ADMINISTRATIVE 2.

Historical Considerations

LAW a. Why did administrative agencies come

about?
DR. GLENN L VELMONTE JD, PHD
(1) Growing complexities of modern life
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES (2) Multiplication of number of subjects
1. Definition needing government regulation; and
Administrative law is that branch of modern (3) Increased difficulty of administering laws
law under which the enexecutive department [Pangasinan Transportation v. Public Service
of the government, acting in a quasi-legislative Commission, G.R. No. L-47065 (1940)]
or quasi-judicial capacity, interferes with the
conduct of the individual for the purpose of b. Why are administrative agencies
promoting the well-being of the community. needed? Because the government lacks:
(1) Time
Administrative law is the law concerning (2) Expertise and
thepowers and procedures of administrative (3) Organizational aptitude for effective and
agencies, including specially the law governing continuing regulation of new developments in
judicial review of administrative actions society [STONE]
[K.Davis, Administrative Law Treatise 1 B. ADMINISTRATIVE
(1958),cited in DE LEON].
AGENCIES
According to scholars, a broad conception of 1. Definition
administrative law is that it is the "Agency" includes any department, bureau,
amalgamation of public laws (i.e., office, commission, authority or officer of the
constitutional provisions, legislative statutes, National Government authorized by law or
judicial opinions, executive directives) that executive order to make rules, issue licenses,
addresses the democratic legitimacy, control, grant rights or privileges, and adjudicate
and performance of administrative authority cases; research institutions with respect to
and discretion by specifying the legal licensing functions; government corporations
structures, procedures, and standards utilized with respect to functions regulating private
by government agencies with an emphasis on right, privileges, occupation or business; and
the role of institutional oversight by the courts. officials in the exercise of disciplinary power as
[Andrew Osorio, Foundations of the provided by law. [Sec. 2(1), Book VII, Admin
Administrative Law (2016)] Code.]

This seems to conform with the understanding Administrative agencies are the organs of
of this area of law in the Philippines. government, other than a court and other than
the legislature, which affect the rights of
Administrative functions are those which private parties either through adjudication or
involve the regulation and control over the through rule-making [NACHURA].
conduct and affairs of individuals for their own
welfare and the promulgation of rules and Administrative agency is the term used
regulations to better carry out the policy of the generally to describe an agency exercising
legislature or such as are devolved upon the some significant combination of executive,
administrative agency by the organic law of its legislative, and judicial powers. It is a
existence. [In Re: Rodolfo v. Manzano, A.M. government body charged with administering
No. 88-7-1861-RTC (1988)] and implementing particular legislation [DE
LEON]. of administrative agencies in matters calling
for technical knowledge and speed in
Care must be taken, however, in distinguishing countless controversies which cannot be
between the quasi-legislative and quasi- possibly be handled by regular courts. [The
judicial sets of powers and the purely Honorable Monetary Board v. Philippine
administrative powers. In contrast to rule- Veterans Bank, G.R. No. 189571, (2015)]
making and adjudication, purely administrative
power is concerned with the work of applying On its rule-making authority, it is
policies and enforcing orders as determined administrative when it does not have the
by proper governmental organs. [Romeo discretion to determine what the law shall be
Jalosjos v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. but merely prescribes details for the
205033, (2013)] enforcement of the law.

2. Manner of Creation 4. Kinds of Administrative Agencies

a. Agencies of Constitutional Origin – a. Government grant or gratuity,

those created by the 1987 Constitution (e.g. special privilege (e.g. Bureau of Lands, Phil.
CSC, COMELEC, COA, CHR) Veterans Admin., GSIS, SSS, PAO);
b. Agencies Created by Statutes (e.g. b. Carrying out the actual business of
NLRC, SEC, PRC, Social Security government (e.g. BIR, Bureau of Customs,
Commission, Bureau of Immigration, Bureau of Immigration, Land Registration
Intellectual Property Office, Games and Authority);
Amusement Board, Energy Regulatory c. Service for public benefit (e.g. Phil
Commission, and Insurance Commission) Post, PNR, MWSS, NFA, NHA);
c. Executive Orders/Authorities of law d. Regulation of businesses affected
(e.g. Fact-finding Agencies) with public interest (e.g. Insurance
Commission, LTFRB, NTC, HLURB);
Power of the President to Create Ad-hoc e. Regulation of private businesses
Committees and individuals (e.g. SEC);
Under his broad powers to execute the laws, f. Adjustment of individual
the President can […] create ad hoc bodies for controversies because of a strong social
purposes of investigating reported crimes. The policy involved (e.g. ECC, NLRC, SEC, DAR,
President, however, has to observe the limits COA) [DE LEON]
imposed on him by the constitutional plan: he 5. Control of Administrative Action
must respect the separation of powers and the a. The President's Executive Power
independence of other bodies which have their The executive power shall be vested in the
own constitutional and statutory mandates President of the Philippines. [Sec. 1, Art. VII,
[Biraogo v. Philippine Truth Commission, G.R. 1987 Constitution]
No. 192935 (2010)].
The President shall have control of all the
3. When is an Agency Administrative? executive departments, bureaus, and offices.
Where its function is primarily regulatory EVEN He shall ensure that the laws be faithfully
IF it conducts hearings and determines executed. [Sec. 17, Art. VII, 1987 Constitution]
controversies to carry out its regulatory duty.
The ever increasing variety of powers and Control - the power of an officer to alter or
functions given to administrative agencies modify or nullify or set aside what a
recognizes the need for thr active intervention subordinate officer had done in the
performance of his duties and to substitute the disapprove such regulations before they take
judgment of the former for test of the latter effect. As such, a legislative veto in the form of
a congressional oversight committee is in the
Supervision - overseeing or the power or form of an inward-turning delegation designed
authority of an officer to see that subordinate to attach a congressional leash (other than
officers perform their duties [Ganzon v. C.A., through scrutiny and investigation) to an
G.R. No. 93252, (1991)] agency to which Congress has by law initially
delegated broad powers [Abakada v.
Can the president control ALL administrative Purisima,G.R. No. 166715, (2008)].
agencies? It depends on whether the enabling
statute has given a power of review to the c. Judicial Review
President. Courts can provide immediate relief and also
they defer to experts. If the law is silent, it does
b. Congressional Oversight Power not mean that there is no judicial review.
Congress uses its oversight power to make For questions of policy, the court will not
sure that the administrative agencies perform interfere with the decisions of administrative
their functions within the authority delegated agencies.
to them. For questions of discretion, the courts will also
There are three categories of congressional generally not interfere unless there is grave
oversight functions, namely: abuse of discretion.
1. Scrutiny - passive process of looking d. The Ombudsman
at readily available facts; Congress may The Office of the Ombudsman has the power
request information and report from the other to "investigate and prosecute on its own or on
branches of government. It can give complaint by any person, any act or omission
recommendations or pass resolutions for of any public officer or employee, office or
consideration of the agency involved. agency, when such act or omission appears to
2. Investigation - involves a more be illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient." This
intense digging of facts. The power of power has been held to include the
Congress to conduct investigation is investigation and prosecution of any crime
recognized by the 1987 Constitution in that the committed by a public official regardless of
Senate or the House of Representatives or any whether the acts or omissions complained of
of its respective committee may conduct are related to, or connected with, or arise fro
inquiries in aid of legislation. the performance of his official duty. It is
3. Supervision - connotes a continuing enough that the act or omission was
and informed awareness on the part of a committed by a public official [Lastimosa v.
congressional committee regarding executive Vasquez, G.R. No. 116801, (1995)].
operations in a given administrative area. It
allows Congress to scrutinize the exercise of
C. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
delegated law-making authority, and permits AGENCIES
Congress to retain part of that delegated The powers of administrative agencies are:
authority [Macalintal v. Comelec, G.R. No. 1. Quasi-legislative (Rule-making)
157013, (2003)]. 2. Quasi-judicial (Adjudicatory);
A legislative veto is a statutory provision 3. Determinative powers
requiring the President or an administrative a. Enabling powers - permit the doing of
agency to present the proposed implementing an act which the law undertakes to
rules and regulations of a law to Congress regulate and which would be unlawful
which, by itself or through a committee formed without government approval (e.g.
by it, retains a "right" or "power" to approve or issuance of licenses to engage in
particular business or occupation)
b. Directing powers - order the Director, Palawan Council for Sustainable
performance of particular acts to Development v. Lim, G.R. No. 183173 (2016)].
ensure compliance with the law and The grant of rule-making is a relaxation of the
often exercised for corrective separation of powers principle and is an
purposes exception to the non-delegation of legislative
• Dispensing powers - allows the powers. But such administrative regulations
administrative officer to relax the must be consistent with the law and be for the
general operation of a law or sole purpose of enforcing its provisions and
exempt from performance of a not to transcend the limits marked by the law.
general duty xxx
• Examining powers - enables the The details and the manner of carrying out the
administrative body to inspect the law are oftentimes left to the administrative
records and premises, and agency entrusted with its enforcement.
investigate the activities, of [People
persons or entities coming under v. Maceren, G.R. No. L- 32166 (1977)]
its jurisdiction Administrative regulations enacted by
• Summary powers - those administrative agencies to implement and
involving use by administrative interpret the law which they are entrusted to
authorities of force upon persons enforce have the force of law and are entitled
or things without necessity of to respect. Such rules and regulations partake
previous judicial warrant of the nature of a statute and are just as
● [CRUZ] binding as if they have been written in the
Does the grant of such powers to statute itself.
