conflict with restrictions
on the legislative power to make retroactive laws.
Amendment or repeal of administrative rules and regulations
● An administrative agency ordinarily has the authority to change, alter, amend, or
correct the rules and regulations duly promulgated by it.
o Since it is discretionary with such an agency whether it will take such action,
the exercise of such discretion in the public interest is NOT subject to
judicial control.
● In order to be valid, a change in regulation must be made in accordance with statutory
procedural requirements.
o notice and hearing
o vote necessary to make a change
● General Practice: An administrative rule should NOT be amended so as to effect a
retroactive change.
● Where administrative bodies exercise regulatory or quasi-legislative power, laying
down rules and regulations, even specific orders to be observed by persons subject
thereto, the doctrine of res judicata is NOT applicable.
o Such rules and regulations, or orders may be amended, modified, or
revolved to conform to the requirements of the law or the demands of public
interest.
● In case of procedural rules, it is often expeditious for an agency to ignore a certain rule
in a particular case and adopt therein a different procedure than that contemplated by
the agency’s rule.
o Parties may voluntarily waive compliance with procedural rules.
o Disregard or minutiae of procedural niceties will be tolerated, where it
clearly appears NO prejudice resulted.
o If it can be shown that a particular rule was established solely
Formal requirements on the promulgation, etc. of rules and regulations
● Filing – three (3) copies of rule with UP Law Center
● Effectivity – fifteen (15) days
● Publication and reading – UP Law Center shall:
o publish a monthly bulletin; and
o keep an up-to-date codification of rules thus published and remaining in
effect.
● Omission of some rules – UP Law Center may omit from the bulletin or the
codification of any rule if its publications would be unduly cumbersome, expensive, or
otherwise inexpedient.
● Distribution of bulletin and codified rules to:
o Office of the President;
o Congress;
o all appellate courts, and
o National Library
● Judicial notice
MVL
● Public participation – Publish or circulate notice of proposed rules and afford
interested parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to the adoption of any
rule.
o fixing of rates – NO rule or final order shall be valid UNLESS the proposed
rates shall have been published in a newspaper of general circulation at
least two (2) weeks before the first hearing thereon.
o opposition – Rules on contested cases shall be observed.
Requirements of notice and hearing of publication
● Generally – Prior notice and hearing and NOT essential to the validity of rules and
regulations promulgated to govern future conduct.
● Where rules do NOT apply to named or specified parties
o Where a function, legislative in nature – legislature need NOT require a
notice of hearing as a prerequisite to the act of the administrative agency.
● Where rules apply to named or specified parties
o function partaking of a quasi-judicial character – demands a previous
notice and hearing to satisfy the requirement of due process
● Where requirements prescribed by law
o Under the Administrative Code of 1987, notices of proposed rules must be
given when required by law; otherwise, such notices shall be circulated as
afar as practicable to afford interested parties the opportunity to submit their
views prior to the adoption of any rule.
● Where rules have the force and effect of law
o Publication is required as a condition precedent to the effectivity of a law, as
well as rules and regulations to implement existing law pursuant to a valid
delegation to inform the public of the contents of the law or rules and
regulations before their rights and interests are affected by the same.
o Corollary, when the issuances are of “general applicability,” publication in
the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation in the
Philippines is necessary as a requirement of due process.
● Where regulations merely interpretative and internal in nature
o need NOT be published
CASES
People vs. Maceren (1977)
● Lawmaking body cannot delegate to administrative official the power to declare what
act constitutes a criminal offense.
○ An administrative regulation must be in harmony with law; it must not amend
an act of the legislature.
○ In a prosecution for violation of an administrative order it must clearly
appear that the order falls within the scope of the authority conferred by law.
○ Fishery Adm. Order No. 84 penalizing electro fishing is null and void
because the Fishery Laws under which it was issued (Act 4003 and R.A.
3512) did not expressly prohibit electro fishing.
Bautista vs. Juinio (1984)
● To the extent that LOI 869 and Memorandum Circular No. 39 were adopted pursuant
to the Land Transportation Code, the provision in said administrative regulation for the
impounding of H and EH plated vehicles violating the ban on their use in weekends
and on holidays would be ultra vires and unwarranted.
○ It follows that while the imposition of a fine or the suspension of registration
under the conditions therein set forth is valid under the Land Transportation
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
and Traffic Code, the impounding of a vehicle finds no statutory justification.
To apply that portion of Memorandum Circular No. 39 would be ultra vires. It
must likewise be made clear that a penalty even if warranted can only be
imposed in accordance with the procedure required by law.
Abella, Jr. vs. Civil Service Commission (CSC) (2004)
● The Constitution mandates that, as “the central personnel agency of the government,”
the CSC should “establish a career service and adopt measures to promote the
morale, efficiency, integrity, responsiveness, progressiveness, and courtesy in the
Civil Services.” Civil Service laws have expressly empowered the CSC to issue and
enforce rules and regulations to carry out its mandate.
● The classification of positions in career service was a quasi-legislative, not a quasi-
judicial, issuance.
○ Quasi-legislative power is exercised by administrative agencies through the
promulgation of rules and regulations within the confines of the granting
statutes and the doctrine of non-delegation of certain powers flowing from
the separation of the great branches of the government.
○ As a general rule, prior notice and hearing are not essential to the validity of
rules or regulations promulgated to govern future conduct.
Palao vs. Florentino III International, Inc. (2017)
● Administrative bodies are not strictly bound by technical rules of procedure.
○ Administrative bodies are not bound by the technical niceties of law and
procedure and the rules obtaining in courts of law. Administrative tribunals
exercising quasi-judicial powers are unfettered by the rigidity of certain
procedural requirements, subject to the observance of fundamental and
essential requirements of due process in justiciable cases presented before
them. In administrative proceedings, technical rules of procedure and
evidence are not strictly applied and administrative due process cannot be
fully equated with due process in its strict judicial sense.
Commissioner of Customs vs. Hypermix Feeds Corporation (2012)
● When the administrative rule goes beyond merely providing for the means that can
facilitate or render least cumbersome the implementation of the law but substantially
increases the burden of those governed, it behooves the agency to accord at least to
those directly affected a chance to be heard, and thereafter to be duly informed,
before that new issuance is given the force and effect of law.
● Rules and regulations, which are the product of a delegated power to create new and
additional legal provisions that have the effect of law, should be within the scope of the
statutory authority granted by the legislature to the administrative agency.
Republic vs. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation (2008)
● The requirements of publication and filing with the Office of National Administrative
Register (ONAR) were put in place as safeguards against abuses on the part of
lawmakers and as guarantees to the constitutional right to due process and to
information on matters of public concern and, therefore, require strict compliance.
○ Under the doctrine of Tanada v. Tuvera (1986), the MOF Circular No. 1-85,
as amended, is one of those issuances which should be published before it
becomes effective since it is intended to enforce Presidential Decree No.
1956. The said circular should also comply with the requirement stated
under Section 3 of Chapter 2, Book VII of the Administrative Code of 1987—
filing with the ONAR in the University of the Philippines Law Center—for
MVL
rules that are already in force at the time the Administrative Code of 1987
became effective.
● Strict compliance with the requirements of publication cannot be annulled by a mere
allegation that parties were notified of the existence of the implementing rules
concerned.
Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. vs. POEA (1988)
● Ordinarily, the decisions of the POEA should first be appealed to the National Labor
Relations Commission, on the theory inter alia that the agency should be given an
opportunity to correct the errors, if any, of its subordinates.
○ This case comes under one of the exceptions, however, as the questions
the petitioner is raising are essentially questions of law. Moreover, the
private respondent herself has not objected to the petitioner’s direct resort to
this Court, observing that the usual procedure would delay the disposition of
the case to her prejudice.
● Legislative discretion as to the substantive contents of the law cannot be delegated.
What can be delegated is the discretion to determine how the law may be enforced.
● There are two (2) accepted tests to determine whether or not there is a valid
delegation of legislative power, viz., the completeness test and the sufficient standard
test.
○ Under the completeness test, the law must be complete in all its terms and
conditions when it leaves the legislature such that when it reaches the
delegate the only thing he will have to do is enforce it.
○ Under the sufficient standard test, there must be adequate guidelines or
limitations in the law to map out the boundaries of the delegate’s authority
and prevent the delegation from running riot.
○ Both tests are intended to prevent a total transference of legislative authority
to the delegate, who is not allowed to step into the shoes of the legislature
and exercise a power essentially legislative.
● Principle of non-delegation of powers is applicable to all the three (3) major powers of
the government, but is especially important in the case of the legislative power.
● Reason for the frequent delegation of power by the legislature
○ The reason is the increasing complexity of the task of government and the
growing inability of the legislature to cope directly with the myriad problems
demanding its attention. The growth of society has ramified its activities and
created peculiar and sophisticated problems that the legislature cannot be
expected reasonably to comprehend. Specialization even in legislation has
become necessary. To many of the problems attendant upon present-day
undertakings, the legislature may not have the competence to provide the
required direct and efficacious, not to say, specific solutions. These
solutions may, however, be expected from its delegates, who are supposed
to be experts in the particular fields assigned to them.
● Reasons for delegation of legislative powers are particularly applicable to
administrative bodies; Delegated power to issue rules to carry out the general
provisions of the statute is called power of subordinate legislation.
● Parenthetically, it is recalled that this Court has accepted as sufficient
standards:
○ “public interest” in People v. Rosenthal;
○ “justice and equity” in Antamok Gold Fields v. CIR;
○ “public convenience and welfare” in Calalang v. Williams; and
○ “simplicity, economy and efficiency” in Cervantes v. Auditor General.
● Administrative agencies vested with two (2) basic powers, quasi-legislative and quasi-
judicial. Power of administrative agencies to promulgate implementing rules and
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
regulations and interprets and applies them, not violative of due process as
long as the cardinal rights in the Ang Tibay vs. CIR case are observed.

Chairman and Executive Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable Development vs. Lim
(2016)
● Administrative agencies possess two (2) kinds of powers, the quasi-legislative or rule-
making power, and the quasi-judicial or administrative adjudicatory power.
○ The quasi-legislative power is the power to make rules and regulations that
results in delegated legislation that is within the confines of the granting
statute and the doctrine of non-delegability and separability of powers.
○ The quasi-judicial power is the power to hear and determine questions of
fact to which the legislative policy is to apply and to decide in accordance
with the standards laid down by the law itself in enforcing and administering
the same law.
● The Regional Trial Court (RTC) has jurisdiction to pass upon the validity or
constitutionality of a rule or regulation issued by an administrative agency in the
performance of its quasi-legislative functions.
● A petition for prohibition is not the proper remedy to assail an administrative order
issued in the exercise of a quasi-legislative function.
○ Prohibition is an extraordinary writ directed against any tribunal, corporation,
board, officer or person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or
ministerial functions, ordering said entity or person to desist from further
proceedings when said proceedings are without or in excess of said entity’s
or person’s jurisdiction, or are accompanied with grave abuse of discretion,
and there is no appeal or any other plain, speedy and adequate remedy in
the ordinary course of law.
○ Petition for prohibition lies against the exercise of judicial or ministerial
functions, not against the exercise of legislative or quasi-legislative
functions.

Smart Communications, Inc. (SMART) vs. National Telecommunications Commission

(NTC) (2003)
● Administrative agencies possess quasi-legislative or rule-making powers and quasi-
judicial or administrative adjudicatory powers.
● The rules and regulations that administrative agencies promulgate, which are the
product of a delegated legislative power to create new and additional legal provisions
that have the effect of law, should be within the scope of the statutory authority
granted by the legislature to the administrative agency.
● The administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a
judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive or administrative nature.
● In questioning the validity or constitutionality of a rule or regulation issued by
an administrative agency, a party need not exhaust administrative remedies
before going to court.
