ADJUDICATORY

POWERS OF
ADMINISTRATIVE
AGENCIES
Definition of Adjudicatory or Quasi-Judicial
Power

• It is the power of administrative authorities to make determinations

of facts in the performance of their official duties and to apply the law
as they construe it to the facts so found. The exercise of this power is
only incidental to the main function of administrative agencies, which
is the enforcement of the law.
Quasi-judicial power vs. Judicial power
• Judicial power is exercised by the regular courts, e.g., the Supreme
Court, Court of Appeals, Regional Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court.
Procedure in these courts are governed by the Rules of Court.
Generally, the courts adhere strictly to the rules of evidence.
• Quasi-judicial power is vested in administrative agencies also known
as quasi-judicial bodies. Administrative agencies have their own set of
rules of procedure, based on the Administrative Code of the
Philippines and other pertinent laws. Unlike regular courts, quasi-
judicial bodies do not adhere strictly to the technical rules of
evidence.
Requisites for Proper Exercise of Quasi-
judicial Power

• 1. Jurisdiction – which is granted by statute. Jurisdiction is defined as

the power to administer justice by hearing and determining
controversies, and to make legal decisions and judgments.

• 2. Due process – primarily the right to notice and an opportunity to

be heard. (recall substantive and procedural due process)
Cardinal Primary Requirements of Procedural Due Process In
Administrative Proceedings (Based on the Ang Tibay Case)

• 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. Substantial evidence means such
evidence as a reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support
a conclusion;
Cardinal Primary Requirements of Procedural Due Process In
Administrative Proceedings (Based on the Ang Tibay Case) -
Continued
• 5. The decision must be based on the evidence presented at the
hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the
parties affected;
• 6. The tribunal or the body or any of its judges must act on its own
independent consideration of the law and the facts of the
controversy, and not simply accept the view of a subordinate;
• 7. The Board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its
decision in such manner that the parties in the proceedings can know
the issues involved, and the reason for the decision rendered.
Summary of the Requirements of
Administrative Due Process

• 1. Right to notice, be it actual or constructive

• 2. Reasonable opportunity to appear and defend his rights and
introduce witnesses
• 3. Impartial tribunal with competent jurisdiction
• 4. Decision/judgment supported by substantial evidence
Exceptions to the Notice and Hearing
Requirement
• 1. Urgency of immediate action
• 2. Tentativeness of the administrative action
• 3. Right was previously offered but not claimed
• 4. Summary abatement of nuisance per se
• 5. Preventive suspension in administrative cases
• 6. padlocking of filthy restaurants/theaters showing obscene movies
• 7. Cancellation of a passport of a person sought for criminal prosecution
• 8. Summary distraint and levy of properties of a delinquent taxpayer
• 9. Replacement of a temporary or acting appointee
Jurisprudence for reading on due process in
administrative cases
• Saunar vs. Executive Secretary. G.R. No. 186502, Dec. 13, 2017
• Vivo vs. PAGCOR. G.R. No. 187854, Nov. 12, 2013
• Purisima vs. Hon. Carpio-Morales. G.R. No. 219501. July 26, 2017