PHILIPPINE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

By Administration
Carlo L. Cruz
Administration is understood in two senses:

Chapter 1 1. institution – administration as the aggregate of individuals in whose hands

General Considerations the reins of government are for the time being.

Nature 2. function – administration as the actual running of the government by the

executive authorities through the enforcement of laws and implementation of
Administrative Law – that branch of modern law under which the executive policies.
department of the government, acting in a quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial
capacity, interferes with the conduct of the individual for the purpose of Government (as distinguished from administration) is the agency or
promoting the well-being of the community. instrumentality through which the will of the State is formulated, expressed and
realized.
Administrative law is a recent development, being a consequence of the ever
increasing complexities of society and the proliferation of problems of Administration Distinguished from Law
government that cannot readily or effectively be addressed by the public
agencies or solved by other disciplines of public law. Law is impersonal command provided with sanctions to be applied in case of
violation, while Administration is preventive rather punitive and is accepted to
It was felt that thelegislative and judicial departments no longer had either the be more personal than law.
time or the needed expertise to attend to these new problems.
Law maintains a watchful eye on those who would violate its order. While
Thus, the obvious solution was delegation of power. administration on the other hand seeks to spare individuals from punishments
of the law by persuading him to observe its commands.
Two major powers of the administrative agency:

1. Quasi-legislative authority– or rule making power

Chapter 2
2. Quasi-judicial power – or adjudicatory function Administrative Agencies

Sources of Administrative Law

Definition
Addministrative law is derived from four sources or is of four (4) kinds:
Administrative agency – a body endowed with quasi-legislative and quasi-
1. Constitution or statutory enactments – e.g. Social Security Act which judicial powers for the purpose of enabling it to carry out the laws entrusted to
established the Social Security Commission. it for enforcement or execution.

2. Decisions of courts interpreting the charters of administrative bodies Administrative agency may be regarded as an arm of the legislature insofar as it
is authorize to promulgate rules. It may also be loosely considered a court
3. Rules and regulations issued by the administrative bodies – e.g. because it performs functions of a particular judicial character, as when it
Omnibus Rules Implementing the Labor Code. decides factual and sometimes even legal questions as an incident of its general
power of regulation.
4. Determinations and orders of the administrative bodies in the
settlement of controversies Creation and Abolition
The administrative body may be created by the Constitution or by a Statute. The interpretative regulation is issued by the administrative body as an incident
to its power to enforce the law and is intended merely to clarify its provisions
If created by the Constitution itself, the administrative body can be altered or for proper observance by the people.
abolished only by Constitution. But where the body was created only by statute,
the legislature that breathed life into it can amend or even repeal its charter, It is an elementary rule in administrative law that administrative regulations
thereby resulting in its abolition which is justified if made in good faith. and policies enacted by administrative bodies to interpret which they are
entrusted to enforce, have the force of law, are entitled to great respect, and
have in their favor a presumpption of legality.

Chapter 3 By contrast, the legislative regulation is issued by the administrative body

Powers of Administrative Agencies pursuant to a valid delegation of legislative power and is intended to have
the binding the force and effect of a law enacted by the legislature itself.

Quasi-Legislative Power – the authority delegated by the law-making body to Classification of Legislative Regulation
the administrative body to adopt rules and regulations intended to carry out the
provisions of a law and implement legislative policy. (a) Supplementary – intended to fill in the details of the law and “to make
explicit what is only general.”
Quasi-Judicial Power – the power of the administrative authorities to make
determinations of facts in the performance of their official duties and to apply (b) Contingent – issued upon the happening of a certain contingency which the
the law as they construe it to the facts so found. administrative body is given the discretion to determine or to ascertain some
circumstances and on the basis thereof may enforce or suspend the operation
of a law.
Chapter 4
The Quasi-Legislative Power Requisites of Administrative Regulation

(a) Its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature;

