subordinate legislation” to administrative bodies.
Due to the
1 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
Administrative Law Definition:
 by Dean Roscoe Pound “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…
“… as under laws regulating public interest, professions,
trades and callings, rates and prices, laws for the protection
of public health and safety, and the promotion of public
convenience.”
Sources:
(1) Constitutional and statutory enactments creating
administrative bodies
 ART IX Const.; Social Security Act; Admin. Code
(EO 292);
(2) Decisions of courts interpreting the charters of
administrative bodies and defining their powers,
rights, inhibitions, among others, and the effects of
their determinations and regulations.
 Aratuc v. COMELEC
 Maceda v. ERB
(3) Rules and regulations in pursuance of the purposes
for which the administrative bodies were created.
(4) Determinations and orders of the administrative
bodies in settlement of controversies arising in their
respective fields.
Define Administration:
As an institution, it refers to the aggregate of individuals in
whose hands the reins of government are for the time being
As an institution v. government  the latter is the agency/
instrumentality through which the will of the State is
formulated, expressed and realized.
 Administration mans the government
As a function, it means the actual running of the government
by the executive authorities through the enforcement of laws
and the implementation of policies
As an internal activity, covers those rules defining the
relations of public functionaries inter se (among themselves)
 law on public officers
As an external activity, defines the relations of the public
office with the public in general
Separation of Powers:
 The separation of powers is a fundamental principle in our
system of government. It obtains not through express
provision but by actual division in our Constitution. Each
department of the government has exclusive cognizance of
matters within its jurisdiction, and is supreme within its own
sphere. But it does not follow from the fact that the three
powers are to be kept separate and distinct that the
Constitution intended them to be absolutely unrestrained and
independent of each other. The Constitution has provided for
an elaborate system of checks and balances to secure
coordination in the workings of the various departments of
the government … And the judiciary in turn, with the Supreme
Court as the final arbiter, effectively checks the other
department in its exercise of its power to determine the law,
and hence to declare executive and legislative acts void if
violative of the Constitution (Angara v. Electoral Commission)
Delegation:
 The Congress delegates the so called “power of
growing complexity of modern society, it has become
necessary to allow specialized administrative bodies to
promulgate supplementary rules, so that they can deal with
technical problems with more expertise and dispatch than
the Congress or the courts. Regulations or supplementary
rules passed by the administrative bodies are intended to fill-
in the gaps and provide details to what is otherwise a broad
statute passed by Congress. For the rules and regulations to
be valid and binding, they must be in accordance with the
statute on which they are based, complete in themselves,
and fix sufficient standards. If any of the requirements is not
satisfied, the regulation will not be allowed to affect private
rights;
2 ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
Define Agency:
EO 292 Book VII Ch. 1 Sec. 2(1). “any department,
bureau, office, commission, authority or officer of the
National Government authorized by law or EO to make
rules, issue licenses, grant rights or privileges, and
adjudicate cases; research institutions WRT licensing
functions; government corps. WRT functions
regulating private right, privilege, occupation or
business; and officials in the exercise of disciplinary
power as provided by law.”
MALAGA V. PENACHOS
The SC explained: “government instrumentality refers to any
