Sei sulla pagina 1di 18

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES
DEFINITIONS
Administrative Law is that branch of modern law under which the
executive department of the government, acting in a quasi-legislative or
quasi-judicial capacity, interferes with the conduct of the individual for
the purpose of promoting the well-being of the community [Dean
Roscoue Pound].
Administrative Agencies are the organs of government, other than a
court and other than the legislature, which affect the rights of private
parties either through adjudication or through rule-making [Nachura].
HISTORICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Why did administrative agencies come about?
(1) Growing complexities of modern life;
(2) Multiplication of number of subjects needing
government regulation; and
(3) Increased difficulty of administering laws.
Why are administrative agencies needed?
Because the government lacks:
(1) Time;
(2) Expertise; and
(3) Organizational aptitude for effective and
continuing regulation of new developments in
society [Stone].
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
Modes of Creation of Administrative Agencies
(1) 1987 Constitution
(E.g. CSC, COMELEC, COA, CHR, Commission on
Appointments, Judicial and Bar Council, NEDA and Office of
the Ombudsman)
(2) Legislative Enactments
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 1

(E.g. NLRC, SEC, PRC, Social Security Commission,


Commission on Immigration and Deportation, Philippine Patent
Office, Games and Amusement Board, Board of Energy, and
Insurance Commission)
(3) Executive Orders/Authorities of law
(E.g. Fact-finding Agencies)
WHEN IS AN AGENCY ADMINISTRATIVE?
Where its function is primarily regulatory EVEN IF it conducts hearings
and determines controversies to carry out its regulatory duty.
On its rule-making authority, it is administrative when it does not have
discretion to determine what the law shall be but merely prescribes details for
the enforcement of the law.
TYPES OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
(1) Government grant or gratuity, special privilege (e.g. Bureau of Lands,
Phil. Veterans Admin., GSIS, SSS, PAO);
(2) Carrying out the actual business of government (e.g. BIR, Customs,
Immigration, Land Registration Authority);
(3) Service for public benefit (e.g. Philpost, PNR, MWSS, NFA, NHA);
(4) Regulation of businesses affected with public interest (e.g. Insurance
Commission, LTFRB, NTC, HLURB);
(5) Regulation of private businesses and individuals (e.g. SEC);
(6) Adjustment of individual controversies because of a strong social
policy involved (e.g. ECC, NLRC, SEC, DAR, COA).
II. POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE BODIES
The powers of administrative agencies are:
(1) Quasi-legislative (Rule-making);
(2) Quasi-judicial (Adjudicatory); and
(3) Determinative powers
Does the grant of such powers to Administrative Agencies violate the
Doctrine of Separation of Powers?
No. Administrative agencies became the catch basin for the
residual powers of the 3 branches (Dicey). The theory of the separation
of powers is designed to forestall over action resulting from
concentration of power. However with the growing complexity of
modern life, there is a constantly growing tendency toward the delegation
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 2

of greater powers by the legislature. [Pangasinan Transportation v.


Public Service Commission (1940)]
QUASI-LEGISLATIVE (RULE-MAKING) POWER
The authority delegated by the law-making body to the administrative
agency to adopt rules and regulations intended to carry out the provisions of a
law and implement a legislative policy.
DOCTRINE OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION
Power to promulgate rules and regulations is only limited to carrying into
effect what is provided in the legislative enactment.
NON-DELEGATION DOCTRINE
Potestas delegata non delegare potest.
What has been delegated cannot be delegated.
LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION
Requisites for a Valid Delegation
(1) The law must be complete in itself and must set forth the policy
to be executed.
(2) The law must fix a standard, the limits of which are sufficiently
determinate or determinable, to which the delegate must
conform.
What is a Sufficient Standard?
(1) Defines legislative policy, marks its limits, maps out its
boundaries and specifies the public agency to apply it; and
(2) Indicates the circumstances under which the legislative
command is to be effected. [Santiago v. COMELEC (1997);
ABAKADA Guro List v. Ermita (2005)]
Forms of the Sufficient Standard:
(1) Express
(2) Implied [Edu v. Ericta (1970)]
(3) Embodied in other statutes on the same matter and not
necessarily in the same law being challenged. [Chiongbian
v. Orbos (1995)]
KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND REGULATIONS
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 3

(1) Supplementary legislation


Pertains to rules and regulations to fix details in the execution of a
policy in the law. e.g. IRRs of the Labor Code.
(2) Interpretative legislation
Pertains to rules and regulations construing or interpreting the
provisions of a statute to be enforced and they are binding on all
concerned until they are changed, i.e. BIR Circulars.
General Distinctions from Legislative Rules
Legislative Rules
Promulgated pursuant to
its quasi-legislative /
rule-making functions.