Administrative Agencies violate the Doctrine of As such, they have the force and effect of law
Separation of Powers? and enjoy the presumption of constitutionality
No. Administrative agencies became the catch and legality until they are set aside with finality
basin for the residual powers of the three in an appropriate case by a competent court.
branches. The theory of the separation of Congress, in the guise of assuming the role of
powers is designed to forestall overaction an overseer, may not pass upon their legality
resulting from concentration of power. by subjecting them to its stamp of approval
However, with the growing complexity of without disturbing the calculated balance of
modern life, there is a constantly growing powers established in the Constitution. Hence,
tendency toward the delegation of greater legislative vetoes are unconstitutional.
powers by the legislature [Pangasinan [Abakada Guro Party List v. Hon. Cesar
Transportation v. Public Service Commission, Purisima, G.R. No. 166715, (2008)].
G.R. No. L-47065 (1940)].
1. Rule-making Power
The authority delegated by the law-making Doctrine of Subordinate Legislation
body to the administrative agency to adopt Power to promulgate rules and regulations is
rules and regulations intended to carry out the only limited to carrying into effect what is
provisions of a law and implement a legislative provided in the legislative enactment.
policy [CRUZ]. Administrative issuances may be distinguished
Quasi-legislative or rule-making power is the according to their nature and substance:
power to make rules and regulations that legislative and interpretative. A legislative rule
results in delegated legislation that is within is in the matter of subordinate legislation,
the confines of the granting statute and the designed to implement a primary legislation by
doctrine of non-delegability and separability of providing the details thereof. An interpretative
powers. [The Chairman and Executive rule, on the other hand, is designed to provide
guidelines to the law which the administrative (15) days from the date of filing as above
agency is in charge of enforcing. [BPI Leasing provided unless a different date is fixed by
Corporation v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. law, or specified in the rule in cases of
127624, (2003)]. imminent danger to public health, safety
and welfare, the existence of which must
Non-Delegation Doctrine be expressed in a statement
Potestas delegata non delegare potest. What accompanying the rule.
has been delegated cannot be delegated. 3. Every rule establishing an offense or
The general rule barring delegation of defining an act which, pursuant to law, is
legislative powers is subject to the following punishable as a crime or subject to a
recognized limitations or exceptions: penalty shall in all cases be published in full
a. Delegation of tariff powers to the President text.
[Sec. 28 (2), Art. VI, 1987 Constitution]; 4. If not otherwise required by law, an agency
b. Delegation of emergency powers to the shall, as far as practicable, publish or
President [Sec. 23 (2), Art. VI, 1987 circulate notices of proposed rules and
Constitution]; afford interested parties the opportunity to
c. Delegation to the people at large; submit their views prior to the adoption of
d. Delegation to local governments; and any rule.
e. Delegation to administrative bodies 5. In the fixing of rates, no rule or final order
[Abakada v. Ermita, G.R. No. 168056 shall be valid unless the proposed rates
(2005)] shall have been published in a newspaper
Permissible Delegation of general circulation at least two (2) weeks
a. Ascertainment of Facts before the first hearing thereon.
A statute may give to non-judicial officers: [Secs. 3, 4, 6, and 9, Chapter 2, Book VII,
1. The power to declare the existence of Admin. Code]
facts which call into operation the statute's Requisites for a Valid Delegation
provisions, and 1. Completeness Test – The law must be
2. May grant to commissioners and other complete in itself and must set forth the
subordinate officers the power to ascertain policy to be executed.
and determine appropriate facts as a basis A statute is incomplete if it does not lay
for procedure in the enforcement of down any rule or definite standard by which
particular laws. the administrative officer or board may be
Such functions are merely incidental to the guided in the exercise of discretionary
exercise of power granted by law to clear powers delegated to it [People v. Vera,
navigable streams of unauthorized G.R. No. L-45685 (1937)].
obstructions. They can be conferred upon The law must be complete in all its terms
executive officials provided the party and conditions when it leaves the
affected is given the opportunity to be legislature such that when it reaches the
heard [Lovina v. Moreno, G.R. No. L-17821 delegate the only thing he will have to do is
(1963)]. enforce it. [Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v.
b. Filling in the Details POEA, G.R. No. 76633 (1988)]
c. General Rule-Making Power To determine whether or not there is an
General Rules: undue delegation of legislative power, the
1. Every administrative agency is to file with inquiry must be directed to the scope and
the University of the Philippines Law definiteness of the measure enacted. The
Center three (3) certified copies of every legislature does not abdicate its functions
rule adopted by it. when it describes what job must be done,
2. Each rule shall become effective fifteen who is to do it, and what is the scope of his
authority [Edu v. Ericta, G.R. No. L-32096 held to be an adequate source of authority to
(1970)]; and delegate a particular function, unless by
2. Sufficient Standards Test – The law express provision of the Act or by implication
must fix a standard, the limits of which are it
sufficiently determinate or determinable, to has been withheld [Realty Exchange Venture
which the delegate must conform Corp. v. Sendino, G.R. No. 109703 (1994)].
[Abakada v. Ermita, G.R. No. 168056 a. Kinds of Administrative Rules and
(2005)]. Regulations
The legislature may delegate to executive 1. Supplementary legislation – pertains to
officers or bodies the power to determine rules and regulations that fix details in the
certain facts or conditions, or the execution of a policy in the law, e.g. IRRs of
happening of contingencies, on which the the Labor Code. This is also called a legislative
operation of a statute is, by its terms, made rule or subordinate legislation.
to depend, but the legislature must 2. Interpretative legislation – pertains to rules
prescribe sufficient standards, policies or and regulations construing or interpreting the
limitations on their authority [Abakada v. provisions of a statute to be enforced and they
Ermita, supra]. are binding on all concerned until they are
Sufficient Standard changed, e.g. BIR Circulars.
1. Defines legislative policy, marks its Legislative Rules v. Interpretative Rules
limits, maps out its boundaries and Legislative
specifies the public agency to apply it; Rules
and Interpretative
2. Indicates the circumstances under Rules
which the legislative command is to be As to
effected [Santiago v. COMELEC, G.R. Source
127325 (1997); Abakada v. Ermita, Promulgated
supra]. pursuant to its
Forms of a sufficient standard: quasilegislative/
1. Express; rulemaking
functions.
2. Implied [Edu v. Ericta, G.R. No. L-
Promulgated
32096 (1970)]; or pursuant to its
3. Embodied in other statutes on the quasi-judicial
same matter and not necessarily in capacity.
the same law being challenged
[Chiongbian v. Orbos, G.R. No. 96754 As to
(1995)]. Function
In case of a delegation of rate-fixing power, the Create a new
only standard which the legislature is required law, a new
policy, with the
to prescribe for the guidance of the
force and effect
administrative authority is that the rate be of law.
reasonable and just. However, it has been held Merely clarify
that even in the absence of an express the meaning of a
requirement as to reasonableness, this preexisting law
standard may be implied [PHILCOMSAT v. by inferring its
implications.
Alcuaz, G.R. No. 84818 (1989)].
As to
The power conferred upon an administrative
Publication
agency to issue rules and regulations
Need
necessary to carry out its functions has been publication.
Need not be that the body
published. observed the
As to proper
Binding procedure in
passing rules.
Effect
Substantive
So long as the
due process,
court finds that
on the other
the
hand, deals
legislative rules
with the
are within the
limitations
power of the
posed by
administrative
constitutional
agency to pass,
and
as seen in the
fundamental
primary law,
rights to rulemaking.
then the rules
Due process
bind the court.
involves whether
The court
the parties were
cannot
afforded the
question the
opportunity to be
wisdom or
notified and
correctness of
heard before the
the policy
issuance of the
contained in
ruling.
the rules.
At best merely Administrative construction is not necessarily
advisory; the binding upon the courts. An action of an
court may administrative agency may be disturbed or set
review the aside by the judicial department if there is an
correctness of error of law, or abuse of power or lack of
the
jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion clearly
interpretation of
the law given by conflicting with either the letter or the spirit of
the a
administrative legislative enactment. [Peralta v. Civil Service
body, and Commission, G.R. No. 95832 (1992)].
substitute its NOTICE AND HEARING
own view of
1. In the exercise of quasi-judicial functions
what is correct.
If it is not within As a general rule, notice and hearing, as the
the scope of the fundamental requirements of procedural due
administrative process, are essential only when an
agency, the administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial
court may, in function.
addition to
2. In the exercise of quasi-legislative
invalidating the
same, also functions
substitute its In the performance of its executive or
decision or legislative functions, such as issuing rules and
interpretation or regulations, an administrative body need not
give its own set comply with the requirements of notice and
of rules.
hearing [Corona v. United Harbor Pilots
As to Due
Association of the Philippines, G.R. No.