It has already been remarked that the rule-making power of the administrative
body is intended to enable it to implement the policy of the law and to provide (b) It must be within the scope of the authority given by the legislature;
for the more effective enforcement of its provisions.
(c) It must be promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure;
Through the exercise of this power of subordinate legislation, it is possible for
the administrative body to transmit the “active power of the state from its (d) It must be reasonable.
source to the point of application,” that is, apply the law and so fulfill the
mandate of the legislature. First Requisite: Promulgation Must Be Authorized by the Legislature

Kinds of Administrative Regulations Authority to promulgate the regulation is usually conferred by the Charter itself
of the administrative body or by the law it is supposed to enforce.
(a) Legislative – the administrative agency is acting in a legislative capacity,
supplementing the statute, filling in the details, or “making the law”, and usually When Congress authorizes promulgation of administrative rules and
acting pursuant to a specific delegation of legislative power. regulations to implement given legislation, all that is required is that the
regulation be not in contravention with it, but to conform to the standards that
(b) Interpretative – are those which purport to do no more than interpret the the law prescribes.
statute being administered, to say what it means. They constitute the
administrator's construction of a statute.
Second Requisite: Regulation Must Be Within the Scope of the Authority prosecution unless the legislature makes such violation punishable and imposes
Given by the Legislature the corresponding sanctions.

Assuming a valid authorization, it is still necessary that the regulation Special requisites of a valid administrative regulation with a penal
promulgated must not be ultra vires or beyond the authority conferred. sanction:

Third Requisite: Regulation Must Be Promulgated in Accordance with the (a) The law itself must make violation of the administrative regulation
Prescribed Procedure punishable;

As in the enactment of laws, the promulgation of administrative regulations of (b) The law itself must impose and specify the penalty for the violation of the
general application does not require previous notice and hearing, the only regulation;
exception being where the legislature itself requires it . In the absence of such a
requirement, the administrative body can promulgate the regulation in its (c) The regulation must be published.
exclusive discretion.
Construction and Interpretation
But where the regulation is in effect a settlement of a controversy between
specific parties, it is considered an administrative adjudication and so will Regulation should be read in harmony with the statute and not in violation of
require notice and hearing. the authority conferred on the administrative authorities.

As for publication, the applicable rule is now found in Executive Order No. 200 The administrative regulation that contravenes the statute is, of course, invalid.
which provides that laws “shall take effect after fifteen (15) days following the
completion of their publication either in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper Enforcement
of general circulation in the Philippines, unless it is otherwise provided.”
It is established that the power to promulgate administrative regulations carries
Interpretative regulations and those merely internal in nature, that is, with it the implied power to enforce them. This may be effected through
regulating only the personnel of the administrative agency and not the public, judicial action or through sanctions that the statute itself may allow the
need not be published. administrative body to impose.

Publication must be in full or it is no publication at all since its purpose is to Amendment or Repeal
inform the public of the contents of the law.
Like the statute, the administrative regulation promulgated thereunder is
The Supreme Court, it would seem, requires publication of the administrative subject to amendment or repeal by the authorities that promulgated them in the
regulation only if it is of general application and penal in nature. first place. Of course, it may be changed directly by the legislature.

Fourth Requisite: Regulation Must Be Reasonable

Chapter 5
Like statutes, administrative regulations promulgated thereunder must not be The Quasi-Judicial Power
unreasonable or arbitrary as to violate due process.