Interpretative Rules
Passed pursuant to its
quasi-judicial capacity.

Create a new law, a new


policy, with the force and
effect of law.

Merely clarify the


meaning of a pre-existing
law by inferring its
implications.

Need publication.

Need not be published.

So long as the court finds


that the legislative rules
are within the power of
the administrative
agency to pass, as seen
in the primary law, then
the rules bind the court.
The court cannot
question the wisdom or
correctness of the policy
contained in the rules.

The court may review


correctness of the
interpretation
of the law given by the
administrative body, and
substitute its own view of
what is correct to the
administrative body. If it is
not within the scope of the
administrative agency, court
can only invalidate the same
but not substitute its
decision or interpretation or
give its own set of rules.

Due process involves


whether the parties were

Due process means that the


body observed the proper

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian


Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 4

afforded the opportunity


to be notified and heard
before the issuance of
the ruling.

procedure in passing rules.

Restrictions on Interpretative Regulations:


(a) does not change the character of a ministerial duty;
(b) does not involve unlawful use of legislative or judicial power.
Administrative Interpretations:
may eliminate construction and uncertainty in doubtful cases.
When laws are susceptible of two or more interpretations, the
administrative agency should make known its official position.
Administrative construction/ interpretation not controlling as to the
proper construction of a statute, but generally it is given great weight, has a
very persuasive influence and may actually be regarded by the courts as the
controlling factor.
Administrative Interpretation is Merely Advisory:
Courts finally determine what the law means.
Contingent Legislation
Pertains to rules and regulations made by an administrative
authority on the existence of certain facts or things upon which the
enforcement of the law depends.
REQUISITES FOR VALIDITY
Requisites of a Valid Administrative Rule
(1) Within the scope or authority of law
(2) Authorized by law
(3) Reasonableness
(4) Promulgated in accordance with prescribed Procedure
Publication Rules
(1) Administrative rules and regulations are subject to the
publication and effectivity rules of the Admin. Code in relation to the
Civil Code.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 5

(2) EO 200 requires publication of laws in the Official Gazette or


in a newspaper of general circulation. Publication is indispensable,
especially if the rule is general.
Exceptions:
(1) Interpretative rules
(2) Internal regulations (i.e. regulating personnel)
(3) Letters of instructions issued by administrative
superior to subordinates
(3) Effectivity: 15 days after publication, not 15 days from date of
filing with the UP Law Center.
Exceptions:
(1) Different date is fixed by law or specified in the
rule.
(2) In case of imminent danger to public health, safety
and welfare.
Penal Rules
Omission of Some Rules. (2) Every rule establishing an offense or
defining an act which, pursuant to law is punishable as a crime or subject
to a penalty shall in all cases be published in full text. [Sec. 6, 1987
Administrative Code]
(1) The law itself must declare the act as punishable and must also define
or fix the penalty for the violation.
(2) Can administrative bodies make penal rules? NO. Penal statutes are
exclusive to the legislature and cannot be delegated. Administrative rules
and regulations must not include, prohibit or punish acts which the law
does not even define as a criminal act.
(3) If a rule is penal, it must be published before it takes effect.
QUASI-JUDICIAL (ADJUDICATORY) POWER
The power of the administrative agency to determine questions of fact to
which the legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with the standards laid
down by the law itself.
Source
Incidental to the power of regulation but is often expressly
conferred by the legislature through specific provisions in the charter of
the agency.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 6