Process
111953 (1997), citing PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz,
Procedural due
process means G.R. No. 84818 (1989)]. The requirements of
due process are presumably satisfied by the given great weight, has a very persuasive
notice, comment, and public hearing influence and may actually be regarded by the
procedures to be complied with by agencies in courts as the controlling factor. [Lim Hoa Ting
the issuance of legislative rules. vs. Central Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. L-
Can the power to hear and decide a case be 10666 (1958)]
delegated? 5. Administrative interpretation is merely
The rule that requires an administrative officer advisory; courts finally determine what the law
to exercise his own judgment and discretion means [Victorias Milling Co., Inc. v. Social
does not preclude him from utilizing, as a Security Commission, G.R. No. 16704 (1962)]
matter of practical administrative procedure, 6. Contingent legislation – Pertains to rules and
the aid of subordinates to investigate and regulations made by an administrative
report to him the facts, on the basis of which authority on the existence of certain facts or
the officer will make his decisions. There is no things upon which the enforcement of the law
abnegation of responsibility by the officer if his depends.
subordinates heard the case as the decision b. Requisites for Validity
remains with and is made by the officer. Requisites of a valid administrative rule:
[American Tobacco Co. v. Director of Patents, 1. Within the scope or authority of law;
G.R. No. L-26803 (1975)] 2. Authorized by law;
3. In the issuance of interpretative rulings 3. Reasonable - If shown to bear no
When an administrative rule is merely reasonable relation to the purposes [using
interpretative in nature, its applicability needs the means-purpose or rational relation
nothing further than its bare issuance for it test] for which they are authorized to be
gives no real consequence more than what the issued, then they must be held to be
law itself has already prescribed. When, upon invalid [Lupangco v. CA, G.R. No. 77372
the other hand, the administrative rule goes (1988)];
beyond merely providing for the means that 4. Promulgated in accordance with
can facilitate or render least cumbersome the prescribed procedure
implementation of the law but substantially
adds to or increases the burden of those Tests to determine invalidity of rules [DE
governed, it behooves the agency to accord at LEON]:
least to those directly affected a chance to be 1. If it exceeds the authority conferred to it;
heard, and thereafter to be duly informed, 2. If it conflicts with the governing statute;
before that new issuance is given the force and 3. If it extends or modifies the statute;
effect of law [Commissioner of Internal 4. If it has no reasonable relationship to the
Revenue v. CA, G.R. No. 119761 (1996)]. statutory purpose; and
Restrictions on interpretative regulations: 5. If it is arbitrary or unreasonable or
1. Does not change the character of a unconstitutional.
ministerial duty; Where a rule or regulation has a provision not
2. Does not involve unlawful use of legislative expressly stated or contained in the statute
or judicial power. being implemented, that provision does not
3. May eliminate construction and uncertainty necessarily contradict the statute. A legislative
in doubtful cases. When laws are susceptible rule is in the nature of subordinate legislation,
of two or more interpretations, the designed to implement a primary legislation by
administrative agency should make known its providing the details thereof. All that is
official position. required is that the regulation should be
4. Administrative construction/interpretation germane to the objects and purposes of the
not binding on the court as to the proper law; that the regulation be not in contradiction
construction of a statute, but generally it is to but in conformity with the standards
prescribed by the law [Holy Spirit Homeowners right is at stake, this court will give the
Association, Inc. challenged law, administrative order, rule or
v. Defensor, G.R. No. 163980 (2006)]. regulation a stricter scrutiny. It will not do for
Rule-making power must be confined to the authorities to invoke the presumption of
details regularity in the performance of official duties.
for regulating the mode or proceedings in [Blas Ople v. Rubed Torres et. al., G.R. No.
order 127685, (1998)].
to carry into effect the law as it has been RULES ON PUBLICATION
enacted, and it cannot be extended to amend 1. Administrative rules and regulations are
or expand the statutory requirements or to subject to the publication and effectivity rules
embrace matters not covered by the statute. of the Administrative Code.
Administrative regulations must always be in 2. Publication Requirement: E.O. 200 (Art. 2,
harmony with the provisions of the law Civil Code) requires publication of laws in the
because Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general
any resulting discrepancy between the two will circulation. Publication is indispensable,
always be resolved in favor of the basic law especially if the rule is general.
[Commissioner v. Fortune Tobacco, G.R. Nos. Publication is indispensable in every case, but
167274-75 (2008)]. the legislature may in its discretion provide that
Accordingly, as the constitutional body the usual 15-day period shall be shortened or
specifically charged with the enforcement and extended. Publication must be in full or it is no
administration of all laws and regulations publication at all, since its purpose is to inform
relative to the conduct of an election, the public of the content of the law. [Tañada v.
plebiscite, Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915 (1986)]
initiative, referendum, and recall, the Publication is mandatory for the following to
COMELEC should be given sufficient leeway in be effective:
accounting for the exigencies of the upcoming 1. Laws not only of general application, but
elections. In fine, its measures therefor should also laws of local application, private laws;
be respected, unless it is clearly shown that 2. Presidential decrees and executive orders
the promulgated by the President in the
same are devoid of any reasonable exercise of legislative powers whenever
justification. [Kabataan Party-list v. COMELEC, the same are validly delegated by the
G.R. No. 221318 (2015)]. legislature or, at present, directly conferred
The function of promulgating rules and by the Constitution;
regulations may be legitimately exercised only 3. Administrative rules and regulations
for the purpose of carrying the provisions of enforcing or implementing existing law
the pursuant also to a valid delegation;
law into effect. The power of administrative 4. City charters; and
agencies is thus confined to implementing the 5. Circulars issued by the Monetary Board
law or putting it into effect. Corollary to this is not merely interpreting but "filling in the
that administrative regulations cannot extend details" of the Central Bank Act which that
the law and amend a legislative enactment. body is supposed to enforce
[Land Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Publication is not necessary for the following
Appeals, G.R. No. 118712, (1995)]. to be effective:
In the case at bar, A.O. No. 308 may have been 1. Interpretative regulations;
impelled by a worthy purpose, but, it cannot 2. Regulations which are merely internal in
pass constitutional scrutiny for it is not nature (regulating only the personnel of the
narrowly administrative agency need not the
drawn. when the integrity of a fundamental published);
3. Letters of instructions issued by provided by law not inconsistent with this
administrative superiors concerning the Book,
rules or guidelines to be followed by their each rule shall become effective fifteen (15)
subordinates in the performance of their days from the date of filing as above provided
duties; unless a different date is fixed by law, or
4. Internal instructions issued by an specified in the rule in cases of imminent
administrative agency; and danger to public health, safety and welfare, the
5. Municipal ordinances which are governed existence of which must be expressed in a
by the Local Government Code [Tañada v. statement accompanying the rule. The agency
Tuvera, G.R. No. L-63915 (1986)] shall take appropriate measures to make
FILING REQUIREMENT emergency rules known to persons who may
Filing be affected by them. [Sec. 4, Chapter 1, Book
Every agency shall file with the University of VII, Admin. Code]
the Philippines Law Center three (3) certified Note:
copes of every rule adopted by it. Rules in 1. The Administrative Code requires filing.
force on the date of the effectivity of this Code 2. The Civil Code requires publication.
which are not filed within three (3) months from 3. Because the Civil Code does not preclude
that date shall not thereafter be the basis of other rule-making requirements provided by
any sanction against any party or persons. law (i.e. the Administrative Code), both
[Sec. 3, publication and filing must be satisfied before
Chapter 1, Book VII, Admin. Code] the 15 day-count begins.
The Administrative Code of 1987, particularly These requirements of publication and filing
Section 3 of Book VII thereof, expressly were put in place as safeguards against
requires each agency to file with the Office of abuses on the part of lawmakers and as
the National Administrative Register (ONAR) of guarantees to the constitutional right to due
the University of the Philippines Law Center process and to information on matters of
three certified copies of every rule adopted by public
it. Administrative issuances which are not concern and, therefore, require strict
published or filed with the ONAR are compliance. Failure to comply with the
ineffective requirements of publication and filing of
and may not be enforced [GMA v. MTRCB, administrative issuances renders said
G.R. No. 148579 (2007)]. issuances ineffective [Republic v. Pilipinas
Not all rules and regulations adopted by every Shell Petroleum, G.R. No. 173918 (2008)].
government agency are to be filed with the UP Exceptions
Law Center. Only those of general or of 1. Different date is fixed by law or specified in
permanent character are to be filed. According the rule; and
to the UP Law Center’s guidelines for receiving 2. In case of imminent danger to public health,
and publication of rules and regulations, safety and welfare.
“interpretative regulations and those merely PENAL RULES
internal in nature, that is, regulating only the Omission of Some Rules.
personnel of the administrative agency and not Every rule establishing an offense or defining
the public,” need not be filed with the UP Law an act which, pursuant to law is punishable as
Center. [Board of Trustees v. Velasco, G.R. a crime or subject to a penalty shall in all cases
No. 170463 (2011)]. be published in full text. [Sec. 6, Chapter 1,
Effectivity: 15 days after filing and publication Book VII, Admin. Code]
EFFECTIVITY General Rule: Rules must not provide penal
In addition to other rule-making requirements sanctions.
Exception: A violation or infringement of a rule decide by the application of rules to the
or regulation validly issued can constitute a ascertained facts. By this power,
crime punishable as provided in the administrative authorities are enabled to
authorizing statute and by virtue of the latter interpret and apply not only implementing
[People v.Maceren, G.R. No. L- 32166 (1977)]. rules and regulations promulgated by them but
For an administrative regulation to have the also the laws entrusted to their administration.
force of penal law: [DE LEON]
1. The violation of the administrative regulation The power of the administrative agency to
must be made a crime by the delegating determine questions of fact to which the
statute itself; and legislative policy is to apply, in accordance
2. The penalty for such violation must be with
provided by the statute itself [Perez v. LPG the standards laid down by the law itself
Refillers Association of the Philippines, Inc., [Smart
G.R. No. 159149 (2006), citing U.S. v. Panlilio, Communications v. NTC, G.R. No. 151908
G.R. No. L-9876 (1914)]. (2003)].