Penal Regulations Quasi-judicial power – is the power of the administrative agency to determine
questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with
The power to define and punish crime is exclusively legislative and may not be the standards laid down by the law itself.
delegated to the administrative authorities. While administrative regulations
may have the force and effect of law, their violation cannot give rise to criminal The proper exercise of the quasi-judicial power requires compliance with two
conditions, to wit:
 It is settled that administrative bodies may summon witnesses and require the
(1) Jurisdiction must be properly acquired by the administrative body production of evidence only when duly allowed by law, and always only in
connection with the matter they are authorized to investigate. Unless otherwise
(2) Due process must be observed in the conduct of the proceedings provided by law, the agency may, in case of disobedience, invoke the aid or
Regional Trial Court within whose jurisdiction the contested case falls. The
Court may punish customacy or refusal as contempt.
A. Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court distinguished between the power to “investigate” and the
Jurisdiction – may be simply defined as the competence of an office or body to power to “adjudicate:”
act on a given matter or decide a certain question.
“The purpose of investigation, of course, is to discover, to finnd out, to learn,
Without jurisdiction, the determination made by the administrative bodies are obtain information. Nowhere included or intimated is the notion of settling,
absolutely null and without any legal effect whatsoever. deciding or resolving a controversy involve in the facts inquired into by
application of the law x x.
It is the legislature that has the power to confer jurisdiction upon the
administrative body and so limit or expand its authority. In the legal sense, “adjudicate” means to settle in the exercise of judicial
authority x x. “Adjudge” x x implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the
It can be said that each administrative body has its own peculiar jurisdiction as entry of judgment.”
conferred upon it by the specific provisions of its charter.
3. The Contempt Power
The law may allow some administrative bodies to award certain kinds of
damages while denying the same power, for no apparent reason, to other Like the subpoena power, the power to punish for contempt is essentially
administrative bodies. judicial and cannot be claimed as an inherent right by the administrative body.

For example, the SEC and NLRC are allowed to award damages virtually to the To be validly exercised, it must be expressly conferred upon the body and,
same extent as a court of justice. Yet similar authority has not been conferred additionally, must be used only in connection with its quasi-judicial as
by its charter to NTC. distinguished from its purely administrative or routinary functions.

It is a well-settled principle that unless expressly empowered, administrative As a rule, where, say, a subpoena of the administrative body is disregarded, the
agencies are bereft of quasi-judicial power. person summoned may not be directly discipline by that body. The proper
remedy id for the administrative body to seek assistance of the courts of justice
1. Rules of Procedure for the enforcement of its order.

Where an administrative body is expressly granted the power of adjudication, it The power to hold in contempt must be exercised not on the vindictive, but on
is deemed also vested with the implied power to precribe the rules to be the preservative principle.
observed in the conduct of its proceedings.

But to be valid, the rules must not violate fundamental rights or encroach upon B. Notice and Hearing
constitutional prerogatives.
The right to notice and hearing is essential to due process and its non-
2. The Subpoena Power observance will as a rule invalidate the administrative proceedings. Persons are
entitled to be notified of any pending case affecting their interests so that, if
The power to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum is not inherent in they are minded, they may claim the right to appear therein and present their
administrative bodies. side or refute the position of opposing parties.
Nevertheless, there are instances when notice and hearing can validly be The law does not require another notice and hearing for a review of the decision
omitted. Among the justifications for such omissions are the urgency of of the board.
immediate action (which does not preclude the enjoyment of the right at a later
time without prejudice to the person affected) and the fact that the right had In M.F. Violago Oiler Tank Trucks vs. NLRC, there was no denial of due process
previously been offered but not claimed. where the petitioners received notice of the scheduled investigation the day
before said date of the hearing or investigation but failed to present evidence.
1. Administrative Due Process On the other hand, there was clearly such a denial where it appears that a
decision rendered against a person who was not a party to or even notified of
While administrative determinations of contested case are by their nature the proceedings taken before a labor arbiter.
judicial, there is no requirement for strict adherence to technical rules as are
observed in truly judicial proceedings.
C. Administrative Appeals and review
It is a general rule that they are unrestricted by the technical or formal rules of
procedure which govern trials before a court. This rule is applied to questions Unless otherwise provided by law or executive order, an appeal from a final
of evidence, pleading and other matters. decision of the administrative agency may be taken to the department head,
whose decision may further be brought to the regular courts of justice, in
Nevertheless, it is essential that due process must be observed, for the accordance with the procedure specified by law.
requirements of fair play are not applicable to judicial proceedings only.