● The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies only where the administrative
agency exercises its quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function.
● Where what is assailed is the validity or constitutionality of a rule or regulation
issued by the administrative agency in the performance of its quasi-legislative
function, the regular courts have jurisdiction to pass upon the same.

-oOo-

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
D. ADJUDICATORY POWERS ● nowhere included or intimated is the
notion of settling, deciding or resolving
Generally a controversy involved in the facts
● Involve specific parties inquired into by application of the law to
● Involve judicial function exercised by a person other than a judge the facts established by the inquiry
● Involve exercise of judicial power conveniently styled “quasi-judicial”
o power of an administrative agency to hear and determine, or to ascertain Distinguished from legislative or rule-making power
facts and decide by the application of rules to the ascertained facts adjudicatory legislative or rule-making power
▪ to interpret and apply not only implementing rules and regulations elements of futurity and retrospection
promulgated by them but also the laws entrusted to their ● investigates, declares, and enforces ● looks to the future and changes existing
administration liabilities as they stand on present or conditions by making a new rule to be
▪ function of any particular act must be either administrative or past facts and under laws supposed to applied thereafter to all or some part of
judicial and there can in reality be NO middle or halfway ground exist those subject thereto
between them elements of generality and particularity
▪ “quasi-judicial” or “judicial in nature” – character of particular ● applies to named persons or to specific ● lays down general regulations that
proceedings or powers, the exercise of which must be situations apply to or affect classes of persons or
accompanied with certain formalities and safeguards ● typically designed to apply to named situations
characteristic of the judicial process parties ● involves the issuance of rules or the
making of determinations which are
Distinguished from judicial power addressed to indicated but unnamed
● Judicial power – power to hear, try and determine all sorts of cases at law and equity and unspecified persons or situations
which are brought before the courts due process requirement of notice and hearing
quasi-judicial judicial ● elementary that the due process ● prior notice and hearing are NOT
● where function primarily ● where function primarily to decide requirements which include prior notice essential to the validity of rules and
administrative and power to hear and question of legal rights and NOT and hearing MUST be observed regulations promulgated to govern
determine controversies is grated as an merely incidental to regulation or some future conduct
incident to the administrative duty other administrative function
Nature of particular acts
Extent of judicial or quasi-judicial powers of administrative agencies ● licensing, enabling, or appoving
● Jurisdiction limited o NOT judicial but is administrative or quasi-judicial
● Extent of powers depends largely on enabling act ● fixing rates and charges
● Function ordinarily judicial may be conferred o either a legislative or an adjudicative function
o Interpret and apply contracts ▪ where the rules and/or rates laid down are meant to apply to all
o Determine the rights private parties under such contracts enterprises of a given kind throughout the country – legislative
o Award damages whenever appropriate character
● Split jurisdiction NOT favored ▪ where the rules and the rates imposed apply exclusively to a
o Rule: When an administrative body or agency is conferred quasi-judicial particular party, based upon a finding of fact – quasi-judicial
functions, all controversies relating to the subject matter pertaining to its o rates prescribed by an administrative agency in the exercise of its quasi-
specialization are deemed to be included within its jurisdiction. judicial function – prior notice and hearing are essential to the validity of
● Grant of particular power must be found in the law instead such rates
o Except for constitutional officials who can trace their competence to act to ▪ BUT an administrative agency may be empowered by law to
the fundamental law itself approve provisionally, when demanded by urgent public need,
● General policy to uphold exercise rates of public utilities without a hearing
o It is the general policy of the courts to sustain the decision of administrative o In any case, the rates must both be:
authorities not only on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers but 1. non-confiscatory; and
also for their presumed knowledgeability and even expertise in the laws they 2. established in the manner prescribed by legislature
are entrusted to enforce. ● miscellaneous acts
o Adjudicatory powers have also been classified as:
Distinguished from investigative power A. quasi-judicial or judicial in nature
adjudicatory investigative power B. administrative
● to settle in the exercise of judicial ● to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain ● auditing accounts of a received of public moneys;
authority information

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
● determinations of the Civil Service Commission (CSC)
in respect of classification and grading of positions in
the civil service;
● passing upon a petition to call an election;
● the function of draft boards;
● investigation for the purpose of ascertaining the
correctness of a tax return;
● the parole of prisoners, at least so long as the duration
of the sentence is not affected, and the revocation of
parole;
● the transfer of prisons from one place of imprisonment
to another;
● making a preliminary finding of probably cause for the
arrest of an accused;
● the initial determination of whether certain things
constitute public nuisances;
● closing and taking charge of banks found to be
insolvent or unsafe and assessment of their
stockholders;
● determination whether or not there had been a
violations of terms of collective bargaining agreement
(CBA);
● the issuance of a warrant of distraint or levy in tax
cases and certain other administrative enforcement
devices; and
● deportation of alien.
Classification of adjudicatory powers
A. enabling powers
o usually characterized by the grant or denial of permit or authorization
B. directing powers – illustrated by the:
o corrective powers of public utility commissions;
o powers of assessment under the revenue laws;
o reparations under public utility laws;
o awards under workmen’s compensation laws; and
o powers of abstract determination such as:
▪ definition-valuation;
▪ classification; and
▪ fact-finding
C. dispensing powers
o exemplified by:
▪ authority to exempt from or relax a general prohibition; or
▪ authority to relive from an affirmative duty
o sanctions a deviation from a standard
D. summary powers
o used to designate administrative power to apply compulsion or force against
person or property to effectuate a legal purpose without a judicial warrant to
authorize such action
o summary in both senses of the term, that is, they involve direct
administrative action taken without notice and hearing
1
Ang Tibay vs. CIR (1940).
MVL
▪ abatement of nuisance;
▪ summary restraint; or
▪ levy of property of delinquent taxpayers
E. equitable powers
o consideration and proper application of the rules of equity
o such as:
▪ power to appoint a receiver; or
▪ power to issue “injunctions”
Cardinal rights of parties in administrative proceedings1
1. right to Hearing
2. tribunal must Consider evidence presented
3. evidence must be Substantial
4. tribunal’s Independent consideration of facts and law
5. decision must be Based on evidence presented
6. decision must have something to Support itself
7. decision Rendered in such a way that the parties know the issues and the
reason
CASES
Commissioner of lnternal Revenue vs. Court of Appeals (1996)
(nature of QL, QJ proceedings)
• The CIR may not disregard legal requirements or applicable principles in the exercise
of its quasi-legislative powers.
• RMC 37–93 cannot be viewed simply as a corrective measure or merely as construing
Section 142(c)(1) of the NIRC.
o A reading of RMC 37–93, particularly considering the circumstances under
which it has been issued, convinces us that the circular cannot be viewed
simply as a corrective measure (revoking in the process the previous
holdings of past Commissioners) or merely as construing Section 142(c)(1)
of the NIRC, as amended, but has, in fact and most importantly, been made
in order to place “Hope Luxury,” “Premium More” and “Champion” within the
classification of locally manufactured cigarettes bearing foreign brands and
to thereby have them covered by RA 7654. Specifically, the new law would
have its amendatory provisions applied to locally manufactured cigarettes
which at the time of its effectivity were not so classified as bearing foreign
brands. Prior to the issuance of the questioned circular, “Hope Luxury,”
“Premium More,” and “Champion” cigarettes were in the category of locally
manufactured cigarettes not bearing foreign brand subject to 45% ad
valorem tax. Hence, without RMC 37–93, the enactment of RA 7654, would
have had no new tax rate consequence on private respondent’s products.
Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Fortune Tobacco Corporation (2008)
• The Court held that in case of discrepancy between the law as amended and the
implementing regulation based on the old law, the former necessarily prevails.
o The Court emphasized that tax administrators are not allowed to expand or
contract the legislative mandate and that the “plain meaning rule” or verba
legis in statutory construction should be applied such that where the words
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
of a statute are clear, plain and free from ambiguity, it must be given its
literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation.
o Administrative regulations must always be in harmony with the provisions of
the law because any resulting discrepancy between the two will always be
resolved in favor of the basic law.
o The Court nullified the circular, ruling that the Bureau of Internal Revenue
(BIR) did not simply interpret the law; rather it legislated guidelines contrary
to the statute passed by Congress.
Soriano vs. Secretary of Finance (2017)
(limitations on AA rule-making power)
• An administrative agency may not enlarge, alter or restrict a provision of law. It
cannot add to the requirements provided by law. To do so constitutes
lawmaking, which is generally reserved for Congress.
o As we have previously declared, rule-making power must be confined to
details for regulating the mode or proceedings in order to carry into effect
the law as it has been enacted, and it cannot be extended to amend or
expand the statutory requirements or to embrace matters not covered by the
statute. Administrative regulations must always be in harmony with the
provisions of the law because any resulting discrepancy between the two
will always be resolved in favor of the basic law.
▪ The BIR added a requirement NOT found in the law.
• Sections 1 and 3 of RR 10-2008 add a requirement
NOT found in the law by effectively declaring that an
MWE who receives other benefits in excess of the
statutory limit of P30,000 is no longer entitled to
exemption provided by R.A. 9504.
Alliance for the Family Foundation, Philippines, Inc. (ALFI) vs. Garin (2017)
(nature of QJ proceedings)
• The powers of an administrative body are classified into two (2) fundamental powers:
quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial.
o Quasi-legislative power, otherwise known as the power of subordinate
legislation, has been defined as the authority delegated by the lawmaking
body to the administrative body to adopt rules and regulations intended to
carry out the provisions of law and implement legislative policy.
o Quasi-judicial power is known as the power of the administrative agency to
determine questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply, in
accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself.
▪ As it involves the exercise of discretion in determining the rights
and liabilities of the parties, the proper exercise of quasi-judicial
power requires the concurrence of two (2) elements:
• one, jurisdiction which must be acquired by the
administrative body; and
• two, the observance of the requirements of due
process, that is, the right to notice and hearing.
• When there is grave abuse of discretion, such as denying a party of his constitutional
right to due process, the Supreme Court (SC) can come in and exercise its power of
judicial review.
o It can review the challenged acts, whether exercised by the FDA in its
ministerial, quasi-judicial or regulatory power. In the past, the Court
exercised its power of judicial review over acts and decisions of agencies
MVL
exercising their regulatory powers, such as DPWH, TRB, NEA, and the
SEC, among others.
o Nowhere in Batas Pambansa (BP) Blg. 129, as amended, are the courts
ousted of their jurisdiction whenever the issues involve questions of
scientific nature.
• In order that a particular act may not be impugned as violative of the due process
clause, there must be compliance with both the substantive and the procedural
requirements thereof.
o As expounded by the Supreme Court (SC), what it found to be primarily
deplorable is the failure of the respondents to act upon, much less address,
the various oppositions filed by the petitioners against the product
registration, recertification, procurement, and distribution of the questioned
contraceptive drugs and devices.
• In Ang Tibay vs. CIR (1940), the Supreme Court (SC) laid down the cardinal rights of
parties in administrative proceedings:
1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and
submit evidence in support thereof;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
3. The decision must have something to support itself;
4. The evidence must be substantial;
5. 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;
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges 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; and
7. The board or 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 reason for the decision rendered.
• Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is not strictly bound by the technical
rules on evidence, as stated in the Rules of Court, or it cannot be bound by the
principle of stare decisis or res judicata, it is NOT excused from complying with the
requirements of due process.
o The Supreme Court (SC) is of the view that the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) need NOT conduct a trial-type hearing.
o The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) need not be bound or limited by
the evidence adduced by the parties, but it can conduct its own search for
related scientific data.