Penal laws and regulations imposing penalties An agency is said to be exercising judicial
must be published before it takes effect function where it has the power to determine
[People v. Que Po Lay, G.R. No. 6791 (1954)]. what the law is and what the legal rights of
Can administrative bodies make penal rules? the parties are, and then undertakes to
NO. A lawmaking body cannot delegate to an determine these questions and adjudicate
executive official the power to declare what upon the rights of the parties. Quasi-judicial
acts should constitute an offense. Penal function is a term which applies to the action,
statutes are exclusive to the legislature and discretion, etc. of public administrative officers
cannot be delegated. Administrative rules and or bodies, who are required to investigate facts
regulations must not include, prohibit or or ascertain the existence of facts, hold
punish acts which the law does not even hearings, and draw conclusions from them as
define as a criminal act. [People v. Maceren, a basis for their official action and to exercise
G.R. No. L- discretion of a judicial nature. [Civil Service
32166 (1977)]. Commission v. Magoyag, G.R. No. 197792
In a prosecution for a violation of an (2015)].
administrative order, it must clearly appear Source
that the order is one within the scope of Incidental to the power of regulation but is
authority conferred upon the administrative often
body and the order will be scrutinized with expressly conferred by the legislature through
special care. specific provisions in the charter of the
[People v. Maceren, G.R. No. L-32166 (1977)] agency.
Power to Amend, Revise, Alter or Repeal Distinguished from Judicial Proceedings
Rules Administrative Judicial
Following the doctrine of necessary Nature
implication, the grant of express power to of
formulate implementing rules and regulations Procee
must necessarily include the power to amend, dings
revise, alter, or repeal the same [Yazaki Torres Inquisitorial Adversarial
Manufacturing, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No. 130584 Rules
of
(2006)].
Proced
2. Adjudicatory Power ure
It is the power of an administrative agency to Liberally applied
hear and determine, or to ascertain facts and but subject to
Ang Tibay essentially the same: "(t)o follow up step by
requirements step by patient inquiry or observation. To trace
Follow technical or track; to search into; to examine and inquire
rules in the into with care and accuracy; to find out by
Rules of Court careful inquisition; examination; the taking of
Nature evidence; a legal inquiry;" "to inquire; to make
and an investigation," "investigation" being in turn
Extent described as "(a)n administrative function, the
of
exercise of which ordinarily does not require a
Decisio
hearing.
n
To 'adjudicate' means to adjudge, arbitrate,
Decision
generally limited
judge, decide, determine, resolve, rule on,
to matters of settle. The dictionary defines the term as "to
general concern, settle finally (the rights and duties of the parties
but also resolves to a court case) on the merits of issues raised:
the issues raised x x to pass judgment on: settle judicially: x x
by the parties in act
a specific as judge." In the legal sense, "adjudicate"
dispute means: "To settle in the exercise of judicial
Decision authority. To determine finally.
includes Fact-finding is not adjudication and it cannot
matters brought be
as issue by the likened to the judicial function of a court of
parties justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency or
Parties The agency itself office. The function of receiving evidence and
may be a party ascertaining therefrom the facts of a
to the controversy is not a judicial function. To be
proceedings considered as such, the act of receiving
before it
evidence and arriving at factual conclusions in
Only the private
a controversy must be accompanied by the
parties
authority of applying the law to the factual
Distinguished from Investigative Power [DE
conclusions to the end that the controversy
LEON]
may be decided or resolved authoritatively,
The purpose of an investigation is to discover,
finally and definitively, subject to appeals or
find out, learn, obtain information. Nowhere
modes of review as may be provided by law.
included is the notion of settling, deciding or
[Louis Biraogo v. Philippine Truth Commission,
resolving controversies in the facts inquired
G.R. No. 192935, (2010), citing Hon. Isidro
into by application of the law to the facts
Carino v. CHR, G.R. No. 96681, (1991)].
established by the inquiry.
Distinguished from Legislative or Rule-
To 'investigate' means to examine, explore,
Making Power [DE LEON]
inquire or delve or probe into, research on,
1. Quasi-judicial action involves enforcement
study. The purpose of investigation, of course,
of
is to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain
liabilities as they stand on present or past facts
information. Nowhere included or intimated is
and under laws supposed to exist, while
the notion of settling, deciding or resolving a
quasilegislation
controversy involved in the facts inquired into
looks to the future and changes
by application of the law to the facts
existing conditions by making a new rule to be
established by the inquiry.
applied prospectively.
The legal meaning of "investigate" is
2. Adjudication applies to named persons or to enforcement if the inquiry is:
specific situations while the legislation lays (1) within the authority of the agency;
down general regulations that apply to classes (2) the demand is not too indefinite; and
of persons or situations. (3) the information is reasonably relevant
Requisites for a Valid Exercise: [Evangelista v. Jarencio, G.R. No. L-
1. Jurisdiction 29274, (1975)].
2. Due process Contempt Power
General Rule: A tribunal, board or officer General Rule: Exercised through the order
exercising judicial functions acts without and assistance of RTC.
jurisdiction if no authority has been conferred Exception: When the law gives agency
to it by law to hear and decide cases. contempt power.
● Jurisdiction to hear must be explicit or The exercise of this power [to punish for
by necessary implication, conferred contempt] has always been regarded as a
through the terms of the enabling necessary incident and attribute of courts. Its
statute. exercise by administrative bodies has been
● Effect of administrative acts outside invariably limited to making effective the power
jurisdiction—Void. to elicit testimony, and the exercise of that
Rationale: They are mere creatures of law and power by an administrative body in
have no general powers but only such as have furtherance
been conferred upon them by law. of its administrative function has been held
Powers Included in Quasi-Judicial invalid [Guevara v. Comelec, G.R. No. L-
Functions 12596, (1958)].
Subpoena Power Power to issue Search Warrant or Warrant
In any contested case, the agency shall have of Arrest
the power to require the attendance of General Rule: Only judges may issue.
witnesses or the production of books, papers, Under the express terms of our Constitution, it
documents and other pertinent data, upon is doubtful whether the arrest of an individual
request of any party before or during the may be ordered by any authority other than the
hearing upon showing of general relevance. judge if the purpose is merely to determine the
Unless otherwise provided by law, the agency existence of a probable cause, leading to an
may, in case of disobedience, invoke the aid of administrative investigation. [Qua Chee Gan v.
the Regional Trial Court within whose Deportation Board, G.R. No. L-10280 (1963),
jurisdiction the contested case being heard decided under the 1935 Constitution. Note
falls. The Court may punish contumacy or that
refusal as contempt. [Sec. 13, Chapter 1, Book the 1987 and 1935 Constitutions are the same
VII, Admin. Code] in limiting the issuance of warrants of arrest to
Administrative agencies may enforce a judge.]
subpoenas issued in the course of Under Article III, Section 2, of the 1987
investigations, whether or not adjudication is Constitution, only judges, and no other, may
involved, and whether or not probable cause is issue warrants of arrest and search. The
shown and even before the issuance of a exception is in cases of deportation of illegal
complaint. The purpose of the subpoena is to and undesirable aliens, whom the President or
discover evidence, not to prove a pending the Commissioner of Immigration may order
charge. When investigative and accusatory arrested, following a final order of deportation,
duties are delegated by statute to an for the purpose of deportation [Salazar v.
administrative body, it, too may take steps to Achacoso, G.R. No. 81510 (1990)].
inform itself as to whether there is probable Board of Commissioners v. De La Rosa [G.R.
violation of the law.
A subpoena meets the requirements for
Nos. 95122 (1991)] reiterates the rule that for a Due process as a constitutional precept does
warrant of arrest issued by the Commissioner not always and in all situations require a
of Immigration to be valid, it must be for the trialtype
sole purpose of executing a final order of proceeding. Due process is satisfied when
deportation. A warrant of arrest issued by the a person is notified of the charge against him
Commissioner of Immigration for purposes of and given an opportunity to explain or defend
investigation only is null and void for being himself. The essence of due process is simply
unconstitutional. to be heard, or as applied to administrative
Exception: A warrant may be issued by the proceedings, an opportunity to explain one's
administrative agency following a final order. side, or an opportunity to seek a
It is different if the order of arrest is issued to reconsideration of the action or ruling
carry out a final finding of a violation, either by complained of. [NAPOLCOM National
an executive or legislative officer or agency Appellate Board v. Bernabe, G.R. No. 129914,
duly authorized for the purpose, as then the (2000)].
warrant is not that mentioned in the CARDINAL PRIMARY RIGHTS
Constitution which is issuable only on Ang Tibay v. CIR [G.R. No. L-46496 (1940)]
probable cause. Such for example, would be a lays down the cardinal primary rights:
warrant of arrest to carry out a final order of 1. Right to a hearing (includes the right of a
deportation, or to effect compliance of an party to present his own case and submit
order of contempt evidence in support thereof)
[Qua Chee Gan vs. Deportation Board, G.R. 2. The tribunal must consider the evidence
No. L-10280 (1963)]. presented
Note: In Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago [G.R. 3. Decision must be supported by evidence.
No. L-82544 (1988)], there was no final order 4. Evidence must be substantial.
of deportation. The executive officials were the Quantum of Proof: Substantial
ones who made a finding of probable cause, Evidence
not the judge. As such, this case seems to The amount of relevant evidence which
carve out another exception (in addition to a reasonable mind might accept as
warrant of arrest to enforce an order of adequate to justify a conclusion [Sec.
deportation) - upon showing of probable cause 5, Rule 133, Rules of Court]
and the filing of a charge. An administrative proceeding is
a. Administrative Due Process different from a criminal case and may
While administrative agencies are free from the proceed independently thereof. The
rigidity of certain procedural requirements, quantum of proof in the latter is
they different, such that the verdict in one
cannot entirely ignore or disregard the need not necessarily be the same as in
fundamental and essential requirements of the other. A finding of guilt in the
due criminal case will not necessarily result
process in trials and investigations of an in a finding of liability in the
administrative character [Ang Tibay v. CIR, administrative case [Miralles v. Go,
G.R. No. L-46496 (1940)]. G.R. No. 139943, (2001)].