Cardinal rights or principles to be observed in administrative proceedings: D. Enforcement of Decision

a. the first of these rights is the right to a hearing; In the absence of any statute providing for the enforcement of an administrative
determination, the same cannot be enforced except possibly by appeal to the
b. the tribunal must consider the evidence presented; force of public opinion.

c. the tribunal must have something to support its decision; Usually, however, the administrative body is allowed certain sanctions that it
may impose directly for the enforcement of its own decisions, i.e. revocation of
d. evidence must be substantial evidence – relevant evidence that a or refusal to renew licenses, destruction of unlawful articles, summary closure
reasonable mind may accept as adequate to support a conclusion of stores, refusal to grant clearances, issuance of cease and desist orders,
detention and deportation of aliens, and imposition of fines.
e. the decision must be rendered on the evidence presented at the
hearing, or at least contained in the record and disclosed to the parties; Significantly, many administrative bodies, such as the SEC and the NLRC, have
been vested with authority to grant provisional reliefs, such as writs of
f. the court must act on its or their own independent consideration of preliminary attachment or injunction, intended to ensure the enforcement of
the law and facts of controversy, and not simply accept the views of a their adjudications.
subordinate in arriving at a decision;
It is established that administrative agencies who have not been conferred the
g. the court should render its decision in such a manner that the power to enforce their quasi-judicial decisions may invoke court action for the
parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the purpose.
reasons for the decisions rendered

It is basic to due process that the tribunal considering the administrative E. Res Judicata
question be impartial, to ensure a fair decision.
The general rule is that an administrative decision is not considered res judicata
so as to preclude its subsequent reconsideration or revocation. Decisions of the
previous incumbents of the administrative body may be modified or reversed Sandiganbayan, and decisions issued under the Labor Code of the Philippines
by their successors in the exercise of their own powers of adjudication. and by the Central Board of Assessment Appeals.”

Where the administrative decision has been affirmed by a court decision, the Other appeals are prescribed by special laws, such as RA No. 1125, providing for
doctrine of res judicata is applicable. The effect of res judicata attaches to the appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals of any decision rendered by the
judgment of the reviewing court rather than to the administrative judgment. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, the Commissioner of Customs, or any
provincial or city board of assessment appeals.
This rule has however been modified in this jurisdiction.
Methods of review
It is now well-settled in our jurisprudence that the decisions and orders of
administrative agencies, rendered pursuant to their quasi-judicial authority, The methods of judicial review are prescribed by the Constitution, statutes or
have upon their finality, the force and binding effect of a final judgment within the Rules of the Court. These methods may be specific or general.
the purview of the doctrine of res judicata.
It is provided in RA No. 5434 that an appeal from a final award, order or
This principle is, however, not applicable to all administrative proceedings, such decisions of the Patent Office shall be taken by filing with said body and with the
proceedings that are non-litigious and summary in nature without regard to Court of Appeals a notice of appeal within 15 days from notice of such award,
legal technicalities obtaining in courts of law. order or ruling, copies being served on all interested parties.

The Administrative Code generally provides that an appeal from an agency

decision shall be perfected by filing with the agency within 15 days from receipt
of a copy thereof a notice of appeal, and with the reviewing court a petition for
Chapter 6 review of the order. Copies of the petition shall be served upon the agency and
Judicial Review all parties of record.

The petition shall contain a concise statement of the issues involved and the
General Rules grounds relied upon for the review, and shall be accompanied with a true copy
of the order appealed from, together with copies of such material portions of
An administrative decision may be appealed to the courts of justice only if the the records as are referred to therein and other supporting papers.
Constitution or the law permits it or if the question to be reviewed is a question
of law. The Supreme Court instructed certain universally accepted axioms governing
judicial review through the extraordinary actions of certiorari or prohibition of
However, jurisprudence is replete with cases where the Supreme Court has determinations of administrative officers or agencies:
applied the exceptions rather than the rule.
First, before said actions may be entertained, it must be shown that all the
In the case of the constitutional commission, i.e., the Commission on Elections, administrative remedies prescribed by law or ordinance have been exhausted;
the Commission on Audit, and the Civil Service Commission, it is provided that and,
“any decision order or ruling of each Commission may be brought to the
Supreme Court on certiorari by the aggrieved party within 30 days from receipt Second, that the administrative decision may properly be annulled or set aside
of a copy thereof.” only upon a clear showing that the administrative official or tribunal has acted
without or in excess of jurisdiction, or with a grave abuse of discretion.
On the basis of Sec. 16 of the Interim Rules and Guideline implementing Sec. 9
(3) of BP Blg. 129, the Court of Appeals may “review final decisions, orders, Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction or Prior Resort
awards or resolutions or regional trial courts and of all quasi-judicial bodies,
except the Commission on Elections, the Commission on Audit, the
There are two doctrines that must be considered in connection with the (4) When there is urgent need for judicial intervention;
judicial review of administrative decisions:(1) doctrine of primary jurisdiction
or prior resort; and (2) the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies. (5) When the claim involved is small;