Castillo vs. Napolcom Adjudication Board (1987)
(QL power to issue rules of procedure)
• Petition for certiorari, fatally defective as it has not raised a question of jurisdiction.
o lt is immediately noticeable that this petition suffers from a fatal defect in
that nowhere does it raise a question of jurisdiction, which is the only
question involved in certiorari. The petitioner does not allege, nor does he
set out to prove, that the respondent board acted without jurisdiction, or in
excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion in rendering the
questioned decision and resolutions. Even on this basis alone, this petition
compels a dismissal.
• Principle that findings of fact of an administrative board or officials, like respondent
NAPOLCOM Adjudication Board, following a hearing, are binding and conclusive upon
the courts so long as they are supported by substantial evidence.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o Petitioner policeman is guilty of illegal arrest for arresting respondents
without a warrant, and for arbitrary detention, which constitute grave
misconduct.
▪ It is immaterial that the offense of illegal arrest was not one of the
charges filed against petitioner because the evidence
satisfactorily proved the commission of the charge; Proceedings
before administrative bodies are governed by their own rules of
procedure which are construed liberally.
• Besides, proceedings before administrative bodies
are governed by their own rules of procedure which
are to be construed liberally in order to effect the
just, speedy, and inexpensive settlement and
disposition of disputes between the parties.
▪ Proceedings before the board are tainted with illegality as the
detention was without legal grounds, and the arrest had been
made without a warrant.
Esquig vs. Civil Service Commission (1990)
(Are AA proceedings technical?)
• Ruling that the commission does not strictly adhere to legal technicalities is supported
by jurisprudence.
o The Commission held, however, that Ferrer's omission to furnish the
appellee with a copy of her appeal "would not stop the Commission in
deciding the case on the merits" for “we do not strictly adhere to legal
technicalities.”
• Administrative proceedings are not bound by the rigid requirements of the Rules of
Court.
o The important consideration is that both parties were afforded an
opportunity to be heard and they availed themselves of it to present their
respective positions on the matter in dispute.
Biraogo vs. Philippine Truth Commission of 2010 (2010)
(nature of investigatory proceedings)
• The creation of the Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) finds justification under
Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution, imposing upon the President the duty to
ensure that the laws are faithfully executed.
o While the power to create a truth commission cannot pass muster on the
basis of P.D. No. 1416 as amended by P.D. No. 1772, the creation of the
PTC finds justification under Section 17, Article VII of the Constitution,
imposing upon the President the duty to ensure that the laws are faithfully
executed.
▪ Section 17. The President shall have control of all the executive
departments, bureaus, and offices. He shall ensure that the laws
be faithfully executed.
o As correctly pointed out by the respondents, the allocation of power in the
three (3) principal branches of government is a grant of all powers inherent
in them.
o The President’s power to conduct investigations to aid him in ensuring the
faithful execution of laws—in this case, fundamental laws on public
accountability and transparency—is inherent in the President’s powers as
the Chief Executive.
▪ That the authority of the President to conduct investigations and
to create bodies to execute this power is not explicitly mentioned
MVL
in the Constitution or in statutes does not mean that he is bereft of
such authority.
• The purpose of allowing ad hoc investigating bodies to exist is to allow an inquiry into
matters which the President is entitled to know so that he can be properly advised and
guided in the performance of his duties relative to the execution and enforcement of
the laws of the land.
• Quasi-judicial powers involve the power to hear and determine questions of fact to
which the legislative policy is to apply and to decide in accordance with the standards
laid down by law itself in enforcing and administering the same law.
o No quasi-judicial powers have been vested in the Philippine Truth
Commission (PTC) as it cannot adjudicate rights of persons who come
before it.
• “Power to Investigate,” and “Power to Adjudicate,” Distinguished.
o “Investigate,” commonly understood, means to examine, explore, inquire or
delve or probe into, research on, study. The dictionary definition of
“investigate” is “to observe or study closely: inquire into systematically: “to
search or inquire into: x x to subject to an official probe x x: to conduct an
official inquiry.” The purpose of investigation, of course, is to discover, to
find out, to learn, obtain information. Nowhere included or intimated is the
notion of settling, deciding or resolving a controversy involved in the facts
inquired into by application of the law to the facts established by the inquiry.
The legal meaning of “investigate” is essentially the same: “(t)o follow up
step by step by patient inquiry or observation. To trace or track; to search
into; to examine and inquire into with care and accuracy; to find out by
careful inquisition; examination; the taking of evidence; a legal inquiry;” “to
inquire; to make an investigation,” “investigation” being in turn described as
“(a)n administrative function, the exercise of which ordinarily does not
require a hearing. 2 Am J2d Adm L Sec. 257; x x an inquiry, judicial or
otherwise, for the discovery and collection of facts concerning a certain
matter or matters.”
o “Adjudicate,” commonly or popularly understood, means to adjudge,
arbitrate, judge, decide, determine, resolve, rule on, settle. The dictionary
defines the term as “to settle finally (the rights and duties of the parties to a
court case) on the merits of issues raised: x x to pass judgment on: settle
judicially: x x act as judge.” And “adjudge” means “to decide or rule upon as
a judge or with judicial or quasi-judicial powers: x x to award or grant
judicially in a case of controversy x x.” In the legal sense, “adjudicate”
means: “To settle in the exercise of judicial authority. To determine finally.
Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense;” and “adjudge” means: “To
pass on judicially, to decide, settle or decree, or to sentence or condemn.
x x. Implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the entry of a judgment.”
• Fact-finding is not adjudication and it cannot be likened to the judicial function of a
court of justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency or office. The function of receiving
evidence and ascertaining therefrom the facts of a controversy is not a judicial
function. To be considered as such, the act of receiving evidence and arriving at
factual conclusions in a controversy must be accompanied by the authority of applying
the law to the factual conclusions to the end that the controversy may be decided or
resolved authoritatively, finally and definitively, subject to appeals or modes of review
as may be provided by law.
o The Philippine Truth Commission (PTC) will not supplant the Ombudsman
or the Department of Justice (DOJ) or erode their respective powers—if at
all, the investigative function of the commission will complement those of the
two offices; The Ombudsman’s power to investigate under Republic Act
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
(R.A.) No. 6770 is not exclusive but is shared with other similarly authorized
government agencies.
Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management (PSALM) Corporation vs. Commissioner
of Internal Revenue (2017)
(doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies)
• Under Presidential Decree (PD) No. 242, all disputes and claims solely between
government agencies and offices, including government-owned or -controlled
corporations, shall be administratively settled or adjudicated by the Secretary of
Justice, the Solicitor General, or the Government Corporate Counsel, depending on
the issues and government agencies involved.
o The purpose of Presidential Decree (PD) No. 242 is to provide for a speedy
and efficient administrative settlement or adjudication of disputes between
government offices or agencies under the Executive branch, as well as to
filter cases to lessen the clogged dockets of the courts.
o Presidential Decree (PD) No. 242 will only apply when all the parties
involved are purely government offices and government-owned or -
controlled corporations.
o It is only proper that intragovernmental disputes be settled administratively
since the opposing government offices, agencies and instrumentalities are
all under the President’s executive control and supervision.
o Under his constitutional power of control, the President decides the dispute
between the two (2) executive offices. The judiciary cannot substitute its
decision over that of the President. Only after the President has decided or
settled the dispute can the courts’ jurisdiction be invoked.
• Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, it is mandated that
where a remedy before an administrative body is provided by statute, relief must be
sought by exhausting this remedy prior to bringing an action in court in order to give
the administrative body every opportunity to decide a matter that comes within its
jurisdiction.
o A litigant cannot go to court without first pursuing his administrative
remedies; otherwise, his action is premature and his case is not ripe for
judicial determination. PD 242 (now Chapter 14, Book IV of Executive Order
No. 292), provides for such administrative remedy. Thus, only after the
President has decided the dispute between government offices and
agencies can the losing party resort to the courts, if it so desires. Otherwise,
a resort to the courts would be premature for failure to exhaust
administrative remedies. Non-observance of the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies would result in lack of cause of action, which is one
of the grounds for the dismissal of a complaint.
• Since the amount involved in this case is more than one million pesos
(PhP1,000,000), the Department of Justice (DOJ) Secretary’s decision may be
appealed to the Office of the President in accordance with Section 70, Chapter 14,
Book IV of Executive Order (EO) No. 292 and Section 552 of Presidential
Decree (PD) No. 242.
Smart Communications, Inc. (SMART) vs. National Telecommunications Commission
(NTC) (2003)
● Administrative agencies possess quasi-legislative or rule-making powers and quasi-
judicial or administrative adjudicatory powers.
● The rules and regulations that administrative agencies promulgate, which are the
product of a delegated legislative power to create new and additional legal provisions
MVL
that have the effect of law, should be within the scope of the statutory authority
granted by the legislature to the administrative agency.
● The administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a
judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive or administrative nature.
● In questioning the validity or constitutionality of a rule or regulation issued by
an administrative agency, a party need not exhaust administrative remedies
before going to court.
● The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies only where the administrative
agency exercises its quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function.
● Where what is assailed is the validity or constitutionality of a rule or regulation
issued by the administrative agency in the performance of its quasi-legislative
function, the regular courts have jurisdiction to pass upon the same.
Republic vs. O.G. Holdings Corporation (2017)
(envi case involving doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies/ECC cancellation)
• The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that resort must first be
made with the appropriate administrative authorities in the resolution of a controversy
falling under their jurisdiction before the same may be elevated to the courts for
review.
o If a remedy within the administrative machinery is still available, with a
procedure pursuant to law for an administrative officer to decide a
controversy, a party should first exhaust such remedy before going to court.
This doctrine closely echoes the reason behind the rule providing that
before resort to the special civil action of certiorari is allowed, a motion for
reconsideration should first be filed with the public respondent concerned.
Exhaustion of administrative remedies is obliged pursuant to comity and
convenience which in turn impel courts to shy away from a dispute until the
system of administrative redress has been completed and complied with.
The issues that an administrative agency is authorized to decide should not
be summarily taken away from it and submitted to a court without first giving
the agency the opportunity to dispose of the issues.
o A motion for reconsideration is an indispensable condition before an
aggrieved party can resort to the special civil action for certiorari under Rule
65 of the Rules of Court.
▪ The Court of Appeals (CA) erred in granting O.G. Holdings’
petition when there was a failure to move for reconsideration
before seeking certiorari.
▪ The CA erred in granting O.G. Holdings’ petition when they had
failed to exhaust available administrative remedies before seeking
certiorari.
• Factual issues are not a proper subject for certiorari, which is limited to the issue of
jurisdiction and grave abuse of discretion.
o The CA erred in making factual findings in a certiorari proceeding.
San Luis vs. Court of Appeals (CA) (1989)
(finality of administrative decisions or administrative res judicata)
• Final orders and decisions of administrative agencies rendered pursuant to their
quasi-judicial authority have the force and binding effect of a final judgment within the
purview of res judicata.
o The rule of res judicata which forbids the reopening of a matter once
judicially determined by competent authority applies as well to the judicial
and quasi-judicial acts of public, executive or administrative officers and
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
boards acting within their jurisdiction as to the judgments of courts having
general judicial powers [Brillantes v. Castro, supra at 503].
o Indeed, the principle of conclusiveness of prior adjudications is not confined
in its operation to the judgments of what are ordinarily known as courts, but
it extends to all bodies upon whom judicial powers had been conferred.
▪ Hence, whenever any board, tribunal or person is by law vested
with authority to judicially determine a question, like the Merit
Systems Board of the Civil Service Commission and the Office of
the President, for instance, such determination, when it has
become final, is as conclusive between the same parties litigating
MVL
for the same cause as though the adjudication had been made by
a court of general jurisdiction.
▪ Since the decisions of both the Civil Service Commission and the
Office of the President had long become final and executory, the
same can no longer be reviewed by the courts.
o Decisions of administrative officers shall not be disturbed by the courts,
except when such officers acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with
grave abuse of discretion.