Effect of Decisions Rendered without Due 5. Decision must be rendered on the
Process evidence presented at the hearing or at
A decision rendered without due process is least contained in the record and disclosed
void ab initio and may be attacked at any time to the parties affected
directly or collaterally by means of a separate 6. The judge must act on its or his own
action or proceeding where it is invoked independent consideration of the law and
[Garcia v. Molina, G.R. No. 157383 (2010)]. facts of the controversy (not simply accept
the views of a subordinate in arriving at a an investigator's recommendation, but must
decision) personally weigh and assess the evidence
7. Decision must be rendered in such a gathered [DOH v. Camposano, G.R. No.
manner as to let the parties know the 157684 (2005)].
various issues involved and the reasons for One may be heard, not solely by verbal
the decision rendered. presentation but also, and perhaps even many
In administrative proceedings, procedural times more creditably than oral argument,
due process has been recognized to through pleadings [Mutuc v. CA, G.R. No.
include the following: 48108 (1990)].
(1) The right to actual or constructive notice of RIGHT TO COUNSEL
the institution of proceedings which may affect The right to counsel is not imperative in
a respondent’s legal rights; administrative investigations because such
(2) A real opportunity to be heard personally or inquiries are conducted merely to determine
with the assistance of counsel, to present whether there are facts that merit disciplinary
witnesses and evidence in one’s favor, and to measures against erring public officers and
defend one’s rights; employees, with the purpose of maintaining
(3) A tribunal vested with competent the dignity of government service [Lumiqued v.
jurisdiction Exevea, G.R. No. 117565 (1997)].
and so constituted as to afford a person Presence of a party at a trial is not always the
charged administratively a reasonable essence of due process. All that the law
guarantee of honesty as well as impartiality; requires to satisfy adherence to this
and constitutional precept is that the parties be
(4) A finding by said tribunal which is given notice of the trial, an opportunity to be
supported heard. Where the defendant failed to appear
by substantial evidence submitted for on
consideration during the hearing or contained the date set for the trial, of which he was
in the records or made known to the parties previously notified, he is deemed to have
affected [Vivo v. Pagcor, G.R. No. 187854, forfeited his right to be heard in his defense
(2013)]. [Asprec v. Itchon, G.R. No. L- 21685 (1966)].
Due process does not require that actual Any seeming defect in the observance of due
taking process is cured by the filing of a motion for
of testimony be before the same officer who reconsideration. Denial of due process cannot
will be successfully invoked by a party who has
decide the case. As long as a party is not had
deprived of his right to present his own case the opportunity to be heard on his motion for
and submit evidence in support thereof, and reconsideration [A.Z. Arnaiz Realty Inc. v.
the decision is supported by the evidence in Office of the President, G.R. No. 170623,
the (2010)].
record, there is no question that the The principle that a person cannot be
requirements of due process and fair trial are prejudiced by a ruling rendered in an action or
fully met [American Tobacco Co. v. Director of proceeding in which he was not made a party
Patents, G.R. No. L-26803 (1975)]. conforms to the constitutional guarantee of
The actual exercise of the disciplining due
authority's prerogative requires a prior process of law. Since respondent was not
independent consideration of the law and the impleaded in the HLURB case, he could not be
facts. Failure to comply with this requirement bound by the decision rendered therein.
results in an invalid decision. The disciplining Because he was not impleaded in said case;
authority should not merely and solely rely on he was not given the opportunity to present his
case therein [Aguilar v. O’Pallick, G.R. No. in administrative proceedings. Said section
182280 (2013)]. applies only to decisions rendered in judicial
Is a trial necessary? proceedings. The constitutional mandate does
No. Due process does not necessarily mean or not preclude the validity of “memorandum
require a trial-type hearing, but simply an decisions,” which adopt by reference the
opportunity or a right to be heard. [Vinta findings of fact and conclusions of law
Maritime Co., Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 113911 contained in the decisions of inferior tribunals
(1978)]. [Solid Homes, Inc. v. Laserna, G.R. No.
BUT the right of a party to confront and 166051 (2008)].
crossexamine There is no requirement in Ang Tibay v. CIR
an opposing witness is a fundamental that the decision must express clearly and
right which is part of due process. If without distinctly the facts and the law on which it is
his fault, this right is violated, he is entitled to based for as long as the administrative
have the direct examination stricken off the decision is grounded on evidence, and
record expressed in a manner that sufficiently informs
[Bachrach Motor Co., Inc. v. CIR, G.R. No. L- the parties of the factual and legal bases of the
26136 (1978)]. decision, the due process requirement is
While the right to cross-examine is a vital satisfied [Solid Homes, Inc. v. Laserna, G.R.
element of procedural due process, the right No. 166051 (2008)]. This is not understood as
does not necessarily require an actual cross abandoning the requirement in the
examination but merely an opportunity to Constitution
exercise this right if desired by the party and the Administrative Code with respecting
entitled explaining the factual and legal bases of
to it [Gannapao v. CSC, G.R. No. 180141 judgment, only that the decision is sufficient
(2011)]. even if it is not written in the same extended
The requirements [of notice and hearing] are manner as in judicial decisions.
followed where parties are given fair The order, it is true, does not make its own
opportunity to explain their side. Such cases discussion of the evidence or its own findings
may be resolved based solely on documentary of fact, but such is not necessary if the court is
evidence submitted by parties as affidavits satisfied with the report of its examiner or
may referee which already contains a full
take the place of their direct testimony. discussion of the evidence and the findings of
[Samalio v. CA, G.R. No. 140079, (2005)]. fact based thereon. The situation differs if the
Evidence on record must be fully disclosed to court disagrees with the report in which case it
the parties [American Inter-Fashion v. Office of should state the reasons for its disagreement.
the President, G.R. No. 92422 (1991)], but If it is in full accord with the report, it is
respondents in administrative cases are not purposeless to repeat what the examiner has
entitled to be informed of findings of already found in it. [Graciano Indias v.
investigative committees but only of the Philippine Iron Mines, G.R. No. L-9987 (1957)]
decision of the administrative body [Pefianco **Note: in Indias, the “court” being referred to
v. was the Court of Industrial Relations which
Moral, G.R. No. 132248 (2000)]. was
DECISIONS RENDERED an administrative agency
Section 14, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution Note: However, in the Administrative Code, it
(i.e., “No decision shall be rendered by any is provided that:
court without expressing therein clearly and Decision. – Every decision rendered by the
distinctly the facts and the law on which it is agency in a contested case shall be in writing
based.”) need not apply to decisions rendered and shall state clearly and distinctly the facts
and the law on which it is based. The agency vital public interests, through the exercise of
shall decide each case within thirty (30) days police power [Pollution Adjudication Board v.
following its submission. The parties shall be CA, G.R. No. 93891 (1991)].
notified of the decision personally or by NOTE: In this case, ex parte cease and desist
registered mail addressed to their counsel of orders are allowed (a) whenever the wastes
record, if any, or to them. [Sec. 14, Chapter 1, discharged by an establishment pose an
Book VII, Admin. Code] "immediate threat to life, public health, safety
Due process is violated when: or welfare, or to animal or plant life or (b)
1. There is failure to sufficiently explain the Whenever such discharges or wastes exceed
reason for the decision rendered; or "the allowable standards set by the NPCC".
2. If not supported by substantial evidence; or Required Notice and Hearing under the
3. Imputation of a violation and imposition Admin. Code
of a fine despite absence of due notice and ● Contested cases [Sec. 11, Chapter 3, Book
hearing [Globe Telecom v. NTC, G.R. No. VII, Admin. Code]
143964 (2004)]. ● Insofar as practicable, to certain licensing
NOTICE AND HEARING procedures, involving grant, renewal,
When required: denial or cancellation of a license; i.e. when
1. When the law specifically requires it; or the grant, renewal, denial or cancellation of
2. When it affects a person’s status and liberty a license is required to be preceded by
When not required: notice and hearing [Sec. 17(1), Chapter 3,
1. When there is urgent need for immediate Book VII, Admin. Code]
action [Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, G.R. ● All licensing procedures, when a license is
No. 139465 (2000)]; withdrawn, suspended, revoked or
2. When there is tentativeness of annulled [Sec. 17(2), Chapter 3, Book VII,
administrative action, i.e. the person Admin. Code]
affected is not precluded from enjoying the Exceptions
right to notice and hearing at a later time Notice and hearing not required in cases of
without prejudice to them; (a) willful violation of pertinent laws, rules
3. When notice and hearing have been and regulations or
proferred, but the right to exercise them (b) when public security, health, or safety
have not been claimed; require otherwise [Sec. 17(2), Chapter
4. Discretion is exercised by an officer vested 3, Book. VII, Admin. Code].
with it upon an undisputed fact [Suntay v.
People, G.R. No. L-9430 (1957)]; APPLICABILITY OF RULES OF EVIDENCE
5. If it involves the exercise of discretion and IN ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
there is no grave abuse; In administrative proceedings, technical rules
6. When it involves rules to govern future of procedure and evidence are not strictly
conduct of persons or enterprises, unless applied; administrative due process cannot be
law provides otherwise; or fully equated with due process in its strict
7. In the valid exercise of police power. judicial sense [Vinta Maritime Co., Inc. v.
Meetings in the nature of consultation and NLRC, G.R. No. 113911 (1978)].
conferences may not be valid substitutes for Administrative rules of procedure are
the proper observance of notice and hearing construed liberally to promote their objective
[Equitable Bank v. NLRC, G.R. No. 102467, and to assist parties in obtaining just, speedy
(1997)]. and inexpensive determination of their
It is a constitutional commonplace that the respective claims and defenses. As a general
ordinary requirements of procedural due rule, a finding of guilt in administrative cases,
process yield to the necessities of protecting if
supported by substantial evidence will be
sustained by this Court [Civil Service case, if deemed necessary [Reyes v. Zamora,
Commission v. Colanggo, G.R. No. 174935, G.R. No. L-46732 (1979)].