agency of the National Government not integrated within the
department framework, vested with special functions or
jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all corporate
powers, administering special funds, and enjoying
operational autonomy, usually through a charter.”
Also: “chartered institution refers to any agency organized or
operating under a special charter, and vested by law with
functions relating to specific constitutional policies or
objectives.”
According to SC:
Agency  any of the various units of the Government,
including a department, bureau, office, instrumentality, or
GOCC, or a local government or a distinct unit therein.
Department  executive department created by law
Bureau  any principal subdivision of any department
Office  any major functional unit of a department/bureau,
integrated within the framework of government organization,
including regional offices; may also refer to any position held/
occupied by individual persons, whose functions are defined
by law/regulation
Instrumentality  *Malaga v. Penachos*; includes regulatory
agencies, chartered institutions, and GOCCs
Definition of GOCCs: any agency organized as a stock/non-
stock corporation, vested with functions relating to public
needs whether governmental/proprietary in nature, and
owned by the Government of the Republic of the PH directly/
through its instrumentalities either wholly or, where
applicable as in the case of stock corporations, to the extent
of at least majority of its outstanding capital stock;
Provided that, for purposes of this Act, the term “GOCC” shall
include GICP (Government Instrumentalities with Corporate
Powers) / GCE (Government Corporate Entities) and GFI
(Government Financial Institutions)
GFIs 
GICP / GCE 
1
Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency: power of the President
to reorganize the National Government may validly be
delegated to his cabinet members exercising control over a
particular executive department.
Types of administrative bodies are those set up:
(1) To offer some gratuity, grant or special privileges
(e.g. Phil. Veterans Admin.)
(2) To carry on certain the actual business of
government (BOCustoms)
(3) To perform some business service for the public
(BOPosts)
(4) To regulate business affected with public interest
(LTFRB)
(5) To regulate private business and individuals under
the police power (SEC)
(6) To adjust individual controversies because of some
strong social policy involved (NLRC)
(7) To make the government a private party (GSIS)
Administrative Relationships:
(1) SUPERVISION AND CONTROL
 shall not apply to chartered institutions attached
to a Department.
(2) ADMINISTRATIVE SUPERVISION
 agency is free from Departmental interference
with respect to appointments and other personnel
actions “in accordance with the decentralization of
personnel functions” under the Admin. Code.
(3) ATTACHMENT
 lateral relationship between the department or its
equivalent and the attached agency or corporation
for the purposes of policy and program coordination.
PADS
Lacson-Magallanes
Beja Sr.
of the delegate’s authority, announce the legislative policy,
and specify the conditions under which it is to be
implemented.
 accepted sufficient standards: “public interest”,
“simplicity, economy and efficiency”, and “public welfare”
Delegation valid when:
 it is complete in itself, setting forth the policy to be
executed, carried out or implemented by the delegate; and
 it fixes a standard – the limits of which are sufficiently
determinate or determinable – to which the delegate must
conform in the performance of his functions.
4 QUASI-LEGISLATIVE POWER
What is quasi-legislative power?
Kinds of Administrative Rules
Legislative
Interpretative
Misamis Oriental Case
Cruz v. Youngberg
Republic v. Drugmakers
Requisites for Valid Administrative Rule
Requisites in case of Administrative Rules with Penal
Sanctions
People v. Macaren
Romulo Mabanta v. HDMF
De Jesus v. COA (internal regulation)
Olsen v. Aldanese
Phil. Consumers’ Foundation v. Sec. of Educ