-oOo-
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
CHAPTER IV
SEPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE AND OTHER POWERS
Doctrine of separation of powers
• The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our system of government.
o It obtains not through express provision but by actual division in our
Constitution.
• Allocation of governmental powers
o It declares that governmental powers are divided among the three (3)
departments of government, the legislative, executive, and judicial.
• Exclusive exercise of assigned powers
o The powers assigned to one department should NOT be exercised by either
of the other departments, and that NO department ought to possess, directly
or indirectly, an overruling influence or control over the others.
• Bending of allocated powers
o An exact delimitation of governmental powers is NOT possible.
o Separation of powers does NOT mean an entire and complete separation of
powers or functions.
Doctrine of non-delegation of powers
• Corollary of separation of powers doctrine
o It prohibits the delegation of legislative power, the vesting of judicial officers
with non-judicial functions, as well as the investing of non-judicial officers
with judicial powers.
• Basis
o It is based on the maxim of potestas delagata non potest delegari which
means “what has been delegated CANNOT in turn be delegated.”
o A delegated powers constitutes NOT only a right but a duty to be performed
by the delegate by the instrumentality of his own judgment acting
immediately upon the matter and not through the intervening mind of
another.
Non-delegation of legislative power
• Non-delegation to administrative agencies
o Congress may NOT delegate to administrative agencies the legislative
powers vested in it EXCEPT when authorized by the Constitution.
• Rule fixed and unalterable
Doctrine of non-delegation not absolute
• Congress possesses a supreme but NOT exclusive legislative power.
• Agencies with combined power structure
o The doctrine of separation of power does NOT preclude a certain degree of
admixture of the three (3) powers of government in administrative agencies.
• Need for the delegation
o Matters requiring more specialized knowledge and expertise possessed by
administrative agencies
o Details and questions beyond capacity of legislature to determine
• Requisites for delegation
o Completeness of the statute making the delegation
o Presence of a sufficient standard
Delegation to administrative agencies
MVL
• Administrative agencies do NOT possess legislative (or judicial) power in the strict
sense, and such power may NOT be delegated to them, EXCEPT where otherwise
provided by the Constitution.
• It is power which is essentially or purely legislative in nature which must be exercised
by the legislature and CANNOT be delegated, and NOT one merely incidental to some
of the administrative powers for the exercise of which a board of commission was
created.
• What can be delegated is the discretion to determine HOW the law may be enforced,
NOT what the law shall be.
• The legislature may delegate its authority to make findings of fact.
• When the legislature laid down the fundamentals of a law, it may delegate to
administrative agencies the authority to exercise such legislative power as is
necessary to carry into effect the general legislative power.
• Under the sufficient standard test, there must be adequate guidelines or limitations
in the law to map out the boundaries of the delegate authority and prevent the
delegation from running riot.
• The modern tendency is to be more liberal in permitting grants if discretion to
administrative agencies in order to facilitate the administration of laws as the
complexity of economic and governmental conditions increases.
• The standard to guide an administrative agency in the exercise of its rule-making
power may be either express or implied.
o It could be implied from the policy and purpose of the statute considered as
a whole.
• In case of a delegation of a rate-fixing power, the only standard which the
legislature is required to prescribe for the guidance of the administrative authority is
that the rate be reasonable and just. However, even in the absence of an express
requirement as to reasonableness, this standard may be implied.
• Another accepted test to determine whether or not there is a valid delegation of
legislative power is the completeness test.
o Under this test, a statute must be complete in itself so that by appropriate
judicial review and control, any action taken pursuant to delegated authority
may be kept within the defined limits of the authority conferred.
• The rule of non-delegation of legislative power does NOT apply:
o when permitted by the Constitution; and
o in case of delegation to local governments.
Sufficiency of standards
• Dependent upon certain considerations
o It depends upon the nature of the power exercised and the nature of the
right restricted by such power.
o It also depends upon whether or not proper regulation or control requires
the vesting of such discretion.
• Detailed standard NOT required
o especially in regulatory enactments under the police power
o The legislature is NOT required to provide such a standard as confers the
least amount of discretion.
• Examples of standards held sufficient
o “necessity”
o “necessary of expedient”
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o “appropriate” o It is recognized that some judicial powers may be conferred upon and
o “reasonable” exercised by administrative agencies without violating constitutional
o “just and reasonable” provisions inhibiting the “delegation” of judicial power.
o “fair and equitable” o However, the judicial power which may be exercised by administrative
o “sufficient” agencies is a restricted one, limited to what is incidental and reasonably
o “excessive profits” necessary to the proper and efficient administration of the statutes that are
o “unduly complicated corporate structures and inequitable distributions of committed to them for administration.
voting power”
o “fit” or “unfit” Law where standard may be expressed or contained
o “suitable” or “unsuitable” • Standard may be prescribed in the law itself
o “competency, ability and integrity” o expressly stated; or
o “safe, pure, and afford a satisfactorily light” o implied in the statute conferring the power
o “worthy cause” • Standard may be found in other sources
o “decency and good order” o other pertinent legislation;
o “substantial” o executive order; or
o “undesirable residents” o field of law governing the operation of the agency
o “undesirable business practices”
o “unprofessional conduct” Exceptions to rule requiring standards or guides
o “misconduct” • Instances in which uncontrolled discretion may be vested on administrative
o “offensive because of injurious and obnoxious noise, vibrations, smoke, gas, agencies:
and other factors” o Handling of state property or funds
o “injurious substances” o A power which is not directly or exclusively a legislative one in the exercise
o “danger to peace or safety” of which the State is supreme and may act at its pleasure, and which has no
o “public interest” relation whatsoever to personal or property rights
o “public convenience or necessity” o Field which is purely administrative
o “a clear and present danger” o Power of a Board to make recommendations which bind no one
o “imminent and grave danger of a substantive evil” o Matters which are in the nature of privileges as to the using of property, the
• Personal judgment of the agency as standard engaging in occupations, or the committing of acts which might well be
o The personal judgment of the agency, where unrestrained, is NOT a forbidden altogether, but which under the certain conditions may be
standard or a sufficient standard. harmless or well-managed
o Impracticable to lay down a definite comprehensive rule, such as where
Restriction on grant of judicial power regulation turns upon the question of personal fitness
• Since the legislature cannot exercise judicial functions, it certainly is precluded from o Act relates to the administration of a police regulation and is necessary to
delegating the exercise of judicial functions to administrative agencies or officers. protect the general welfare, morals, and safety of the public
• It, by no means, follows that it may NOT perform functions which are in their nature, • The courts will infer that the standard of reasonableness is to be applied.
judicial, and possess and exercise quasi-judicial powers.
-oOo-

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
CHAPTER V
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS

Generally o An administrative tribunal has only such jurisdiction and power as are
• Agency acts both in legislative and judicial capacity expressly or by necessary implications conferred upon it by law.
• Fundamental procedural requirements to be observed • Source
• Proceeding terminates when appeal has been taken o dependent entirely upon the validity and the terms of the statutes reposing
power in them
Character of Proceedings • Conduct; waiver; estoppel
• Adversary in nature o An administrative agency CANNOT enlarge its own jurisdiction NOR can
o may result in an order in favor of one persons against another jurisdiction be conferred upon the agency by parties before it.
o primary purpose of agency is to protect the public interests o Deviations from an agency’s statutorily established sphere of action
o examples CANNOT be upheld because it is based upon agreement, contract, or
▪ proceedings before the Securities and Exchange Commission consent of the parties; NOR can they be made effective by waiver or
(SEC) estoppel.
▪ unfair labor practices procedure before the National Labor • Determination of existence
Relations Commission (NLRC) o When a particular statute authorizes an administrative agency to act in a
▪ revocation of a license upon an order to show cause particular situation, it necessarily confers upon such agency authority to
• Quasi-judicial or judicial in nature determine whether the situation is such as to authorize the agency to act.
o partake the nature of judicial proceedings if it involves: o An administrative agency’s determination as to its jurisdiction is NOT
▪ taking and evaluation of evidence; conclusive upon the courts.
▪ determination of facts based upon the evidence presented; and • Failure to exercise power
▪ rendering an order or decision supported by the facts proved o A failure to exercise jurisdiction does NOT result in its loss.
• Civil, NOT criminal, in nature • Expiration or repeal of statute
o even though the charge before the agency is based upon a violation of o may be held NOT to deprive an administrative agency of jurisdiction to
penal law enforce the statute as to liabilities incurred while the statute was in force,
o NOT exempt from basic and fundamental procedural principles such as the where a general saving statute continues such liabilities.
right to due process in investigations and hearings • Jurisdiction of courts
o examples o Administrative agencies are creatures of law, and they have NO general
▪ discipline of police officers powers but only such as have been conferred upon them by law.
▪ license revocation o Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, if the case is such that its
▪ quarantine proceedings determination requires the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the
▪ deportation proceedings proper administrative bodies because technical matters of intricate
• Not an action at law questions of facts are involved, then relief must be obtained in an
o NOR is a litigation between private parties administrative proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by the courts
o Under some statutes, an administrative proceeding is NOT a private one but even though the matter is within the proper jurisdiction of a court.
is a public one looking to public ends.
o Some are NEITHER preventive NOR compensatory, BUT are preventive Procedure to be followed (Administrative Procedure)
and remedial to implement a public policy. • Administrative procedure may refer to the procedure for performing purely executive
or ministerial functions, or for rule-making, or for adjudication of disputes.
Jurisdiction • Statute and/or rules
• Definition o The procedure may be prescribed in the statute creating the agency or in
o Jurisdiction is the power and authority given by law to hear and decide a the rules promulgated by the agency by authority of law.
case. • Reasonable method
• Elements o Where the statute does NOT require any particular method of procedure to
1. jurisdiction over the subject matter; and be followed by an administrative agency, the agency may adopt any
2. jurisdiction over the person reasonable method to carry out its functions.
• Necessity o In proceedings before administrative bodies, technical rules of procedure
o essential to give validity to the determinations of administrative agencies and evidence are NOT binding.
o VOID judgment is NO judgment at all o Administrative due process CANNOT be fully equated to due process in its
• Scope strict judicial sense.
• Informal methods of adjudication

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o A great mass of administrative adjudications are made informally, especially
where the decision is made upon inspection or tests, or complaints are
disposed of by consent or correspondence.
Rules of adjudication under the Administrative Code
Controversies among government offices and corporations
• How settled
o administratively settled or adjudicated
o NOT apply to disputes involving:
▪ Congress;
▪ Supreme Court;
▪ Constitutional Commissions; and
▪ local governments
• Disputes involving questions of law
o shall be submitted to and settled or adjudicated by the Secretary of Justice
as Attorney-General of the National Government and as ex officio legal
adviser of all government-owned or -controlled corporations
▪ ruling or decision shall be conclusive and binding on all the
parties concerned
• Disputes involving questions of fact and law
o shall be submitted to and settled or adjudicated by:
▪ the Solicitor General, if the dispute, claim or controversy involves
only departments, bureaus, offices and other agencies of the
National Government as well as GOCCs or entities of whom he is
the principal law officer or general counsel; and
▪ the Secretary of Justice, in all other cases NOT falling under the
preceding paragraph
• Arbitration
o The determination of factual issues may be referred to an arbitration panel
composed one (1) representative each of the parties involved and presided
over by a representative of the Secretary of Justice or the Solicitor General,
as the case may be.
• Appeals
o The decision shall be final and binding upon the parties involved.
o Appeals may, however, be taken to the President where the amount of the
claim or the value of the property exceeds ₱1,000,000.
• Rules and regulations
o The Secretary of Justice shall promulgate the rules and regulations
necessary.