(2008)]. N.B. Under the Doctrine of Qualified Political
b. Administrative Appeal and Review Agency [Villena v. Secretary of Interior, G.R.
Different kinds of administrative appeal and No. L-46570 (1939)], a decision of the
review [DE LEON]: department head generally need not be
1. That which inheres in the relation of appealed to the Office of the President, since
administrative superior to administrative the department head (e.g. Secretary) is the
subordinate where determinations are alter ego of the President, and the former’s
made at lower levels of the same acts
administrative system; are presumably the President’s. However, the
2. That embraced in statutes which provide doctrine does not apply when (a) the act is
for a determination to be made by a repudiated by the President, or (b) the act is
particular officer of body subject to appeal, required (by law) to be performed specifically
review, or redetermination by another by the department head.
officer or body in the same agency or in the In order that the review of the decision of a
same administrative system; subordinate officer might not turn out to be a
3. That in which the statute attempts to make farce, the reviewing officer must perforce be
a court a part of the administrative scheme other than the officer whose decision is under
by providing in terms or effect that the review; otherwise, there could be no different
court, on review of the action of an view or there would be no real review of the
administrative agency, shall exercise case. [Zambales Chromite Mining v. CA, G.R.
powers of such extent that they differ from No. L-49711, (1979)].
ordinary judicial functions and involve a The law, in prescribing a process of appeal to
trial de novo of matters of fact or discretion a higher level, contemplates that the reviewing
and application of the independent officer is a person different from the one who
judgment of the court; issued the appealed decision. Otherwise, the
4. That in which the statute provides that an review becomes a farce; it is rendered
order made by a division of a Commission meaningless [Rivera v. CSC, G.R. No. 115147
or Board has the same force and effect as (1995)].
if made by the Commission subject to a c. Administrative Res Judicata
rehearing by the full Commission, for the This doctrine of finality of judgment is
‘rehearing’ is practically an appeal to grounded on fundamental considerations of
another administrative tribunal; public policy and sound practice. Nothing is
5. That in which the statute provides for an more settled in law than that once a judgment
appeal to an officer on an intermediate attains finality it thereby becomes immutable
level with subsequent appeal to the head of and unalterable.
the department or agency; and [Civil Service Commission v. Magoyag, G.R.
6. That embraced in statutes which provide No. 197792 (2015)].
for appeal at the highest level, namely, the When it applies
President. The doctrine of res judicata applies only to
A party must prove that it has been affected or judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings and not
aggrieved by an administrative agency in order to the exercise of purely administrative
to entitle it to a review by an appellate functions.
administrative body or another administrative Administrative proceedings are non-litigious
body. and summary in nature; hence, res judicata
The appellate administrative agency may does not apply [Nasipit Lumber Co. v. NLRC,
conduct additional hearings in the appealed G.R. No. 54424 (1989)].
Requisites: Exception: For res judicata to be applied in
1. The former judgment must be final; cases of citizenship, the following must be
2. It must have been rendered by a court present:
having jurisdiction over the subject matter and 1. A person's citizenship must be raised as a
the parties; material issue in a controversy where said
3. It must be a judgment on the merits; and person is a party;
4. There must be identity of parties, subject 2. The Solicitor General or his authorized
matter and cause of action [Ipekdijan representative took active part in the resolution
Merchandising v. CTA, G.R. No. L-14791 thereof; and
(1963)]. 3. The finding or citizenship is affirmed by SC
Res judicata embraces two concepts: [Board of Commissioners v. De la Rosa, G.R.
1. Bar by prior judgment: exists “when, as Nos. 95122 (1991)].
between the first case where the judgment Res judicata may not be invoked in labor
was relations proceedings because they are
rendered and the second case that is sought nonlitigious
to and summary in nature [Nasipit
be barred.” there is identity of parties, subject Lumber Co., Inc. v. NLRC, G.R. No. 54424
matter, and causes of action. (1989)].
2. Conclusiveness of judgment: exists when Due to the difference between the quantum of
“a fact or question has been squarely put in evidence, procedure, and sanctions imposed
issue, judicially passed upon, and adjudged in in
a former suit by a court of competent criminal and administrative proceedings, the
jurisdiction.” This principle only needs identity findings and conclusions in one should not
of parties and issues to apply. [Emerald necessarily be binding on the other [Ocampo
Garment Manufacturing Corp. v. CA, G.R. No. v.
100098 (1995)]. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No.114683
While it is true that this Court has declared that (2000)].
the doctrine of res judicata applies only to The basis of administrative liability differs from
judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings, and not criminal liability. The purpose of administrative
to the exercise of administrative powers, we proceedings is mainly to protect the public
have also limited the latter to proceedings service, based on the time-honored principle
purely administrative in nature. Therefore, that a public office is a public trust. On the
when the administrative proceedings take on other
an adversary character, the doctrine of res hand, the purpose of the criminal prosecution
judicata certainly applies [Heirs of Maximino is the punishment of crime [Ferrer v.
Derla v. Heirs of Catalina Derla Vda. De Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 161067 (2008)].
Hipolito, G.R. No. 157717 (2011)]. Forum Shopping
Effect There is forum-shopping whenever, as a result
Decisions and orders of administrative bodies of an adverse opinion in one forum, a party
rendered pursuant to their quasi-judicial seeks a favorable opinion (other than by
authority have, upon their finality, the force and appeal or certiorari) in another. The principle
effect of a final judgment within the purview of applies not only with respect to suits filed in
the doctrine of res judicata, which forbids the the courts but also in connection with litigation
reopening of matters once judicially commenced in the courts while an
determined by competent authorities. administrative proceeding is pending, in order
General Rule: Res judicata does not apply in to defeat administrative processes and in
administrative adjudication relative to anticipation of an unfavorable administrative
citizenship. ruling and a favorable court ruling.
The test for determining whether a party has showing of grave abuse of discretion [Marlow
violated the rule against forum shopping is Navigation Philippines Inc. vs. Heirs of Ricardo
where a final judgment in one case will amount S. Ganal, G.R. No. 220168 (2017)].
to res judicata in the action under Exception: Equally settled that one of the
consideration exceptions to the above rule is when the
[Fortich v. Corona, G.R. No. 131457 (1998), factual
citing First Philippine International Bank v. CA findings of the quasi-judicial agencies
(1996)]. concerned are conflicting or contrary with
The rule against forum shopping applies only those
to judicial cases or proceedings, not to of the CA.
administrative cases [Office of the "Investigate" means to examine, explore,
Ombudsman v. Rodriguez, G.R. No. 172700 inquire or delve or probe into, research on,
(2010)]. study. The purpose of investigation is to
U.P. LAW BOC ADMINISTRATIVE LAW discover, to find out, to learn, obtain
POLITICAL LAW information. Nowhere included or intimated is
Page 285 of 439 the notion of settling, deciding or resolving a
3. Fact-Finding, Investigative, controversy involved in the facts inquired into
by application of the law to the facts
Licensing, and Rate-Fixing
established by the inquiry [Cariño v. CHR, G.R.
Powers No. 96681 (1991)].
a. Ascertainment of Fact c. Licensing Function
A statute may give to non-judicial officers: Licensing Procedure
1. The power to declare the existence of 1. When the grant, renewal, denial or
facts which call into operation the cancellation of a license is required to
statute’s provisions, and be preceded by notice and hearing, the
2. May grant to commissioners and other provisions concerning contested cases
subordinate officers the power to shall apply insofar as practicable.
ascertain and determine appropriate 2. Except in cases of willful violation of
facts as a basis for procedure in the pertinent laws, rules and regulations or
enforcement of particular laws. when public security, health, or safety
Such functions are merely incidental to the requires otherwise, no license may be
exercise of power granted by law to clear withdrawn, suspended, revoked or
navigable streams of unauthorized annulled without notice and hearing
obstructions. They can be conferred upon [Sec. 17, Chapter 3, Book VII, Admin.
executive officials provided the party affected Code].
is given the opportunity to be heard [Lovina v. Nonexpiration of License
Moreno, G.R. No. L-17821 (1963)]. Where the licensee has made timely and
b. Investigative Powers sufficient application for the renewal of a
Administrative agencies’ power to conduct license with reference to any activity of a
investigations and hearings, and make continuing nature, the existing license shall not
findings expire until the application shall have been
and recommendations thereon is inherent in finally determined by the agency [Sec. 18,
their functions as administrative agencies. Chapter 3, Book VII, Admin. Code].
General Rule: Findings of fact by Definitions
administrative agencies and quasi-judicial 1. “License” includes the whole or any
bodies, which have acquired expertise part of any agency permit, certificate,
because of their jurisdiction is confined to passport, clearance, approval,
specific matters, are generally accorded not registration, charter, membership,
only great respect but even finality, absent a
statutory exemption or other form of first hearing thereon [Sec. 9, Chapter 2, Book
permission, or regulation of the VII, Admin Code].
exercise of a right or privilege. Generally, the power to fix rates is a
2. “Licensing” includes agency process quasilegislative
involving the grant, renewal, denial, function, i.e. it is meant to apply to
revocation, suspension, annulment, all. However, it becomes quasi-judicial when
withdrawal, limitation, amendment, the rate is applicable only to a particular party,
modification or conditioning of a predicated upon a finding of fact
license. [PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz, G.R. No. 84818
U.P. LAW BOC ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (1989), citing Vigan Electric Light Co. v. Public
POLITICAL LAW Service Commission, G.R. No. L-19850
Page 286 of 439 (1964)].