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction simply calls for the determination of (6) When irreparable damage will be suffered;
administrative questions, which ordinarily questions of fact, by
administrative agencies rather courts of justice. (7) When there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy;

If the case is such that its determination requires the expertise, specialized skills (8) When strong public interest is involved;
and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies because technical matters
or intricate questions of facts are involved, then relief must first be obtained in (9) When the subject of the controversy is private land;
an administrative proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by the courts
even though the matter is within the proper jurisdiction of the court (10) In quo warranto proceedings

Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies C. Appeal to the President

Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, an Of special interest is the question of whether or not a decision of the cabinet
administrative decision must first be appealed to the administrative member has to be appealed first to the President before it may be brought to a
superior up to the highest level before it may be elevated to a court of justice court of justice. Jurisprudence on this matter is rather indecisive.
for review.
In the early case of demaisip vs. Court of Appeals, the Court held that appeal to
A. Reasons the President was not necessary because the Cabinet member was after all his
alter ego and, under the doctrine of qualified political agency, the acts of the
(1) The administrative superiors, if given the opportunity, can correct the secretary were the acts of the President.
errors committed by their subordinates;
This view was abandoned in Calo vs. Fuertes, where it was held that appeal to
(2) Courts should as much as possible refrain from disturbing the findings the President was the final step in the administrative process and therefore a
of administrative bodies in deference to the doctrine of separation of condition precedent to appeal to the courts.
powers;
In Bartulata vs. Peralta, however, the court reinstated the Demaisip doctrine,
(3) On practical grounds, it is best that the courts should not be saddled again on the basis of alter ego justification.
with the review of administrative cases;
Tan vs. Director of Forestry, thereafter revived Calo andagain required appeal
(4) Judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected through the to the President as a prerequisite to an appeal of a Cabinet member's decision to
special civil actions of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition, which are the courts of Justice.
available only if there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy.
D. Effect of Non-compliance
B. Exceptions
The failure to exhaust administrative remedies does not affect the jurisdiction
(1) When the question raised is purely legal (question of law is involved); of the court and merely results in the lack of a cause of action which may be
invoked in a motion to dismiss.
(2) When the administrative body is estoppel;
If this ground to dismiss the court action is not properly or reasonably invoked,
(3) When the act complained of is patently illegal; the court may proceed to hear the case.
As previously noted, the court has the discretion to require the observance of
the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies and may, if it sees fit,
dispense with it and proceed with the disposition of the case.

Questions Reviewable

Two kinds of questions are reviewable by the courts of justice, to wit: the
question of fact and the question of law.

On the question of fact, review of the administrative decision lies in the

discretion of the legislature, which may or may not permit it as it sees fit.

But when it comes to the question of law, the administrative decision may be
appealed to the courts of justice independently of legislative permission or even
against legislative prohibition. The reason is that the judiciary cannot be
deprived of its inherent power to review all decisions on questions of law,
whether made initially by lower courts and more so by an administrative body.

A. Questions of fact

Even if allowed to review administrative decisions on questions of fact, courts of

justice generally defer to such decisions and will decline to disturb them except
only where there is a clear showing of arbitrariness or grave abuse of
discretion.

The Supreme Court ruled in Osias Academy vs. DOLE that “findings of
administrative agencies which have acquired expertise because their
jurisdiction is confined to specific matters are generally accorded not only
respect but finality.”

B. Questions of Law

Administrative bodies may be allowed to resolve questions of law in the

exercise of their quasi-judicial function as an incident of their primary power of
regulation.

However as a rule, it is only the judicial tribunal that can interpret and
decide the question of law with finality.