Due process of law in administrative adjudication
• Nature
o NOT merely statutory; constitutional right
• Essence
o basic requirement of notice and real opportunity to be heard
▪ simply means an opportunity to explain one’s side or an
opportunity to seek a reconsideration of the action or ruling
complained of, and to submit any evidence a person may have in
support of his defense
MVL
o For as long as the parties were afforded fair and reasonable opportunity to
be heard and to submit evidence in support of their arguments before
judgment was rendered, the demands of due process are sufficiently met.
o Technical rules of procedure and evidence are NOT strictly applied.
o One may be heard, NOT solely by verbal presentation but also, and
perhaps many times more creditably and practicable than oral agreement,
through pleadings. There is NO violation of procedural due process even if
NO formal or trial-type hearing was conducted.
• Standard
o Procedural due process in administrative proceedings follows a more
flexible standard.
o Administrative tribunals exercising quasi-judicial powers are thus free from
the rigidity of certain procedural requirements observed in the courts as long
as its proceedings are conducted in an atmosphere of justice and fairness.
• Requisites
o Right to notice
o Right to reasonable opportunity to appear personally or with assistance of
counsel and defend his rights and to introduce witness and relevant
evidence in his favor, by testimony or otherwise, and to controvert the
evidence of the other party
o Right to tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction, so constituted as to give
him reasonable assurance of honesty and impartiality
o Right to a finding or decision by that tribunal supported by substantial
evidence presented at the hearing
• Right to counsel
o A party in an administrative inquiry may or may not be assisted by counsel
irrespective of the nature of the charges and of respondents capacity to
represent himself.
• Effect of non-observance
o Denial of due process constitutes grave abuse of discretion and may result
in the invalidation of the administrative proceedings and the order or
determination entered against a party.
Institution of proceedings
• Ex parte application
o applicant for license, permit, approval, or consent
o filing of a claim or an application for benefits
• Filing of complaint
o by an aggrieved person on the basis of which notice of hearing is issued
• Motu proprio
o on their own initiative, motion, or complaint
Necessity for notice and hearing
• Executive, administrative, or legislative matter
o General Rule: Notice and hearing are NOT essential to the validity of
administrative action where the administrative body acts in the exercise of
executive, administrative, or legislative functions.
• Judicial or quasi-judicial matter
o The person whose rights or property may be affected by the action is
entitled to notice and hearing.
Sufficiency of notice
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
• Substantial compliance is sufficient.
• Where a statute or rule provides the manner, form, and time of notice, the notice must Requirement of notice and hearing by law or regulations
conform with the prescribed provisions, at least substantially, and a statutory provision • Where provided by law
may NOT be altered by a rule of the administrative agency. o Such statutory requisite must be met or the determination is invalid.
• Where NOT provided by law
Waiver of right to notice o It is to be determined by the terms of the particular statute and the attendant
• Generally: The right to notice in an administrative proceeding may be waived since circumstances.
notice goes to jurisdiction of the person rather than of the subject matter. • Where provided by regulations
• Personal notice is NOT required where it is impossible to give such notice to all parties o The regulations may be held to embrace all the elements of a fair hearing.
who may be interested in the matter, which parties are unknown.
Constitutional requirement of notice and hearing
Denial of due process may be cured • Generally essential to due process
• What the law prohibits is NOT the absence of previous notice, but absolute absence o The fundamental or essential requirement of procedural due process of law
thereof and lack of opportunity to be heard. is notice and hearing, that is, opportunity to be heard either before a court or
• A motion for reconsideration or appeal availed of within the administrative agency is an administrative agency.
curative in character on the issue of alleged denial of due process. • Not essential in exercise of EXECUTIVE or LEGISLATIVE functions
o Notice and hearing, as the fundamental requirements of procedural due
Elements or essentials of right to hearing process, are essential only when an administrative body exercises its
• Scope of right QUASI-JUDICIAL function.
o The right to a full hearing includes the right of the party interested or o In the performance of EXECUTIVE or LEGISLATIVE functions, such as
affected: issuing rules and regulations, an administrative body need NOT comply with
▪ to present his case or defense, and submit evidence, oral or the requirements of notice and hearing.
documentary, in support thereof;
▪ to know the claims of the opposing party and to meet them; Proceedings in which NO hearing is required
▪ to cross-examine witnesses for a full and true disclosure of the • Due process dependent upon the circumstances
facts; and • Nature of right affected
▪ to submit rebuttal evidence o Notice and hearing are necessary in order to comply with due process of
• Actual hearing/ cross-examination NOT always essential law only constitutional rights is claimed to be invaded and the Constitution
o It is NOT always an indispensable aspect of due process. does NOT require a trial-type hearing in every conceivable case of
government impairment of private interest.
Duty of administrative body to consider the evidence presented o NOT essential/necessary in the following cases:
• Rationale ▪ purpose of an administrative determination is to decide whether a
o The right to adduce evidence, without the corresponding duty on the part of right or privilege which an applicant does NOT possess shall be
the agency to consider it, is in vain. granted to him or withheld in the exercise of a discretion vested
• Independent consideration of the case by statute
o The body or official must act on its or his own consideration of the law and ▪ NO personal or property rights are involved but only a privilege
the facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a ▪ where a right is granted conditionally and subject to termination
subordinate. • Nature of power exercised
• Clear as to issues involved and reasons for decisions o The requirement of notice and hearing is NOT essential where the
o in such a manner that the parties to the proceeding can known the various proceeding or power exercised is LEGISLATIVE, EXECUTIVE,
issues involved, and the reasons for the decisions rendered ADMINISTRATIVE, or MINISTERIAL in nature.
• Instances when requirement NOT essential in adjudicatory proceeding
Investigation and hearing distinguished o summary abatement of nuisance per se
Investigation Hearing o summary proceedings of distraint and levy upon the property of the taxpayer
• have NO parties • There are parties and issues of law and o preventive suspension of a public office pending investigation
• NOT proceedings in which action is of fact to be tried and at the conclusion o interlocutory orders
taken against anyone of the hearing, action is taken which • Waiver of right
may affect the rights of the parties. o The right to a hearing or the right to particular elements of a fair trial may be
• Parties are entitled to be present in waived.
person and by counsel, participate in
the hearing, and entitled to be furnished Applicability of rules governing judicial proceedings
a record of the proceedings. • Rules of Court may be applied suppletorily

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
• Strict legal rules NOT applicable
• Due process requirement to be observed
Delegation of authority to hear and receive evidence
• Allowed as a practical necessity
• Essential that judgment and discretion are finally exercised by proper officer
• Essential that due process requirements are observed
• Essential that proper officer acts in his own independent judgment
Evidence in administrative proceedings
• Application of strict rules of evidence
o 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.
• Particular judicial rules
• Essential rules of evidence
o While quasi-judicial bodies are NOT bound by the technical rules of
procedure in the adjudication of cases, this procedure should NOT be
construed as a license to disregard certain fundamental evidentiary rules.
• Probative value
o Not only must there be some evidence to support a finding or conclusion,
but the evidence must be substantial.
• Hearsay rule
o Hearsay evidence is generally held admissible in proceedings before
administrative agencies, at least for limited purposes, especially when not
objected to.
▪ It may be used for the purpose of supplementing or explaining
any direct evidence.
▪ However, hearsay evidence has been held inadmissible, at least
where the question at issue is NOT a matter of opinion, such as
valuation of property but purely a question of fact which is
susceptible of accurate determination, such as the amount of
gross receipts from retail sales.
▪ Hearsay evidence once admitted is subject to the substantial
evidence test upon judicial review.
• Admission and declarations
o The following have been held admissible in administrative proceedings:
▪ dying declarations;
▪ declarations of deceased persons against their interest; and
▪ other admissions and declarations against interest
o General Rule: Self-serving declarations are excluded.
• Evidence offered during the hearing
o All the parties in an administrative proceeding must be fully or fairly
appraised of the evidence submitted or to be considered.
• Agency files and records
o An administrative agency may take notice of data on file or results reached
by it in other cases where such is made known and there is adequate
opportunity for rebuttal.
• Secret or confidential information
o General Rule: In adjudicatory proceedings involving primarily interests of
private litigants, information CANNOT be withheld from the parties on the
MVL
ground that it is of confidential nature and at the same time be used as a
basis for decision by the administrative agency.
o However, there are cases which support the proposition that in some
instances, a right to a hearing does not include the right to know information
which must be kept secret in the public interest.
• Quantum of proof
o Rule: The findings of fact of administrative agencies must be respected, so
long as they are supported by substantial evidence.
▪ Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion even if other equally reasonable minds might
conceivably opine, otherwise.
o An administrative body may NOT require a degree of proof higher than
substantial evidence and the rules of administrative due process enunciated
in Ang Tibay.
1. The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s
case and submit evidence in support thereof;
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
3. The decision must have something to support itself;
4. The evidence must be substantial;
5. 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;
6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges 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; and
7. The board or 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 reason for the decision
rendered.
o The presumption of regularity accorded to ordinary administrative
proceedings does NOT apply to such proceedings resulting in the
deprivation of a citizen or a taxpayer of his property.
o The court attached NO persuasive value to a desistance, especially when
executed as an afterthought. Withdrawal of a complaint or the execution of
an affidavit of desistance does NOT automatically result in the dismissal of
an administrative case.
Decision or orders
• Necessity of findings
o Express findings are necessary or desirable:
▪ To know upon what the action of the administrative agency is
based;
▪ To protect and assure the parties against careless and arbitrary
action;
▪ To enable courts to perform their function of review; and
▪ To give the reviewing court the assistance of an expert judgment
on the matters entrusted to the agency for initial determination
• Form
o Administrative decisions or orders must in particular cases conform to the
statutes and the rules of the agency governing the particular proceeding as
well as applicable constitutional prescriptions.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o They must:
▪ be in proper form;
▪ authenticated as prescribed by statute;
▪ be entered against the proper party; and
▪ be sufficiently definite and certain to inform the party what is
required to be done, and to enable the courts, in proper cases, to
enforce them.
• Finality
o General Rule: They become executory only after they have become final
and executory.
▪ Exception: execution pending appeal
o A judgment becomes final and executory after the lapse of the reglementary
period of appeal if no appeal is perfected, or an appeal therefrom having
been taken the judgment in the appellate court becomes final.
o Decisions of the following are NOT immediately executory and are stayed
when an appeal is filed before the Court of Appeals:
▪ Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
▪ Civil Aeronautics Administration
o Decisions of the following are immediately executory even pending appeal
because the pertinent law mandate them to be so:
▪ Civil Service Commission (CSC)
▪ Office of the President (OP)
Where administrative agency is a collegiate body
• The powers and duties of an administrative agency or board composed of members or
commissioners may not be exercised by the individua members separately. Their acts
are official only when done by the members convened in session, upon a concurrence
of at least a majority and with at least a quorum present.
• Where the action needed is not of the individuals composing a board but of the official
body, the members must be together and act in their official capacity, and the action
should appear in the records of the Board.
Power of administrative agencies to modify their decisions
• Conditions
o Administrative determinations are subject to reconsideration and changes
so long as no rights have vested in the meantime by reason thereof, and so
long as they have not passed beyond the control of the administrative
authorities, as where determinations are not final but interlocutory, or where
the powers and jurisdiction of the administrative authorities are continuing in
character.
• Grounds
o In particular, administrative authorities have the power to modify their
determinations on the ground of fraud of imposition, mistake, surprise,
inadvertence, or newly discovered evidence, or to meet the changed
conditions, whether by reason of express statutory provision granting the
power of revision or by reason of principles applied by courts.
Application of the doctrine of res judicata
• The doctrine of res judicata provides that a final judgment on the merits rendered by
a court of competent jurisdiction is conclusive as to the rights of the parties and their
privies and constitutes an absolute bar to subsequent action involving the same
demand, claim, or cause of action.