Distinctions from Judicial Proceedings


Administrative

Judicial

Inquisitorial

Adversarial

Rules of
Procedure
technical

Liberally applied

Follow
rules in the
Rules of Court

Nature and
Extent of
Decision

Decision limited
to matters of
general concern

Decision
includes
matters brought
as issue by the
Parties

Parties

The agency itself


may be a party to
the proceedings
before it

The parties are


only the private
litigants

Nature of
Proceedings

Requisites for a Valid Exercise


(1) Jurisdiction
(2) Due process
General Rule
A tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial functions acts without
jurisdiction if no authority has been conferred to it by law to hear and decide
cases.
(1) Jurisdiction to hear is explicitly or by necessary implication,
conferred through the terms of the enabling statute.
(2) Effect of administrative acts outside jurisdictionVoid.
Powers included in Quasi-Judicial Function
(1) Subpoena Power In any contested case, the agency shall have the
power to require the attendance of witnesses or the production of
books, papers, documents and other pertinent data.
[Sec. 13, 1987 Admin Code]
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 7

(2) Contempt Power


General Rule: Get the aid of RTC.
Exception: Law gives agency contempt power.
[Sec. 13, 1987 Admin Code]
(3) Power to issue Search Warrant or Warrant of Arrest
General Rule: Only Judges may issue
Exception: Deportation Proceedings
[Harvey v. Defensor-Santiago 1988]
Administrative Due Process
Due Process
Findings of facts by administrative bodies which observed
procedural safeguards (e.g. notice and hearing parties, and a full
consideration of evidence) are accorded the greatest respect by
courts.
Cardinal Primary Rights:
Ang Tibay v CIR (1950) lays down the cardinal primary rights:
(1) Right to a hearing (Includes the right of a party to
present his own case and submit evidence in support
thereof).
(2) The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
(3) Decision must be supported by evidence.
(4) Evidence must be substantial.
Quantum of Proof (Substantial Evidence)
The amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind
might accept as adequate to justify a conclusion [Sec. 5 Rule 134
Rules of Court]
(5) Decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at
the hearing or at least contained in the record and disclosed
to the parties affected.
(6) Independent consideration of judge (Must not simply
accept the views of a subordinate).
(7) Decision rendered in such a manner as to let the parties
know the various issues involved and the reasons for the
decision rendered.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 8

Due process does not always entail notice and hearing prior to the
deprivation of a right. Hearing may occur after deprivation, as in
emergency cases, in which case, there must be a chance to seek
reconsideration. [UP Board of Regents v. CA (1999)]
Presence of a party at a trial is not always the essence of due
process. All that the law requires is the element of fairness; that the
parties be given notice of trial and
(1) an opportunity to be heard;
(2) in administrative proceedings, an opportunity to seek
reconsideration; and
(3) an opportunity to explain ones side.
The law, in prescribing a process of appeal to a higher level,
contemplates that the reviewing officer is a person different from the one
who issued the appealed decision. Otherwise, the review becomes a
farce; it is rendered meaningless. [Rivera v. CSC (1995)]
Is a trial necessary? NO. WON to hold an adversarial trial is
discretionary. Parties cannot demand it as a matter of right. [Vinta Maritime v.
NLRC (1978)].
The right of a party to confront and cross-examine opposing witness is a
fundamental right which is part of due process. If without his fault, this right is
violated, he is entitled to have the direct examination stricken off the record.
[Bachrach Motors v. CIR (1978)]
Evidence on record must be fully disclosed to the parties [American
Inter-Fashion v. Office of the President (1991)] but respondents in
administrative cases are not entitled to be informed of findings of investigative
committees but only of the decision of the administrative body. [Pefianco v.
Moral (2000)]
Due process is violated when:
(1) There is failure to sufficiently explain the reason for the decision
rendered;
(2) If not supported by substantial evidence;
(3) And imputation of a violation and imposition of a fine despite
absence of due notice and hearing. [Globe Telecom v. NTC (2004)]
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 9

Self-incrimination
The right against self-incrimination may be invoked by the
respondent at the time he is called by the complainant as a witness.
However, if he voluntarily takes the witness stand, he can be cross
examined; but he may still invoke the right when the question calls for an
answer which incriminates him for an offense other than that charged.
[People v. Ayson (1989)]
Notice and Hearing
When required:
(1) When the law specifically requires it.
(2) When it affects a persons status and liberty.
When not required:
(1) Urgent reasons.
(2) Discretion is exercised by an officer vested with it upon an
undisputed fact.
(3) If it involves the exercise of discretion and there is no grave
abuse.
(4) When rules to govern future conduct of persons or enterprises,
unless law provides otherwise.
(5) In the valid exercise of police power.
Administrative Decisions or Interpretation not part of the legal system:
A memorandum circular of a bureau head could not operate to vest
a taxpayer with a shield against judicial action [PBCom v. CIR (1999)].
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AND REVIEW
Different kinds of administrative appeal and review:
(1) That which inheres in the relation of administrative superior to
administrative subordinate where determinations are made at lower levels
of the same administrative system;
(2) That embraced in statutes which provides for a determination to
be made by a particular officer of body subject to appeal, review, or
redetermination by another officer of body in the same agency or in the
same administrative system;
(3) That in which the statute attempts to make a court a part of the
administrative scheme by providing in terms or effect that the court, on
review of the action of an administrative agency, shall exercise powers of
such extent that they differ from ordinary judicial functions and involve a
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 10

