1.

Gen principles
3. Executive, Power of control
- Facts, then ipapadistinguish if it is a ministerial or discretionary power.
Powers of the administrative agency
The distinction between a ministerial and discretionary act is well delineated. A purely
ministerial act or duty is one which an officer or tribunal performs in a given state of facts, in a - Lodged in the executive department
prescribed manner, in obedience to the mandate of a legal authority, without regard to or the
- SC held in case of Marcos v. Manglapus that the powers granted to the president are not only
exercise of his own judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done. If the law
those granted by the Constitution but he also have implied powers or residual powers
imposes a duty upon a public officer and gives him the right to decide how or when the duty
shall be performed, such duty is discretionary and not ministerial. The duty is ministerial only Powers:
when the discharge of the same requires neither the exercise of official discretion or judgment.
Power to Control
Discretionary Powers – power or right conferred upon them by law, acting officially under certain
circumstances, according to the dictates of their own judgment and conscience, and not - Amend, alter or set aside the decision of a subordinate in the Executive Department
controlled by the judgment or conscience of others.

Ministerial Powers – performed in a duty which has been positively imposed by law and its 4. Quasi judicial
performance required at a time and in a manner or upon conditions specifically designated, the
duty to perform under the conditions specified not being dependent upon the officer’s -- distinguish from quasi-legislative power
judgment or decision. (e.g. duty of Register of Deeds to just register deeds before it as long
asthe requirements are complete)

2. Sources

1. Constitutional or statutory enactments creating administrative bodies

a. Article IX, Constitution
b. Social Security Act- established the Social Security Commission
c. Administrative Code of 1987
2. Decisions of courts interpreting the characters of administrative bodies and defining their
powers, rights, inhibitions, among others, and the effects of their determinations and regulations

3. Rules and regulations issued by the administrative bodies in pursuance of the purposes for
which they were created
a. Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code
b. Circulars of the Central Monetary Authority on interest rates
c. Regulations of the Commission on Immigration and Deportation
d. Rules promulgated by the SEC; Bureau of Patents, Trademarks and Technology
Transfer

4. Determinations and orders of the administrative bodies in the settlement of controversies

arising in their respective fields
a. Refers to the adjudications of administrative agencies in the exercise of their quasi-
judicial power
 administrative agency. It is required that the regulation be germane to the objects and purposes
of the law, and be not in contradiction to, but in conformity with, the standards prescribed by
law.17 They must conform to and be consistent with the provisions of the enabling statute in
order for such rule or regulation to be valid. Constitutional and statutory provisions control with
respect to what rules and regulations may be promulgated by an administrative body, as well as
with respect to what fields are subject to regulation by it. It may not make rules and regulations
which are inconsistent with the provisions of the Constitution or a statute, particularly the statute
it is administering or which created it, or which are in derogation of, or defeat, the purpose of a
statute. In case of conflict between a statute and an administrative order, the former must
prevail.18

Not to be confused with the quasi-legislative or rule-making power of an administrative agency is

its quasi-judicial or administrative adjudicatory power. This 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
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, 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. In carrying out their quasi-judicial functions, the
administrative officers or bodies are required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of
facts, hold hearings, weigh evidence, and draw conclusions from them as basis for their official
action and exercise of discretion in a judicial nature. 19

5. Test of valid delegation

There are two 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 first 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 stations 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.

Administrative agencies possess quasi-legislative or rule-making powers and quasi-judicial or To determine if it is rulemaking:
administrative adjudicatory powers. Quasi-legislative or rule-making power is the power to make a. Determine if there is an existing law, or at least a provision of the Constitution
rules and regulations which results in delegated legislation that is within the confines of the - If none, then it is a lawmaking power
granting statute and the doctrine of non-delegability and separability of powers.16 b. Ascertain if the rule promulgated pursuant to the law is valid, following the two
tests:
The rules and regulations that administrative agencies promulgate, which are the product of a a. Completeness test
delegated legislative power to create new and additional legal provisions that have the effect of - Law must be complete and it must not delegate the authority to
law, should be within the scope of the statutory authority granted by the legislature to the another department. There must be nothing left but enforce the law.
 - A law is not complete if there is discretion on the part of the function in deciding cases enactment of statutes
Declares and enforces liabilities as they stand on Looks to the future and changes existing condition
enforcing body. Ex. “the courts shall determine the penalty for violators.” present or past facts by a new rule
Applies to specific persons or situations Lays down general regulations that apply to or
b. Sufficient standard test affects classes of persons or situations
Generally requires observance of notice and Generally do not require notice and hearing for its
- To guide the implementor by setting boundaries or limitations hearing (due process) validity
- Ex. Ynot v. IAC- the confiscated meat may be disposed by the
Department as it may deem necessary

6. Quasi-leg, rule making, law making 9. Due process

-- what can be delegated -- Ang Tibay v. CIR ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS

1. Right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and
submit evidence in support thereof;
7. Rate fixing
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented;
-- CASE: jeepney drivers rallied to increase jeepney fare and was approved by LTFRB – what
power was exercised? Quasi-judicial, needs notice and hearing. If the fare was increased without 3. The decision must have something to support itself;
any rally or petition, the LTFRB just increased it on its own? Quasi-legislative, rule-making 4. The evidence must be “substantial”; and “substantial” evidence means such a
power, no need for notice and hearing reasonable mind would accept as adequate to support a finding or conclusion;
8. Quasi/adjudicatory functions 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;

Where a power rests in judgment or discretion, so that it is of judicial nature or character, but 6. The tribunal or body or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent
does not involve the exercise of functions of a judge, or is conferred upon an officer other than a consideration of the law and facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views of a
judicial officer, it is deemed quasi-judicial. subordinate in arriving at a decision;