When are notice and hearing required in While respondent [NTC] may fix a temporary
licensing? rate pending final determination of the
Only if it is a contested case. Otherwise, it can application of petitioner, such rate-fixing
be dispensed with (e.g., driver’s licenses) [Sec. order,
2, Chapter 1, Book VII, Admin. Code]. even if temporary, is not exempt from the
A license or permit is not a contract between statutory procedural requirements of notice
the sovereignty and the licensee. Rather, it is a and hearing, as well as the requirement of
special privilege, a permission or authority to reasonableness [PHILCOMSAT v. Alcuaz,
do what is within its terms. It is always G.R. No. 84818 (1989)].
revocable. The absence of an expiry date in a N.B. The old doctrine is if the rate-fixing power
license does not make it perpetual. is quasi-legislative, it need not be
Notwithstanding that absence, the license accompanied
cannot last beyond the life of the basic by prior notice and hearing. Under the
authority Administrative Code (supra), the distinction
under which it was issued [Gonzalo Sy Trading seems to have been disregarded, since the
v. Central Bank, G.R. No. L-41480 (1976)]. provision did not qualify the character of the
Note: The Administrative Code, however, rate-fixing, and now requires prior notice (via
prescribes notice and hearing before it can be publication) before the hearing.
revoked, subject to certain exceptions. Can the power to fix rates be delegated to a
d. Fixing of Rates, Wages, and Prices common carrier or other public service?
Definition NO.
“Rate” means any charge to the public for a The latter may propose new rates, but these
service open to all and upon the same terms, will not be effective without the approval of the
including individual or joint rates, tolls, administrative agency [KMU v. Garcia, G.R.
classification or schedules thereof, as well as No. 115381 (1994)].
communication, mileage, kilometrage and What is considered in the fixing of rates?
other special rates which shall be imposed by 1. The present valuation of all the property of a
law or regulation to be observed and followed public utility, and
by any person [Sec. 2, Chapter 1, Book VII, 2. The fixed assets.
Admin. Code]. The property is deemed taken and condemned
PUBLICATION REQUIREMENT FOR by the public at the time of filing the petition,
RATEFIXING and the rate should go up and down with the
Public Participation physical valuation of the property. It should not
[…] (2) In the fixing of rates, no rule or final be confiscatory as to be oppressive to the
order shall be valid unless the proposed rates business owner, but should also be just and
shall have been published in a newspaper of reasonable so that it is fair to the public.
general circulation at least 2 weeks before the
[Ynchausti v. Public Utility Commissioner, G.R. administrative agency within its jurisdiction
No. L-17665 (1922)]. and
The charter of Manila International Airport protect the substantial rights of the parties;
Authority (MIAA), as amended, directly vests It is that part of the checks and balances which
the power to determine revisions of fees, restricts the separation of powers and
charges and rates in the “ministry head” and forestalls
even requires approval of the cabinet. The arbitrary and unjust adjudications [St. Martin’s
ministry head who has the power to determine Funeral Homes v. NLRC, G.R. No. 130866
the revision of fees, charges and rates of the (1998)].
U.P. LAW BOC ADMINISTRATIVE LAW N.B. Rule 43 of the Rules of Court provides
POLITICAL LAW that
Page 287 of 439 the Court of Appeals shall have appellate
MIAA is now the DOTC Secretary. As an jurisdiction over awards, judgments, final
attached agency of the DOTC, the MIAA is orders or resolutions of or authorized by any
governed by the Administrative Code of 1987 quasi-judicial agency in the exercise of its
which requires notice and public hearing in the quasi-judicial functions.
fixing of rates [MIAA v. Airspan Corp., G.R. No. EXTENT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
157581 (2004)]. 1. Questions of Law
D. JUDICIAL REVIEW a. Constitutionality of the law creating the
General Rule agency and granting it powers
Judicial review may be granted or withheld as b. Validity of agency action if these
Congress chooses, except when the transcend limits established by law
Constitution requires or allows it. Thus, a law c. Correctness of interpretation or
may provide that the decision of an application of the law
administrative agency shall be final and not 2. Questions of Fact
reviewable and it would still not offend due Judicial Review. –
process. Review shall be made on the basis of the
However, Sec. 1, par. 2, Art. VIII of the record taken as a whole. The findings of fact of
Constitution, provides that judicial review of the agency when supported by substantial
administrative decisions cannot be denied the evidence shall be final except when
courts when there is an allegation of grave specifically
abuse of discretion [NACHURA]. provided otherwise by law [Sec. 25, Chapter 4,
It is generally understood that as to Book VII, Admin. Code].
administrative agencies exercising General Rule: Findings of fact by the agency
quasijudicial are final when supported by substantial
or legislative power, there is an evidence.
underlying power in the courts to scrutinize the Exceptions
acts of such agencies on questions of law and a. Specifically allowed otherwise by law
jurisdiction even though no right of review is b. Fraud, imposition, mistake, or other error of
given by statute. xxx Judicial review is proper judgment in evaluating the evidence [Ortua
in case of lack of jurisdiction, grave abuse of v. Singson Encarnacion, G.R. No. L-39919
discretion, error of law, fraud or collusion [San (1934)]
Miguel Corp. v. NLRC, G.R. No. L-39195 c. Error in appreciation of pleadings and
(1975), citing Timbancaya v. Vicente, G.R. No. interpretation of the documentary evidence
L-19100 (1963)]. presented by the parties [Tan Tiong Teck
Rationale v. SEC, G.R. No. L-46471 (1940)]
The purpose of judicial review is to keep the d. Decision of the agency was rendered by an
almost divided agency and that the division
was precisely on the facts as borne out by (1907)].
the evidence [Gonzales v. Victory Labor It may occur that the Court has jurisdiction to
Union, G.R. No. L-2256 (1969)] take cognizance of a particular case, which
3. Question of Discretion means that the matter involved is also judicial
General Rule: Administrative and in character. However, if the determination of
discretionary functions may not be interfered the case requires the expertise, specialized
with by the courts. skills and knowledge of the proper
Rationale: Courts have none of the technical administrative bodies because technical
and economic or financial competence which matters or intricate questions of facts are
specialized administrative agencies have at involved, then relief must first be obtained in
their disposal, and in particular must be wary an
of administrative proceeding before a remedy will
intervening in matters which are at their core be supplied by the courts even though the
technical and economic in nature [PLDT v. matter is within the proper jurisdiction of a
National Telecommunications Commission, court
G.R. No. 94374 (1995)]. [Industrial Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, G.R. No.
Exceptions 88550 (1990)].
1. When there is a grave abuse of discretion; Administrative agencies are given a wide
2. Where the power is exercised in an latitude in the evaluation of evidence and in the
arbitrary or despotic manner [Banco exercise of their adjudicative functions,
Filipino Savings and Mortgage Bank v. latitude
Monetary Board, G.R. No. 70054 (1991)]; which includes the authority to take judicial
3. If without reasonable support in the notice of facts within their special competence
evidence; [Quiambao v. CA, G.R. No. 128305 (2005)].
4. Rendered against law, or The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies
5. Issued without jurisdiction [Laguna where a claim is originally cognizable in the
Tayabas Bus Company v. Public Service courts, and comes into play whenever
Commission, G.R. No. 10903 (1957)]. enforcement of the claim requires the
1. Doctrine of Primary resolution of issues which, under a regulatory
scheme, have been placed within the special
Administrative Jurisdiction competence of an administrative body; in
Courts cannot or will not determine a suchcase, the judicial process is suspended
controversy involving a question which is pending referral of such issues to the
within the jurisdiction of the administrative administrative body for its view [Industrial
tribunal prior to the resolution of that question Enterprises, Inc. v. CA, supra].
by the administrative tribunal, where the The doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not
question demands the exercise of sound warrant a court to arrogate unto itself authority
administrative discretion requiring the special to resolve a controversy the jurisdiction over
knowledge, experience and services of the which is initially lodged with an administrative
administrative tribunal to determine technical body of special competence [Vidad v. RTC,
and intricate matters of fact [Guy v. Ignacio, G.R. No. 98084 (1993)].