MVL
• As affected by statutory provisions
o The rule of res judicata is applicable to determinations in the field of
administrative law as well as to courts whenever consistent with he purpose
of the tribunal, board, or officer.
• As to administrative decisions judicially reviewed
o The doctrine has been applied to administrative action that has been
characterized by the court as “adjudicatory,” “judicial,” or “quasi-judicial.”
o The rules of res judicata have been held to be NOT applicable to
administrative determinations of “administrative,” “executive,” “legislative,” or
“ministerial” nature.
▪ The principle of res judicata may NOT be invoked in labor
relations proceedings considering that such proceedings are
“non-litigious and summary in nature without regard to legal
technicalities obtaining in courts of law.”
• As affected by statutory provisions
o It is a matter of interpreting the enabling statute.
• As to administrative decisions judicially reviewed
o Where an administrative determination has been reviewed by the courts, the
res judicata, if any attaches to the court’s judgment rather than to the
administrative action.
• As to invalid judgments
o Only a valid and final judgment can be res judicata.
Administrative appeal and review
• Hierarchy of authorities
o A review may be had within the administrative system itself of the action of
lower administrative authorities by their superiors.
o A particular administrative body is authorized to hear and decide appeals
from, and review the determinations of, certain other administrative bodies
or officers.
• Types and kinds
o that which inheres in the relation of administrative superior to administrative
subordinate where determinations are made at lower levels of the same
agency or department;
o that embraced in statutes which provide for a determination to be made by a
particular officer or body subject to appeal, review, or redetermination by
another officer or body in the same agency or in the same administrative
system;
o that in which the statute makes or attempts to make a court a part of the
administrative scheme by providing in terms or effect that the court, on
review of the action of an administrative agency, shall exercise powers of
such extent that they differ from ordinary judicial functions and involve a trial
de novo of matters of fact or discretion and application of the independent
judgment of the court;
o that in which the statute provides than an order made by a division of a
Commission or Board has the same force and effect as if made by the
Commission subject to a hearing by the full Commission, for the “rehearing”
is practically an appeal to another administrative tribunal;
o that in which the statute provides for an appeal to an officer on an
intermediate level with subsequent appeal to the head of the department or
agency; and
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o that embraced in statutes which provide for appeal at the highest level,
namely, the President
• Partly entitled to appeal and review
o A party must have been affected or aggrieved by it, and must so prove.
Action by administrative appellate tribunal
• Authority to reverse must be exercised sparingly
• Review must not be arbitrary
• Review generally de novo
• Reviewing officer must be other than officer whose decision is under review
o The decision of the reviewing officer would be a biased view.
• Final and executory decisions not subject to review
• Where there is no entry of judgment
o In administrative cases, there is NO rule regarding entry or judgment.
o Where there is NO entry of judgment, finality and immutability do NOT come
into play.
• Generally
o Administrative determinations are enforceable only in the manner provided
by the statute.
• Administrative enforcement
o In the absence of statute, administrative authorities may NOT enforce their
own determinations, but statutes frequently invest them with power of
enforcement.
• Judicial enforcement
o Generally: Administrative bodies have NO power to enforce their decisions
or orders but such decisions or orders can be enforced only by the courts.
▪ Exception: as may be otherwise provided by statute
• Execution pending appeal
o Where the legislature has seen fit to declare that decision of the quasi-
judicial agency is immediately final and executory pending appeal, the law
expressly so provides; otherwise, execution of decisions takes place only
when they become final and executory.

Enforcement of administrative determinations -oOo-

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
CHAPTER VI
JUDICIAL REVIEW OF, OR RELIEF AGAINST, ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
Concept of judicial review
• In connection with action of an administrative agency, the term judicial review may
embrace any form of judicial scrutiny of a matter which arises when such action is
brough into question before a court.
o It is ordinarily available only for final administrative action
• Its underlying purpose is to assure—on the petition of interested parties—by the
intervention of ordinary courts that administrative power is exercised according to law.
• Collaboration of courts and administrative agencies
o Both are governmental instruments for realizing public purposes.
• Accommodation of administrative process to the judicial system
o Accordingly, one basic approach to judicial review is that questions of law or
validity are for the court, while questions of fact, policy, or discretion are
determinable by the administrative agency.
• Policy of the courts
o It is the policy of the courts NOT to interfere with the actions of government
agencies entrusted with the regulation of activities coming under their
special knowledge and training or specific field of expertise UNLESS there
is a clear showing of capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment or
grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
o Subject to well-settled exceptions, certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus do
NOT lie against the legislative and executive branches or the members
thereof acting in the exercise of their official functions, basically in
consideration of the respect due from the judiciary to said departments of
co-equal and coordinate ranks under the principle of separation of powers.
Purposes of judicial review
• Primary purpose
o To ensure that agencies do NOT go beyond their statutory or constitutional
powers in carrying out their tasks.
• Important check on the legality of agency action on Congress as well
o In short, separation of powers principles as well as specific provisions of the
Constitution limit the power Congress can delegate to agencies. Courts play
an important role as guardians of these constitutional principles and values.
• Institutional expertise and characteristics of courts
o Such institutional characteristics enhance the ability of courts to apply their
legal, interpretative skills in a relatively objective and independent manner.
▪ They are NOT part of any administrative agency and have NO
particular regulatory mission to fulfill.
▪ They also have a position with fixed tenure and salary that cannot
be lowered.
• Judicial review of agency of finding of facts
o Closely related to the role that courts may play in examining the
constitutional and statutory validity of what administrative agencies can
actually do, is judicial review of why agencies decide to exercise their
power.
Right to judicial review
• Reference
MVL
o The “right to judicial review” has reference both to the power and right of the
court to grant the review sought and the right in the person who invokes the
power of the court.
• Where right granted by statute
o Where judicial review is provided in the statute, the right of appeal to the
courts is to be determined by looking at:
▪ the statute;
▪ the valid regulations promulgated pursuant to it; and
▪ proven administrative practice throwing light upon their meaning.
o Rule: Where legislation provides for an appeal form decisions of certain
administrative bodies to the Court of Appeals, it means that such bodies are
co-equal with the Regional Trial Courts (RTC), in terms of role and stature,
and logically beyond the control of the latter.
• Where review NOT provided by statute
o There is NO inherent right to judicial review of the action of an
administrative agency.
o The fact, however, that a statute does NOT provide for judicial relief or
review does NOT mean that there is NO power or right of relief or review in
a proper case under the general powers and jurisdiction of the courts.
o In many situations, the Constitution is held to required judicial review even
though a statute does NOT, and even though the statute attempts to
preclude judicial review.
• Where review precluded or restricted by statute
o Very rarely do statutes withhold judicial review.
o General Rule: Where a full hearing is provided before a proper tribunal, the
determination of that tribunal may be made final, or if an appeal is allowed,
the matter to be inquired into on appeal may, in the discretion of the
legislature, be limited.
o Congress may:
▪ make an administrative determination final and immune from
judicial review where it gives the aggrieved party a right to elect in
the first place between administrative or judicial relief.
▪ may restrict review to a single court, and it need NOT provide for
appeal to the Supreme Court.
▪ may place procedural conditions and restrictions upon the right of
judicial review.
• Where review a matter of constitutional necessity
o In such situations, a court will provide relief or review though no statute
specifically provides thereof, and even though a statute attempts to preclude
review.
• Where administrative decision has become final and executory
o The rule of res judicata which forbids the reopening of a matter once
judicially determined by competent authority applies as well to the judicial
and quasi-judicial acts of administrative officers and boards acting within
their jurisdiction as to the judgments of courts having general judicial
powers.
o There is res judicata when the following requisites are present:
3. final judgment or order;
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
4.
jurisdiction of the court (or agency) over the subject matter and
the parties; and
5. identity of parties, identity of subject matter, and identity of cause
of action
• Where administrative decisions declared final and unappealable by statute
o Even decisions of certain administrative agencies which are declared “final”
by law are NOT exempt from judicial review when so warranted as where
any of the following is brought to the attention of the court:
▪ want of jurisdiction;
▪ want of substantial basis, in fact or in law;
▪ grave abuse of discretion;
▪ violation of due process;
▪ denial of substantial justice;
▪ fraud; or
▪ erroneous interpretation of the law.
• Where question or issue raised for the first time on appeal
o General Rule: No question will be determined on appeal.
▪ Exception: UNLESS it has been raised in the proceedings below
Rules governing appeals from judgments of quasi-judicial agencies
• Where to appeal
o to the Court of Appeals
• Period of appeal
o within fifteen (15) days from:
▪ notice of the award, judgment, final order or resolution; or
▪ the date of its last publication, if publication is required by law for
effectivity; or
▪ denial of petitioner’s motion for reconsideration duly filed
o only one (1) motion for reconsideration (MR) shall be allowed
• How appeal taken
o by filing a verified petition for review in seven (7) legible copies with the
Court of Appeals, with proof of service of a copy thereof on the adverse
party and on the court or agency a quo
• Contents of the petition
o full names of the parties to the case;
o concise statement of the facts and issues involved and the grounds relief
upon for the review;
o clearly legible duplicate original or a certified true copy of the award,
judgment, final order or resolution appealed from;
o specific material dates showing that it was filed within the reglementary
period provided therein; and
o sworn certification against forum-shopping
• Effect of failure to comply with requirements
o sufficient grounds for the dismissal thereof
• Action on the petition
o The Court of Appeals may require the respondent to file a comment on the
petition, NOT a motion to dismiss, within ten (10) days from notice. The
Court, however, may dismiss the petition if it finds the same to be patently
without merit, prosecuted manifestly for delay, or that the questions raised
therein are too unsubstantial to require consideration.
• Contents of comment
MVL
o It shall point out the insufficiencies or inaccuracies in petitioner’s statement
of facts and issues, and state the reasons why the petition should be denied
or dismissed.
• Due course
o If the Court of Appeals finds prima facie that the court or agency concerned
has committed errors of fact or law that would warrant reversal or
modification or the award, judgment, final order or resolution sought to be
reviewed, it may give due course to the petition, otherwise, it shall dismiss
the same.
• Transmittal of record
o within fifteen (15) days from notice that the petition has been given due
course
• Effect of appeal
o The appeal shall NOT stay the award, judgment, final order or resolution
sought to be reviewed UNLESS the Court of Appeals shall direct otherwise
upon such terms as it may deem just.
• Submission for decision
o If the petition is given due course, the Court of Appeals may set the case for
oral argument or require the parties to submit memoranda within a period of
fifteen (15) days from notice. The case shall be deemed submitted for
decision upon the filing of the last pleading or memorandum required by the
rules of by the Court of Appeals.
▪ The above rules do NOT apply to judgments and final orders or
resolutions issued under the Labor Code.
o The rule that an appellate court may only pass upon errors assigned, as
well as its exceptions, is also applicable to administrative bodies. There is
NO reason why it should not.
Administrative findings and constructions generally conclusive
• Factual basis and sufficiency of evidence
o Substantial evidence is all that is needed to support an administrative
finding of fact.
o Substantial Evidence Rule: The general rule is that, courts will NOT
disturb on appeal the factual findings of administrative agencies acting
within the parameters of their own competence so long as such findings are
supported by substantial evidence, albeit such evidence may not be
overwhelming or merely preponderant, or negatively stated, it is sufficient
that findings are not shown to be unsupported by evidence.
• Administrative constructions
o The same weight and respect is accorded on the constructions given by an
administrative agency to the law which it is entrusted to enforce. While they
are not necessarily binding upon the courts, they can only be set aside on
proof of:
▪ lack of jurisdiction;
▪ gross abuse of discretion;
▪ fraud; or
▪ error of law.