Quasi-judicial functions a term which applies to the action, discretion, etc., of public 7. The tribunal or body shall, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a
administrative officers or bodies, who are required to investigate facts, or ascertain the existence manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved and the reason
of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them, as a basis for their official action and to for the decision rendered.
exercise discretion of a judicial nature.10

10. Theories, Doctrine of primary jurisdiction, exhaustion

The grant of original jurisdiction on a quasi- judicial agency is not implied. -- the DOLE Secretary rendered a decision on a labor case. Aggrieved party did not appeal to the
President but appealed immediately to the CA. Is it proper? Was there exhaustion of admin
remedies? Yes, to both. Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency, the Secretary being the alter-ego
The rule is that when an administrative body or agency is conferred quasi-judicial functions, all of Pres. Can appeal to President if chooses to? Yes.
controversies relating to the subject matter pertaining to its specialization are deemed to be
included within its jurisdiction. Split jurisdiction is not favored Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies
- Once a case was lodged in administrative agency, the parties must exhaust all administrative
Rule-making remedies before the matter be brought to the Court
Resembles a judicial Resembles a legislature’s
- Parties went to the administrative agency first before they went to Court
- Courts will not entertain the case filed unless all remedies were exhausted by the party, Administrative Case, there is no denial of due process because the respondent should know, considering
otherwise the filing of a case in court while pending in a quasi-judicial agency will result to forum his high degree of education.
shopping.

Q: there is a pending administrative case. Ten days after the receipt of a decision, the party filed
a complaint in court.
The running for period to appeal will not be suspended.
Administrative Remedies of the Party:
1. Appeal 10. Admin cases
2. Motion for Reconsideration
Neri vs senate commitee on accountability of public officers
Exception:
when the issue involved is a pure question of law
when the due process is clearly violated Marcos vs manglapus
when the administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
when there is urgent need for judicial intervention Contrary to petitioners' view, it cannot be denied that the President, upon whom executive
when there is unreasonable delay or official inaction power is vested, has unstated residual powers which are implied from the grant of executive
when there is no other plain, speedy or adequate remedy provided by law power and which are necessary for her to comply with her duties under the Constitution. The
powers of the President are not limited to what are expressly enumerated in the article on the
when there is estoppel on the part of the agency concerned
Executive Department and in scattered provisions of the Constitution. This is so, notwithstanding
when there is great and irreparable damage which can only be prevented by court action
the avowed intent of the members of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 to limit the powers
when the resort to administrative remedy will amount to the nullification of a claim
of the President as a reaction to the abuses under the regime of Mr. Marcos, for the result was a
when the law specifically provides that the issue shall be brought up to the court
limitation of specific power of the President, particularly those relating to the commander-in-chief
when the subject matter is private land in land case proceedings
clause, but not a diminution of the general grant of executive power.
Principle of Qualified Political Agency: Ang tibay case
- due to multifarious functions there are those that may be acting as President’s alter ego
o deemed the decision of the Office of the President so as not for the parties to go to the
President himself
- secretary’s decision is the President’s decision Abs-cbn vs ca
o some administrative agency are of the same level with the RTC
- however there are decisions that can be appealed to the CA
Ynot vs IAC
11. General on judicial review We also mark, on top of all this, the questionable manner of the disposition of the confiscated
-- when may a party go to judicial review without filing a motion for reconsideration in an admin property as prescribed in the questioned executive order. It is there authorized that the seized
case (exceptions) property shall "be distributed to charitable institutions and other similar institutions as the
Chairman of the National Meat Inspection Commission may see fit, in the case of carabeef, and
Right to Counsel is not necessary in Quasi-judicial proceedings to deserving farmers through dispersal as the Director of Animal Industry may see fit, in the case
Luniqued Case: The procedure is composed of a committee. The first day of hearing, Regional Director of carabaos." (Emphasis supplied.) The phrase "may see fit" is an extremely generous and
has no counsel. He requested for a reset that was granted by the committee. On the next scheduled dangerous condition, if condition it is. It is laden with perilous opportunities for partiality and
hearing, the respondent did not appear nor his counsel. As such, the committee decided to proceed and abuse, and even corruption. One searches in vain for the usual standard and the reasonable
recommended the dismissal of the Regional Director. The SC held that even without counsel in an guidelines, or better still, the limitations that the said officers must observe when they make
their distribution. There is none. Their options are apparently boundless. Who shall be the
fortunate beneficiaries of their generosity and by what criteria shall they be chosen? Only the
officers named can supply the answer, they and they alone may choose the grantee as they see
fit, and in their own exclusive discretion. Definitely, there is here a "roving commission," a wide
and sweeping authority that is not "canalized within banks that keep it from overflowing," in
short, a clearly profligate and therefore invalid delegation of legislative powers.

To sum up then, we find that the challenged measure is an invalid exercise of the police power
because the method employed to conserve the carabaos is not reasonably necessary to the
purpose of the law and, worse, is unduly oppressive. Due process is violated because the owner
of the property confiscated is denied the right to be heard in his defense and is immediately
condemned and punished. The conferment on the administrative authorities of the power to
adjudge the guilt of the supposed offender is a clear encroachment on judicial functions and
militates against the doctrine of separation of powers. There is, finally, also an invalid delegation
of legislative powers to the officers mentioned therein who are granted unlimited discretion in
the distribution of the properties arbitrarily taken. For these reasons, we hereby declare
Executive Order No. 626-A unconstitutional.

In recunanan

Lumiqued vs exevea