G.R. No.167824 (2010)]. Rationale
It can only occur where there is a concurrence In this era of clogged docket courts, the need
of jurisdiction between the court and the for specialized administrative boards with the
administrative agency. special knowledge and capability to hear and
It is a question of the court yielding to the determine promptly disputes on technical
agency because of the latter’s expertise, and matters has become well-nigh indispensable.
does not amount to ouster of the court [Texas Between the power lodged in an administrative
& Pacific Railway v. Abilene, 204 U.S. 426
body and a court, the unmistakable trend has which the expertise is with the courts);
been to refer it to the former [GMA v. ABS a. Regular courts have jurisdiction in
CBN,G.R. No. 160703 (2005)]. cases where what is assailed is the
Requisites validity or constitutionality of a rule
1. An administrative body and a regular court or regulation issued by the
have concurrent and original jurisdiction administrative agency in the
2. Question to be resolved requires expertise performance of its quasi-legislative
of administrative agency function [Smart v. NTC, supra]
3. Legislative intent on the matter is to have 2. When the issue involved is clearly a factual
uniformity in rulings question that does not require specialized
4. Administrative agency is performing a skills and knowledge for resolution to justify
quasi-judicial or adjudicatory function (not the exercise of primary jurisdiction.
rulemaking or quasi-legislative function 2. Doctrine of Exhaustion of
[Smart v. NTC, G.R. No. 151908 (2003)]
Effect
Administrative Remedies
While no prejudicial question strictly arises General Rule: Where the law has delineated
where one is a civil case and the other is an the procedure by which administrative appeal
administrative proceeding, in the interest of or remedy could be effected, the same should
good order, it behooves the court to suspend be followed before recourse to judicial action
its action on the cases before it pending the can be initiated [Pascual v. Provincial Board,
final outcome of the administrative G.R. No. L-11959 (1959)].
proceedings
[Vidad v. RTC, supra]. One of the reasons for exhaustion of
Does not per se have the effect of restraining administrative remedies is our well-entrenched
or preventing the courts from the exercise of doctrine on separation of powers, which
their lawfully conferred jurisdiction. A contrary enjoins upon the Judiciary a policy of
rule would unduly expand the doctrine of noninterference with matters falling primarily
primary jurisdiction [Conrad and Co., Inc. v. (albeit not exclusively) within the competence
CA, G.R. No. 115115 (1995)]. of other departments. Courts, for reasons of
All the proceedings of the court in violation of law, comity and convenience, should not
the doctrine and all orders and decisions entertain suits unless the available
rendered thereby are null and void [Province of administrative remedies have first been
Aklan v. Jody King Construction and resorted to and the proper authorities have
Development Corp., G.R. No. 197592 (2013)]. been given an appropriate opportunity to act
Note: The court may raise the issue of primary and correct their alleged errors, if any,
jurisdiction sua sponte and its invocation committed in the administrative forum [Antolin
cannot be waived by the failure of the parties v. Domondon, G.R. No. 165036
to (2010)].
argue it as the doctrine exists for the proper
distribution of power between judicial and Requisites
administrative bodies and not for the a. The administrative agency is performing a
convenience of the parties [Euro-Med quasi-judicial function;
Laboratories Phil., Inc. v. Province of b. Judicial review is available; and
Batangas, G.R. No. 148106 (2006)]. c. The court acts in its appellate jurisdiction.
When the Doctrine is not Applicable
1. When the issue is not within the Rationale
competence of the administrative body to a. Legal reason: The law prescribes a
act on (e.g. pure questions of law, over procedure.
b. Practical reason: To ensure that disputes (1972)]
involving technical and specialized matters 8. Where the administrative remedy is only
U.P. LAW BOC ADMINISTRATIVE LAW permissive or voluntary and not a
POLITICAL LAW prerequisite to the institution of judicial
Page 290 of 439 are first resolved by the body proceedings. [Corpus v. Cuaderno, Sr.,
which has the expertise and competence to G.R. No. L-17860 (1962)]
resolve them, and, in most cases, to give the 9. Application of the doctrine will only cause
agency a chance to correct its own errors and great and irreparable damage which
prevent unnecessary and premature resort to cannot be prevented except by taking the
the courts. It also entails lesser expenses and appropriate court action. [De Lara, Jr. v.
provides for a speedier disposition of Cloribel, G.R. No. L-21653 (1965)]
controversies. 10. When it involves the rule-making or
c. Reasons of comity: Expedience, quasilegislative
courtesy, convenience. functions of an administrative
d. Separation of powers: enjoins upon the agency. [Smart v. NTC, supra]
Judiciary a policy of non-interference with 11. Administrative agency is in estoppel.
matters falling primarily (albeit not [Republic v. Sandiganbayan, supra]
exclusively) within the competence of 12. Doctrine of qualified political agency
other departments. (respondent is a department secretary
a. Exceptions to the Doctrine whose acts as an alter ego of the President
The exceptions may be condensed into three: bears the implied and assumed approval
1. Grave abuse of discretion; of the latter). [Demaisip v. CA, G.R. No. L-
2. Pure question of law; or 13000 (1959); Pagara v. CA, G.R. No.
3. No other plain, speedy, and adequate 96882 (1996)]
remedy. 13. Subject of controversy is private land in
This list has been expanded by case law to land case proceedings. [Soto v. Jareno,
include: G.R. No. L-38962 (1986)]
1. Purely legal questions [Castro v. Secretary, 14. Violation of due process [Pagara v. CA,
G.R. No. 132174 (2001)] supra]
2. There is grave doubt as to the availability 15. Where there is unreasonable delay or
of the administrative remedy [Pascual v. official inaction that will irretrievably
Provincial Board, supra] prejudice the complainant. [Republic v.
3. Steps to be taken are merely matters of Sandiganbayan, supra]
form. [Pascual v. Provincial Board, supra] 16. Administrative action is patently illegal
4. Administrative remedy not exclusive but amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction.
merely cumulative or concurrent to a [DAR v. Apex Investment, supra]
judicial remedy. [Pascual v. Provincial 17. Resort to administrative remedy will
Board, supra] amount to a nullification of a claim. [Paat v.
5. There are circumstances indicating CA, G.R. No. 111107 (1997); Alzate v.
urgency of judicial intervention. [DAR v. Aldana, G.R. No. L- 14407 (1960)]
Apex Investment, G.R. No. 149422 (2003)] 18. No administrative review provided for by
6. Rule does not provide plain, speedy, law. [Estrada v. CA, G.R. No. 137862
adequate remedy. [Information (2004)]
Technology Foundation v. COMELEC, 19. Issue of non-exhaustion of administrative
G.R. No. 159139 (2004)] remedies has been rendered moot.
7. Resort to exhaustion will only be [included in the enumeration in Estrada v.
oppressive and patently unreasonable. CA, supra]
[Cipriano v. Marcelino, G.R. No. L-27793 20. When the claim involved is small.
21. When strong public interest is involved. c. When Appeals to the Office of the
22. In quo warranto proceedings [included in President are Required
the enumeration in Lopez v. City of Manila, A decision or order issued by a department or
G.R. No. 127139 (1999)] agency need not be appealed to the Office of
23. Law expressly provides for a different the President when there is a special law that
review procedure. [Samahang provides for a different mode of appeal. If the
Magbubukid v. CA, G.R. No. 103953 law does not provide for a specific relief,
(1999)]; and appeals may be taken to the Office of the
24. When there is no express legal provision President [Moran v. Office of the President,
requiring such administrative step as a G.R. No. 192957 (2014)].
condition precedent to taking action in When OP is not exercising quasi-judicial
court. [CSC v. DBM, G.R. No. 158791 functions
(2005)] When the OP itself represents a party, i.e., the
b. Effect of Failure to Exhaust Republic, to a contract, it merely exercises a
Administrative Remedies contractual right by cancelling/revoking said
A direct action in court without prior agreement—a purely administrative action
exhaustion which should not be considered quasi-judicial
of administrative remedies, when required, is in nature. Thus, absent the OP's proper
premature, warranting its dismissal on a exercise of a quasi-judicial function, the CA
motion has
to dismiss grounded on lack of cause of no appellate jurisdiction over the case [Narra
action. Nickel Mining and Development Corp. v.
Before a party is allowed to seek the Redmont Consolidated Mines Corp., G.R. No.
intervention of the court, it is a pre-condition 202877 (2015)].
that he should have availed of all the means of Doctrine of
administrative processes afforded him. Hence, Exhaustion
if a remedy within the administrative machinery of
can still be resorted to by giving the Administrati
administrative officer concerned every ve Remedies
opportunity to decide on a matter that comes Doctrine of
within his jurisdiction then such remedy should Primary
be exhausted first before the court's judicial Administrati
power can be sought. The premature ve
invocation of court's intervention is fatal to Jurisdiction
one's cause of action. Accordingly, absent any Jurisdiction of Court
finding of waiver or estoppel the case is Appellate Concurrent
susceptible of dismissal for lack of cause of Original Jurisdiction
action. [Rosita Montanez v. Provincial Agrarian with AdminBody
Reform Adjudicator et. al., G.R. No. 183142 Ground
(2009)]. for Nonexercise
Failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion Of Jurisdiction
of Exhaustion of
administrative remedies does not affect the Administrativ
Court’s jurisdiction. e remedy is a
If not invoked at the proper time, this ground is condition
deemed waived and the court can take precedent.
cognizance of the case and try it [Republic v. The court
Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 112708-09 (1996)]. yields to the
jurisdiction of grant relief as the new facts and
the circumstances
administrative warrant [Candelario v. Cañizares, G.R. No.
agency 17688 (1962)].
because of its
specialized
knowledge or
expertise.
Court
Action
Dismiss Suspend
Judicial
Action
Waivability
Waivable Cannot be
waived
3. Doctrine of Finality of
Administrative Action
Courts will not interfere with the act of an
administrative agency before it has reached
finality or it has been completed.
Once a decision or order becomes final and
executory, it thereby becomes immutable and
unalterable and any amendment or alteration
which substantially affects a final and
executory judgment is null and void for lack of
jurisdiction, including the entire proceedings
held for that purpose [Gagui v. Dejero, G.R.
No.196036 (2013)].
Rationale: Without a final order or decision,
the power has not been fully and finally
exercised.
Exceptions to the doctrine of finality [Peña
v. GSIS, G.R. No. 159520 (2006)]
a. Correction of clerical errors
b. Nunc pro tunc entries which cause no
prejudice to any party
c. Void judgments
d. Whenever circumstances transpire after the
finality of the decision rendering its execution
unjust and inequitable
After a judgment has become final, if there is
evidence of an event or circumstance which
would affect or change the rights of the parties
thereto, the court should be allowed to admit
evidence of such new facts and
circumstances,
and thereafter suspend execution thereof and