• Conflicting versions of factual matter
o In the exercise of their jurisdiction, when confronted with conflicting versions
of factual matter, it is for them in the exercise of discretion to determine
which party deserves credence on the basis of the evidence received. If the
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
administrative findings of facts are NOT supported by substantial evidence,
the same are NOT binding on the courts.
Finality of administrative action for purposes of review
• Policy of courts
o Courts are reluctant to interfere with action of an administrative agency prior
to its completion or finality, the reason being that absent a final order or
decision, power has not been fully and finally exercised, and there can
usually be no irreparable harm.
o It is only after judicial review is no longer premature that a court may
ascertain in proper cases whether the administrative action or findings are
not in violation of law, or are free from fraud or imposition or find substantial
support from evidence.
• Order or decision
o Statutes relating to judicial review of action of an administrative agency
commonly provide for review of “orders,” “any order,” “final order,” “final
agency action,” or “final decisions.”
o A particular order or determination may be held NOT subject to review
because it does NOT constitute an “order” or “decision” or because it does
NOT meet other requirements specifically laid down in the statute providing
for review.
o The mere informality of a decision does NOT prevent its review if it is
otherwise final.
• Threatened or pending action
o Judicial relief or review is often denied for lack of finality where action of the
administrative agency is only anticipated, even though threatened, or where
the action is still pending without final disposition.
• Action requiring approval by superior
o An order required to be submitted to a superior is NOT final for purposes of
review.
o However, the fact that in some circumstances the grant of relief might have
to be submitted for approval does NOT detract from finality of an order
denying relief.
• Pendency of rehearing or administrative appeal
o The pendency of an application for rehearing or recommendation filed within
the time prescribed by law or regulations deprives the original order of
finality.
▪ However, a statute may provide otherwise.
• Rules and regulations
o But rules and regulations, even though arbitrary or discriminatory with
respect to particular individuals, are NOT subject to challenge in a judicial
proceeding prior to the time when administrative action pursuant to such
rules and regulations constitutes a present invasion of private rights. No
such invasion exists where such rules and regulations are advisory only,
and not enforceable.
• Purely administrative matters
o Purely administrative and discretionary functions may NOT be interfered
with by the courts.
o In general, courts have NO supervising power over the proceedings and
actions of the administrative departments of the government.
• Preliminary, procedural and interlocutory determinations
o Rule: Appeal to the courts will NOT lie from an interlocutory order.
MVL
▪ Exception: UNLESS such order affects the merits
o interlocutory order – when the substantial rights of the parties involved in
the action remain undetermined and when the cause is retained for further
action; examples:
▪ orders directing an investigation and inquiry, appointing a
conservator or conciliator, providing for a hearing and requiring
corporations under investigation to appear and present certain
data;
▪ denial of a motion to change place of hearing;
▪ denial of application for a stay;
▪ approval or disapproval of a compromise agreement;
▪ denial of application for rehearing; and
▪ an order of an administrative appellate tribunal reversing and
remanding a case to the hearing officer to take further testimony
o BUT: Certiorari is available against administrative agencies exercising
quasi-judicial functions, whether the order is interlocutory or NOT where due
process was NOT followed.
Exceptions to doctrine of finality
• Review at an initial or intermediate stage of administrative action
o interlocutory order affecting the merits of the controversy;
o to grant relief to preserve the status quo pending further action by the
administrative agency;
o when it is essential to the protection of the rights asserted from the injury
threatened;
o where an administrative officer assumes to act in violation of the
Constitution and other laws;
o where such order is NOT reviewable in any other way and the complainant
will suffer great and obvious damage if the order is carried out; and
o to an order made in excess of power, contrary to specific prohibition in the
statute governing the agency and thus operating as a deprivation of a right
assured by the statute
• Review allowed by statutory provisions
o directly from statutory provisions
TIMING OF APPLICATION TO COURTS
• Doctrine of primary jurisdiction
o NOT concerned with judicial review BUT determines in some circumstances
whether initial action should be taken by a court or by an administrative
agency
• Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
o designed primarily to control the timing of judicial relief from adjudicative
action of an agency
o customarily applied to adjudication and NOT to rule-making
• Doctrine of ripeness for review
o applies to rule-making and to administrative action which is embodied
neither in rules and regulations nor in adjudication or final orders
DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY JURISDICTION
Doctrine of primary jurisdiction
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
• Concept
o also referred to as:
▪ doctrine of prior resort;
▪ doctrine of exclusive administrative jurisdiction; or
▪ doctrine of preliminary resort
o usually refers to cases involving specialized disputes which are referred to
an administrative agency of special competence to resolve the same
• Application/objective
o Application
▪ applies only where the administrative agency exercises its quasi-
judicial or adjudicatory function
o Objective
▪ to guide a court in determining whether it should refrain or NOT
from exercising its jurisdiction over a matter of question even if it
may well be within its proper jurisdiction where relief may be
obtained in an administrative proceeding
• Case initially lodged with administrative body
o A court cannot arrogate unto itself the authority to resolve a controversy or
interfere in matters the jurisdiction over which is initially lodged with an
administrative body which by reason of its special knowledge and expertise
is in a better position to pass judgment thereon.
• Case requires resolution of issues by administrative body
• Reasons for doctrine
o based on sound public policy and practical considerations
o two (2) reasons:
▪ to take full advantage of administrative expertness; and
▪ to attain uniformity of application of regulatory laws which can be
secured only if determination of the issue is left to the
administrative body
• Subsequent resort to judicial action NOT precluded
o It does NOT operate to remove these issues completely from the sphere of
judicial action.
o If it is held that the doctrine is applicable, and prior resort to the agency is
required, the case may still (in appropriate instances) be considered by the
courts subsequent to the administrative determination.
• Exclusive jurisdiction may be explicit or implicit
o The statute, implicitly or explicitly, may give the agency exclusive jurisdiction
to make initial determination, and it may give a particular court exclusive
jurisdiction to review the administrative action in a designated way and at a
designated time.
o A mere grant of power to an administrative agency probably carries with it
the implicit idea that the agency has exclusive jurisdiction to make the initial
determination.
▪ But where exclusive jurisdiction is only implicit, it must clearly
appear that the intent of Congress is to require administrative
determination, either to the exclusion of judicial action or in
advance of it, and in such case, a strong showing is required,
both of the inadequacy of the prescribed procedure and of
impending harm, to permit short-circuiting of the administrative
process.
Application of the doctrine
MVL
• Where elements of administrative discretion important considerations
o such as in cases involving issuance and revocation of licenses and the
enforcement of licensing rules
• Where reasons for doctrine inapplicable
o Application involves exercise of judicial discretion
▪ Whether or not the requirement of prior resort should be imposed
is said to depend on the court’s determination whether Congress
intended the issues to be left to the administrative agency for
initial determination.
o Issues involve questions of law
▪ Prior resort to an agency should be limited to questions of fact
and questions requiring the skills of administrative specialists.
• Where concurrent jurisdiction conferred
DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
Doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies
• requires that where a remedy within an administrative agency is provided by law 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 and
exhausting this remedy before bringing an action in or elevating it to the courts of
justice for review
• to allow first the administrative agency to carry outs its functions and discharge its
responsibilities within the specialized areas of its competence as a pre-condition
before resort can be made to the courts
• premature invocation of a court’s intervention = fatal to one’s cause of action
o complaint is susceptible of dismissal for lack of cause of action
Legal and practical considerations for doctrine
• Rule: Only after all administrative remedies are exhausted at the highest level within
the administrative system may judicial recourse or intervention be allowed.
• Several reasons:
o It determines at what stage a person may secure review of administrative
action and is concerned with promoting proper relationships between the
courts and administrative agencies charged with regulatory duties.
o It involves a policy of:
▪ orderly procedure.
▪ avoidance of interference with functions of the administrative
agency by withholding judicial action until the administrative
process has run its course.
▪ prevention of attempts “to swamp the courts” by a resort to them
in the first instance.
o It entails lesser expenses and provides for a speedier disposition of
controversies.
o It is founded not only on practical consideration but also on comity existing
between different departments of government which comity requires that the
courts stay their hands until the administrative process have been
completed.
o It is based not only on respect for a co-equal office in the government and
deference to its act but likewise on convenience of the party litigants.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Application of the doctrine in a particular case is presented to the court
• As a prerequisite of judicial review as an original matter, rather than a matter of
o In some instances, the statute makes the exhaustion of the remedies a pre- review.
condition of the right to seek the intervention of the courts.
• As affecting one’s cause of action Relation between exhaustion doctrine and due process concept
o In our jurisdiction, it has been held that failure of a party to exhaust the • The exhaustion principled is based on the perspective of the ruling court or tribunal,
procedure of administrative remedies provided by law therefor affects his while due process is considered from the point of view of the litigating party against
cause of action, NOT the jurisdiction of the court over the subject matter. whom a ruling was made.
o The only effect of non-compliance with the doctrine is to render the action
premature, i.e., the claimed cause of action is NOT ripe for judicial DOCTRINE OF RIPENESS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW
determination and for that reason a party has NO cause of action to
ventilate in court. Doctrine of ripeness for judicial review
• Basic principle: The judicial machinery should be conserved for problems which are
Instances where doctrine has been applied real and present or imminent, and should not be squandered on problems which are
• Certiorari CANNOT be sustained where the administrative remedies were NOT future, imaginary, or remote.
exhausted.
Application of the doctrine
Exceptions to the doctrine • when interests of the plaintiff are, in fact subjected to or imminently threatened with
• Remedy is permissive substantial injury;
• Issue involves NOT a question of fact, but one of pure law • when mere existence of the statute on the books without enforcement, in fact, causes
• Issue raised is the constitutionality of the statute substantial injury to the plaintiff;
• Questions involved are essentially judicial • when party is immediately confronted with the problem of complying or violating;
• Estoppel on the part of the party invoking the doctrine or where the administrative • when plaintiff is, in fact, substantially harmed by the vagueness of a statute;
body is in estoppel • where no administrative remedy is available and the party affected is immediately
• Irreparable damage or injury will be suffered by a party confronted with the choice between compliance and non-compliance, and violation of
• No plain, speedy, or adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law the instruction is a criminal offense
• Respondent officer acted in utter disregard of due process
• Insistence of its observance would result in the nullification of the claim being asserted Ripeness doctrine and exhaustion doctrine, distinguished
• Long-continued and unreasonable delay or official inaction Ripeness Doctrine Exhaustion Doctrine
• Special reasons or circumstances demanding immediate judicial intervention The ripeness focus is upon the nature of the The exhaustion focus is upon the relatively
• Amount involved is relatively small so that to require exhaustion would be oppressive judicial process—upon the types of functions narrow question of whether a party should
and unreasonable the court should perform. be required to pursue an administrative
• No administrative review is provided as a condition precedent remedy before going to court.
• Where the land subject of litigation is NOT part of the public domain The ripeness doctrine is applied to rule- The exhaustion doctrine is customarily
• Possessory actions involving public lands making and administrative action NOT applied to adjudicative action of an
• Respondent is a Department Secretary whose acts, as an alter ego of the President, involving rule-making and adjudication. administrative agency.
bear the implied or assumed approval of the latter
• Administrative officer has NOT rendered any decision, or made any final finding of any Ripeness doctrine and primary jurisdiction doctrine, distinguished
sort Ripeness Doctrine Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine
• Plaintiff in the civil action for damages has NO administrative remedy available to him Both ripeness and exhaustion doctrines The doctrine of primary jurisdiction
determine at what stage a party may secure determine whether the court or the agency
• Strong public interest is involved
judicial review of administrative action. should make the initial decision.
• Other cases
Questions of ripeness and exhaustion may But questions of primary jurisdiction arise
arise whenever judicial review of only when administrative and judicial
Exhaustion doctrine and primary jurisdiction doctrine, distinguished
administrative action is available. jurisdictions are concurrent for the initial
Exhaustion Doctrine Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine
decision of some questions.