trial de novo of matters of fact or discretion and application of the


independent judgment of the court;
(4) That in which the statute provides that an order made by a
division of a Commission or Board has the same force and effect as if
made by the Commission subject to a rehearing by the full Commission,
for the rehearing is practically an appeal to another administrative
tribunal;
(5) That in which the statute provides for an appeal to an officer on
an intermediate level with subsequent appeal to the head of the
department or agency; and
(6) That embraced in statutes which provide for appeal at the
highest level, namely, the President.
A party must prove that it has been affected or aggrieved by an
administrative agency in order to entitle it to a review by an appellate
administrative body or another administrative body. The appellate
administrative agency may conduct additional hearings in the appealed
case, if deemed necessary [Reyes v. Zamora (1979)].
Administrative Res Judicata
The doctrines of forum shopping, litis pendentia and res judicata
also apply to administrative agencies.
When it applies
The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or quasijudicial proceedings and not to the exercise of purely administrative
functions.
Administrative proceedings are non-litigious and summary in
nature; hence, res judicata does not apply. [Nasipit Lumber Co. v. NLRC
(1989)]
Requisites:
(1) The former judgment must be final;
(2) It must have been rendered by a court having jurisdiction
over the subject matter and the parties;
(3) It must be a judgment on the merits; and
(4) There must be identity of parties, subject matter and
cause of action

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian


Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 11

Effect:
Decisions and orders of administrative bodies rendered
pursuant to their quasi-judicial authority have, upon their finality,
the force and effect of a final judgment within the purview of the
doctrine of res judicata, which forbids the reopening of matters
once judicially determined by competent authorities.
However, Res Judicata does not apply in administrative
adjudication relative to citizenship [Board of Commissioners v. De
la Rosa (1991)]
FACT-FINDING, INVESTIGATIVE, LICENSING AND RATE-FIXING
POWERS ASCERTAINMENT OF FACT
A statute may give to non-judicial officers:
(1) The power to declare the existence of facts which call into
operation the statutes provisions and
(2) May grant them and their subordinate officers the power to
ascertain and determine appropriate facts as a basis of procedure in
the enforcement of laws.
(3) Such functions are merely incidental to the exercise of power
granted by law to clear navigable streams of unauthorized
obstructions. They can be conferred upon executive officials
provided the party affected is given the opportunity to be heard.
INVESTIGATIVE POWERS
Administrative agencies power to conduct investigations and hearings,
and make findings and recommendations thereon is inherent in their functions
as administrative agencies.
Findings of facts by administrative bodies which observed procedural
safeguards (e.g. notice and hearing parties, and a full consideration of evidence)
are accorded the greatest respect by courts.
LICENSING FUNCTION
Licensing Procedure. (1) When the grant, renewal, denial or cancellation of a
license is required to be preceded by notice and hearing, the provisions
concerning contested cases shall apply insofar as practicable; (2) Except in
cases of willful violation of pertinent laws, rules and regulations or when public
security, health, or safety requires otherwise, no license may be withdrawn,
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 12