Landbank v. CA
3 POWERS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
CIR v. CA (Fortune Tobacco)
AGENCIES
Lupangco v. CA
Quasi-legislative power

Limitation on quasi-legislative power 5 QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER

Rabor v. CSC
Definition of Quasi-Judicial Power
Eugenio v. CSC
Determinative Powers of Quasi-Judicial Power (Implied &
Lianga Bay Express Powers)

Quasi-judicial power  power of the administrative Requisites of Judicial Power

authorities to make determinations of facts in the
performance of their official duties and to apply the law as
they construe it to the facts so found
Determinative Powers
 ENABLING POWERS  those permitted
Test for valid delegation
COMPLETENESS TEST
the law must be complete in all its terms and conditions
when it leaves the legislature so that when it reaches the
delegate, it will have nothing to do but to enforce.
 if there are gaps in the law that will prevent its
enforcement until they are first filled, the delegate will have
the opportunity to repair the omission
SUFFICIENT STANDARD TEST
the law must offer a sufficient standard to specify the limits
Jurisdiction
Jurisdiction conferred by legislature pursuant to the law
creating the agency
Power to promulgate rules of procedure; express/implied?
Say, administrative agency vested with quasi-judicial power;
says in law, with power to resolve disputes between parties
(e.g. re: phone bill); can agency promulgate rules of
procedure even if impliedly?
Doctrine of Implication
ACUZAR V. JOROLAN (APRIL 7, 2010)
Respondent filed an administrative case against petitioner
before the Peoples Law Enforcement Board (PLEB) for Grave
2
Misconduct for allegedly having an illicit relationship with
respondent’s minor daughter.
Petitioner claims the under the PLEB Rules of Procedure,
prior conviction was required before the PLEB may act on the
administrative case considering that the charge was actually
for violation of law (although denominated as grave
misconduct).
RTC annulled the decision of the PLEB. The CA reversed
ruling holding that the petition for certiorari filed by petitioner
before the RTC was not the proper remedy because appeal
was available and the issues raised were not pure questions
of law.
Held: The CA decision is affirmed.
The charge was grave misconduct (not a violation of law).
Definition: Misconduct  wrongful, improper, or unlawful
conduct, motivated by premeditated, obstinate or intentional
purpose. It usually refers to transgression of some
established and definite rule of action, where no discretion is
left except what necessity may demand; it does not
necessarily imply corruption or criminal intention, but implies
wrongful intention and not a mere error of judgment.
Criminal and administrative cases are separate and distinct
from each other. In criminal cases, proof beyond reasonable
doubt is needed whereas in administrative cases, only
substantial evidence is required.
Administrative cases may proceed independently of criminal
proceedings. The PLEB, being the administrative disciplinary
body tasked to hear complaints against erring members of
the PNP, has jurisdiction over the case.
Paterok v. BOC
Is it always necessary that parties should be notified at the
outset?
Even without notice, as long as pwede MR, there is due
process
Dela Cruz v. Abille
Mendoza v. COA
Substantial Evidence; need not be totally compliant with rules
on evidence?
Ombudsman v. Valencia
Adamson v. Amores
Which among the cardinal rules was not followed in Globe v.
NTC?
Carbonell v. CSC
Why is right to counsel not imperative?
A person can invoke his right against self-incrimination in all
administrative proceedings? Pascual case
A person cannot invoke right to counsel but can invoke right
against self-incrimination; why?
Rules of Procedure
The Subpoena Power
The Contempt Power
Notice and Hearing
Administrative Due Process
GR: Administrative Tribunals are unrestricted by the
technical/formal rules of procedure which govern trials
before a court
 especially where the administrative order has the effect of
only prima facie evidence
 this rule is applied to questions of evidence, pleading and
other matters
ANG TIBAY V. THE COURT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
FEBRUARY 27, 1940
The Cardinal Rights or Principles to be observed in
administrative proceedings:
(1) RIGHT TO A HEARING which includes the right of a party
interested to present his own case and submit
evidence in support thereof.
(2) THE TRIBUNAL MUST CONSIDER THE EVIDENCE
PRESENTED.
(3) While the duty to deliberate does not impose the
obligation to decide right, it does imply the necessity of
HAVING SOMETHING TO SUPPORT ITS DECISION.
 Principle: A decision with absolutely nothing to
support it is a nullity
 Principle: The genius of constitutional gov’t is
contrary to the vesting of unlimited power anywhere.
Law is both a grant and limitation on power.
(4) THE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE FINDING/
CONCLUSION MUST BE SUBSTANTIAL
 Definition: “Substantial Evidence” means such
relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept
as adequate to support a conclusion.
(5) THE DECISION MUST BE RENDERED ON THE EVIDENCE
PRESENTED AT THE HEARING, or at least contained in
the record and disclosed to the parties affected.
 Boards of inquiry may be appointed for the purpose
of investigating and determining the facts in any given
case, but their report and decision are only advisory.
(6) The Court of Industrial Relations (CIR) or any of its
judges, therefore, MUST ACT ON ITS/HIS OWN
INDEPENDENT CONSIDERATION OF THE LAW AND
FACTS OF THE CONTROVERSY, and not simply accept
the views of a subordinate in arriving at a decision.
(7) The CIR should, in all controversial questions, RENDER
ITS DECISION IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THE PARTIES
TO THE PROCEEDING CAN KNOW THE VARIOUS ISSUES
INVOLVED, AND THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION
RENDERED.
In GSIS v. CA 357 Phil 511 (1998), the SC added the
requirement of AN IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL which, needless to
say, dictates that one called upon to resolve a dispute may
not sit as judge and jury simultaneously; neither may he
review his decision on appeal.
Administrative Appeals and Review
Enforcement of Decision
Res Judicata
Applicable only to adjudicatory decisions?
NHA case v. Ysmael case (finality of case)
Encinas case
3
What made the SC rule that the complaint does not
constitute an adjudication; thus, there is no forum shopping
because there is no res judicata between the two? Why was
the proceeding of the BFP

6 JUDICIAL REVIEW
Doctrine of Judicial Review under Admin law (p 220)

Courts can no longer review questions of fact, as a rule; why?

Questions of law v. Questions of fact

How do you determine?

When can courts review questions of fact? (p 301)

GR: Questions of fact; not reviewable by courts; why?

(p300)

Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction

Why? (p 300 235)

IEI v. CA

Pimentel

Shell

Crusaders