BOTH doctrines are concerned with promoting proper relationships between the courts and
administrative agencies, permitting the courts to obtain expert aid in solution of technical
Scope and extent of judicial review
problems, and the net result of the application of either rule is practically the same.
• Types of agency determination for purposes of judicial review
It applies where the claim or matter is Questions of primary jurisdiction arise where
a. determinations of law, which are fully reviewable;
cognizable in the first instance by an both the court and administrative agency
b. determinations of fact, review of which is limited to finding of the existence
administrative agency alone. have jurisdiction to pass on q question which
of substantial evidence; and

MVL
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
c. discretionary determinations, which are reviewable only to ascertain
whether the action taken was arbitrary or capricious
• General frame of power
o to keep the administrator within the valid statute which guides him and keep
him from unreasonable excesses in the exercise of his function, and to
ascertain whether there is warrant in the law and the facts for what the
administrative agency has done
• Review is limited
o Judicial review is extremely limited in regard to findings of fact and to
expert judgments of an administrative agency acting within its statutory
authority.
o The power of judicial review is NOT the power to determine whether the
action of an administrative agency is right, correct, wise, proper, advisable,
expedient, or best fitted to the situation involved.
o NO relief is available for mere error or honest error, by an administrative
agency, particularly in a collateral proceeding.
o The courts will NOT inquire into motives which impel action by the
administrative agency.
o A court may require an administrative agency to comply with the law and its
rules and regulations particularly those prescribing notice and hearing but it
may NOT require it to decide a controversy in a particular way.
o The determination of an administrative agency as to the operation,
implementation, and application of law which it is entrusted to enforce is
accorded great weight.
Judicial review does NOT import trial de novo
• Judicial review of executive or administrative decisions does NOT import a trial de
novo (i.e., a review of the evidence all over again) BUT only an ascertainment of:
o whether the administrative findings are not in violation of the Constitution or
of the laws;
o whether they are free from fraud or imposition; and
o whether they find reasonable support in evidence.
• It is NOT for the reviewing court to:
o weight the conflicting evidence;
o determine the credibility of the witnesses; or otherwise
o substitute its own judgment for that of the administrative agency on the
sufficiency of evidence.
• The question whether the administrative agency abused its discretion in weighing the
evidence should be resolved solely on the basis of the proof that the administrative
authorities had before them and no other.
• Administrative decision in matters within the executive or administrative jurisdiction
can only be set aside on proof of:
o grave abuse of discretion;
o fraud; or
o error of law.
• There CANNOT be a trial de novo in administrative cases since a review of an
administrative finding is limited to the evidence already presented before the
administrative body.
Methods or modes of relief or review
• direct or collateral
• statutory or non-statutory
MVL
Statutory methods of review
• Where remedy itself governed by statute
o An illustration is the declaratory judgment, which is purely a creation of
statute.
• Where proceedings in court required by statute for enforcement of
administrative decision
o where a statute governing the action of a particular administrative agency
does NOT permit the enforcing of an administrative decision EXCEPT by
proceedings in a court to be instituted by the prevailing party or the
administrative agency itself
• Where direct judicial review afforded by legislation providing generally for such
review
o sometimes called “direct review proceedings”
o afforded by legislation providing generally for review of action of
administrative agency and prescribing the manner and extent of such review
Non-statutory methods of review
• the fact that a statute does NOT provide for judicial review of action of an
administrative agency does NOT preclude the courts from providing such as is
necessary or required.
• In the absence of a statutory provision for review, relief may be had in appropriate
cases by means of the common law or prerogative writs such as:
o certiorari;
o mandamus;
o habeas corpus;
o quo warranto; and
o prohibition
Relation between the two (2) methods
• Where a statute relating to the administrative agency provides a direct method of
judicial review of agency action and is applicable, such method of review may be
regarded as exclusive and to preclude the use of any other non-statutory method.
• Some cases hold, not that the statutory method of review is exclusive, but that it must
be exhausted as a prerequisite to judicial relief by some other methods.
Questions open to review
• Generally
o The courts CANNOT or WILL NOT disturb the action of an administrative
agency which is within its jurisdiction or not beyond its powers or authority,
and which is not contrary to law or which has a reasonable basis, and is not
arbitrary or capricious, or an abuse of discretion, and, as to findings of fact,
regardless of whether or not they are consistent with the preponderance of
evidence so long as there is some evidence upon which the findings could
be made.
• Questions of law
o Definition/nature
▪ when the doubt or differences arise as to the applicable law to a
certain state or set of facts
▪ concerns the correct application of law or jurisprudence to a
certain set of facts
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
▪ must involve NO examination of the probative value of the
evidence presented by the litigants or any of them, the truth or
falsehood of facts being admitted
o It is for the courts, NOT for administrative agencies, to lay down the
governing principles of law and to determine what action is within or without
the law, or if the law has been properly applied by the agency.
o In general, it is said to be the function of the administrative agency to
determine the facts of a controversy and apply the law to those facts. On the
other hand, it is said to be the function of the reviewing court to decide
whether the correct rule of law was applied to the facts found, and whether
there was evidence before the administrative tribunal to support the findings
made.
• Questions of fact
o Definition/nature
▪ when doubt or differences arise as to the truth or falsity of the
alleged facts
▪ one which is to be determined by the special circumstances of
each case in the exercise of judgment and NOT by any fixed rule
of law
o Test of whether a question is one of law or of fact
▪ whether the appellate court can resolve the question raised
without reversing or evaluating the evidence, in which case it is a
question of law; otherwise, it is a question of fact
o General Rule: A question of fact is the concern solely of an administrative
body so long as there is substantial evidence of record to sustain its action
even if such evidence is NOT overwhelming or preponderant.
• Mixed questions of law and fact
o An administrative finding on a mixed question of fact and law is subject to
judicial review, on which the court may substitute its judgment for that of the
administrative agency.
o Where there is a mixed question of law and fact and the court cannot
separate the elements to see clearly what and where the mistake of law is,
such question is treated as a question of fact for purposes of review and the
courts will not ordinarily review the decision of the administrative tribunal.
o Where, however, jurisdictional or constitutional facts are involved, the
administrative findings are subject to judicial review.
• Administrative discretion
o In general, courts have NO supervising power over the proceedings and
actions of administrative bodies, and this is generally true with respect to
acts involving the ex, and this is generally true with respect to acts involving
the exercise of judgment or discretion and, as already mentioned, findings
of facts.
o Questions of policy discretion are reviewable only for:
▪ unreasonableness;
▪ departure from statutory standards;
▪ lack of evidentiary support; and
▪ questions of wisdom, propriety, or expediency.
o The court will NOT substitute its discretion or judgment for that of the
administrative agency which is treated with finality but will determine the
lawfulness of its action.
Grounds which would warrant reversal of administrative proceedings
MVL
• General Rule: Factual findings of administrative agencies that are affirmed by the
Court of Appeals, are conclusive upon and NOT reviewable by the Supreme Court.
o Exceptions:
▪ conclusion is a finding grounded on speculations, surmises, and
conjectures;
▪ inferences made are manifestly mistaken, absurd, or impossible,
▪ grave abuse of discretion;
▪ judgment is based on misapprehension of facts or the findings of
facts are conflicting;
▪ agency (or the Court of Appeals) overlooked certain facts of
substance and value which if considered would affect the result of
the case or justify a different conclusion;
▪ agency in arriving at its findings went beyond the issues of the
case and the same are contrary to the admissions of the parties
or the evidence presented;
▪ findings of facts are premised on the supposed absence of
evidence but such findings contradicted by the evidence on
record;
▪ facts set forth in the petition as well as the petitioner’s main and
reply briefs are NOT disputed by the respondent;
▪ agency has sustained irregular procedures and through the
invocation of summary methods, including rules on appeal, has
affirmed an order which tolerates a violation of due process; and
▪ rights of a party were prejudiced because the administrative
findings, conclusions, or decisions were:
• in violation of constitutional provisions;
• in excess of statutory authority or jurisdiction;
• made upon irregular procedure;
• vitiated by fraud, imposition, or mistake;
• not supported by substantial evidence adduced at the
hearing or contained in the records or disclosed to eh
parties; or
• arbitrary or capricious
Substance evidence rule
• It provides the most generally applied standard governing the judicial review of
administrative action
• It is a compromise between opposing theories of a broad or de novo review of
administrative actions and restricted review or complete abstention
• It holds that administrative determinations are final and conclusive upon the courts an
must be sustained if supported by substantial evidence upon the whole record even if
such evidence be not overwhelming or preponderant and even if the other minds
equally reasonably might conceivably opine or conclude otherwise, in the absence of
any of the established exceptions calling for judicial review such as proof of grave
abuse of discretion, fraud, or error of law.
• In administrative cases, the courts are NOT authorized to:
o weigh once more the conflicting evidence submitted before the
administrative body;
o receive additional evidence that was not submitted to the administrative
agency;
o determine the credibility of witnesses; and
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
o make their own findings of facts and substitute the same for the findings of • Basis of the rule
fact of the quasi-judicial agency. o The rule is simply one public policy designed to aid in the effective
functioning of government, and represents a balance between evils
Justifiable decision or conclusion to the contrary NOT precluded inevitable in either alternative.
• “Substantial evidence” has been described as such evidence as will established a • Exceptions to the rule
substantial basis of fact from which the fact at issue can be reasonably inferred. o The suability of a government official depends on:
o The evidence need NOT be such as to preclude a justifiable decision to the ▪ whether the official concerned was acting within his official or
contrary. jurisdictional capacity; and
▪ whether the acts done in the performance of official functions will
Test to be applied result in a charge or financial liability against the government.
• whether the evidence reasonably tends to support the administrative decision or o There are a number of well-recognized exceptions to official immunity and
findings, or, whether the decision is NOT clearly contrary to the overwhelming weight State immunity from suit:
of the evidence ▪ A public officer enjoys only qualified, NOT absolute immunity.
Where the circumstances of the case are such as to render the
Hierarchy of evidentiary values officer personally liable, he is NOT relieved from responsibility by
• All administrative determinations require only substantial proof and NOT clear and reason of mistake and honest intention.
convincing evidence. ▪ The State (Government) may be sued only with its consent.
• Hierarchy: • Official immunity and State immunity distinguished
o Proof beyond reasonable doubt State Immunity Official Immnunity
o Clear and convincing evidence • It applies to complaints filed • It is a more limited principle
o Preponderance of evidence against public officials for than governmental immunity,
o Substantial evidence acts done in the performance since its purpose is not
• In assessing whether there is substantial evidence in administrative cases, the of their duties. directly to protect the
reviewing court is NOT bound by technical rules of procedure or evidence. As long as • It principally rests upon the sovereign, but rater to do so
the administrative findings are supported by substantial evidence, it is NOT the task of tenuous ground that “the king only collaterally, by protecting
an appellate court to weigh once more the evidence submitted before the could do no wrong.” It serves the public official in the
administrative body in respect of the sufficiency of such evidence. to protect the impersonal performance of his
body politic or government government function.
Liability of administrative agencies and officers itself from tort liability. • It serves as a protective aegis
• Generally for public officials from tort
o The doctrine of judicial immunity from suit extends generally to liability for damages arising
governmental officials in respect to their acts of a discretionary, judicial, or from discretionary acts or
quasi-judicial nature. functions in the performance
o The rule of immunity protects an officer from liability for a mistake of fact or of their official duties.
an erroneous construction and application of the law, or an error of
judgment in the determination of the law or the facts, including the officer’s -oOo-
duties under the law.
o The rule applies not only to a head of a department or agency but also to
those subordinate officers who act in his place and stead carrying out the
duties of the department or agency.

MVL