suspended, revoked or annulled without notice and hearing. [Sec. 17, 1987
Administrative Code]
Non-expiration of License. Where the licensee has made timely and sufficient
application for the renewal of a license with reference to any activity of a
continuing nature, the existing license shall not expire until the application shall
have been finally determined by the agency. [Sec. 18, 1987 Administrative
Code]
License includes the whole or any part of any agency permit, certificate,
passport, clearance, approval, registration, charter, membership, statutory
exemption or other form of permission, or regulation of the exercise of a right
or privilege. [Sec. 2(10), 1987 Administrative Code]
Licensing includes agency process involving the grant, renewal, denial,
revocation, suspension, annulment, withdrawal, limitation, amendment,
modification or conditioning or a license. [Sec. 2(11), 1987 Administrative
Code]
When are notice and hearing required in licensing? Only if it is a contested
case. Otherwise, it can be dispensed with (e.g. drivers licenses).
No expiry date does not mean the license is perpetual. A license permit is
a special privilege, a permission or authority to do what is within its terms. It is
always revocable. [Gonzalo Sy Trading v. Central bank (1976)]
FIXING OF RATES, WAGES, PRICES
Rate means any charge to the public for a service open to all and upon
the same terms, including individual or joint rates, tolls, classification or
schedules thereof, as well as communication, mileage, kilometrage and other
special rates which shall be imposed by law of regulation to be observed and
followed by any person. [Sec. 2(3), 1987 Administrative Code]
Public Participation. (2) In the fixing of rates, no rule or final order shall be
valid unless the proposed rates shall have been published in a newspaper of
general circulation at least 2 weeks before the first hearing thereon. [Sec. 9,
1987 Administrative Code]

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian


Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 13

Generally, the power to fix rates is a quasi-legislative function. However,


it becomes judicial when the rate is applicable only to an individual.
Can the power to fix rates be delegated to a common carrier or other
public service? NO. The latter may propose new rates, but these will not be
effective without the approval of the administrative agency. [KMU v. Garcia
(1994)]
What are considered in the fixing of rates?
(1) The present valuation of all the property of a public utility; and
(2) The fixed assets.
The property is deemed taken and condemned by the public at the time of
filing the petition and the rate should go up and down with the physical
valuation of the property. [Ynchausti v. Public Utility Commissioner (1922)]
III. JUDICIAL REVIEW OF ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
JUDICIAL RECOURSE AND REVIEW
General Rule: Judicial review may be granted or withheld as Congress chooses.
Thus, a law may provide that the decision of an administrative agency shall be
final and irreviewable and still not offend due process.
Exception: Judicial Power vests in the Supreme Court the power to determine
whether or not there is grave abuse of discretion. [Nachura]
Rule 43 of the Rules of Court provides that the Court of Appeals shall
have appellate jurisdiction over judgments or final orders of the Court of Tax
Appeals and from awards, judgments, final orders or resolutions of or
authorized by any quasi-judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi-judicial
functions.
DOCTRINE OF PRIMARY ADMINISTRATIVE JURISDICTION
General Rule: Courts will not intervene if the question to be resolved is one
which requires the expertise of administrative agencies and the legislative intent
on the matter is to have uniformity in the rulings.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian


Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 14

It can only occur where there is a concurrence of jurisdiction between the


court and the administrative agency.
It is a question of the court yielding to the agency because of the latters
expertise, and does not amount to ouster of the court. [Texas & Pacific Railway
v. Abilene (1907)]
It is the recent jurisprudential trend to apply the doctrine of primary
jurisdiction in many cases that demand the special competence of
administrative agencies. It may occur that the Court has jurisdiction to take
cognizance of a particular case, which means that the matter involved is also
judicial in character. However, if the determination of the case requires the
expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies
because technical matters or intricate questions of facts are involved, then relief
must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy will be
supplied by the courts even though the matter is within the proper jurisdiction
of a court. [Industrial Enterprises v. CA (1990)]
Well-entrenched is the rule that courts will not interfere in matters which
are addressed to the sound discretion of the government agency entrusted with
the regulation of activities coming under the special and technical training and
knowledge of such agency. Administrative agencies are given a wide latitude in
the evaluation of evidence and in the exercise of their adjudicative functions,
latitude which includes the authority to take judicial notice of facts within their
special competence [Quiambao v. CA (2005)]
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction applies where a claim is originally
cognizable in the courts, and comes into play whenever enforcement of the
claim requires the resolution of issues which, under a regulatory scheme, have
been placed within the special competence of an administrative body; in such
case, the judicial process is suspended pending referral of such issues to the
administrative body for its view. And, in such cases, the court cannot arrogate
into itself the authority to resolve a controversy, the jurisdiction over which is
initially lodged with an administrative body of special competence. [Sherwill v.
Sitio Sto Nino (2005)]
RATIONALE: In this era of clogged docket courts, the need for specialized
administrative boards with the special knowledge and capability to hear and
determine promptly disputes on technical matters has become well-nigh
indispensable. Between the power lodged in an administrative body and a court,
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 15

the unmistakable trend has been to refer it to the former. [GMA v. ABS CBN
(2005)]
REQUISITES:
(1) Administrative body and the regular court have concurrent and
original jurisdiction
(2) Question to be resolved requires expertise of administrative agency
(3) Legislative intent on the matter is to have uniformity in rulings
(4) Administrative agency is performing a quasi-judicial or adjudicatory
function (not rule-making or quasi-legislative function [Smart v. NTC
(2003)]
Rationale: It is presumed that an administrative agency, if afforded
an opportunity to pass upon a matter, would decide the same
correctly, or correct any previous error committed in its forum
[Caballes v Sison 2004]
WHEN THE DOCTRINE IS INAPPLICABLE:
(1) If the agency has exclusive jurisdiction
(2) When the issue is not within the competence of the administrative body to
act on.
(3) When the issue involved is clearly a factual question that does not require
specialized skills and knowledge for resolution to justify the exercise of primary
jurisdiction.
EFFECT
The case is not dismissed, but merely suspended until after the matters
within the competence of the administrative agency are threshed out and
determined. [Vidad v. RTC (1993)]
IV. DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES
General Rule: Where the law has delineated the procedure by which
administrative appeal or remedy could be effected, the same should be followed
before recourse to judicial action can be initiated. [Pascual v. Provincial Board
(1959)]
REQUISITES:
(1) The administrative agency is performing a quasi-judicial function.
(2) Judicial review is available.
(3) The court acts in its appellate jurisdiction.
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 16

RATIONALE:
(1) Legal reason: The law prescribes a procedure.
(2) Practical reason: To give the agency a chance to correct its own errors and
prevent unnecessary and premature resort to the courts.
(3) Reasons of comity: Expedience, courtesy, convenience.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE DOCTRINE OF EXHAUSTION OF
REMEDIES:
(1) Purely legal questions.
(2) Steps to be taken are merely matters of form.
(3) Administrative remedy not exclusive but merely cumulative or concurrent
to a judicial remedy.
(4) Validity and urgency of judicial action or intervention.
(5) No other plain, speedy, adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law.
(6) Resort to exhaustion will only be oppressive and patently unreasonable.
(7) Where the administrative remedy is only permissive or voluntary and not a
prerequisite to the institution of judicial proceedings.
(8) Application of the doctrine will only cause great and irreparable damage
which cannot be prevented except by taking the appropriate court action.
(9) When it involves the rule-making or quasi-legislative functions of an
administrative agency.
(10) Administrative agency is in estoppel.
(11) Doctrine of qualified political agency
(12) Subject of controversy is private land in land case proceedings.
(13) Blatant violation of due process.
(14) Where there is unreasonable delay or official inaction.
(15) Administrative action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of
jurisdiction.
(16) Resort to administrative remedy will amount to a nullification of a claim.
(17) No administrative review provided for by law.
(18) Issue of non-exhaustion of administrative remedies rendered moot.
(19) In quo warranto proceedings.
(20) Law expressly provides for a different review procedure.
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO EXHAUST ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES:
It does not affect jurisdiction of the court. The only effect of noncompliance is it that will deprive complainant of a cause of action, which is a
ground for a motion to dismiss. But if not invoked at the proper time, this
ground is deemed waived. [Republic v. Sandiganbayan (1996)]
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian
Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 17

Doctrine of Exhaustion of
Doctrine of Primary
Administrative Remedies
Administrative Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction of Court
Appellate
Concurrent Original
Jurisdiction with Admin
Body
Ground for non-exercise of Jurisdiction
Exhaustion of
The court yields to the
Administrative Remedy a
jurisdiction of the
condition precedent
Administrative agency
because of its
specialized knowledge
or expertise
Court Action
Dismiss
Suspend Judicial Action
DOCTRINE OF FINALITY OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION
No resort to the courts will be allowed unless the administrative action
has been completed and there is nothing left to be done in the administrative
structure.
The Doctrine of Finality of Administrative Action is a broader doctrine
which encompasses the Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies. It
is a prerequisite for judicial review.

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REVIEW under Atty. Victor T. Tulalian


Submitted by: Catherine Kay S. Francisco
09-03-16
Page 18

Potrebbero piacerti anche