Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M.

1
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

1. DEFINITION

Describe the Administrative Code of 1987.

Held: The Code is a general law and “incorporates in a unified document the major structural, functional and
procedural principles of governance (Third Whereas Clause, Administrative Code of 1987) and “embodies
changes in administrative structures and procedures designed to serve the people.” (Fourth Whereas Clause,
Administrative Code of 1987) The Code is divided into seven (7) books.These books contain provisions on the
organization, powers and general administration of departments, bureaus and offices under the executive
branch, the organization and functions of the Constitutional Commissions and other constitutional bodies, the
rules on the national government budget, as well as guidelines for the exercise by administrative agencies of
quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers.The Code covers both the internal administration, i.e., internal
organization, personnel and recruitment, supervision and discipline, and the effects of the functions performed
by administrative officials on private individuals or parties outside government.(Ople v. Torres, G.R. No.
127685, July 23, 1998 [Puno])

Administrative Law – 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.

Administrative law is a recent development , being a consequence of the ever increasing complexities of
society and the proliferation of problems of government that cannot readily or effectively be addressed by the
public agencies or solved by other disciplines of public law. It was felt that the legislative and judicial
departments no longer had either the time or the needed expertise to attend to these new problems.

Thus, the obvious solution was delegation of power.

Two major powers of the administrative agency:

1.Quasi-legislative authority– or rule making power
2.Quasi-judicial power – or adjudicatory function

• Administrative Law
Branch of law governing the creation and operation of administrative agencies. Of special importance are
the powers granted to administrative agencies, the substantive rules that such agencies make, and the legal
relationships between such agencies, other government bodies, and the public at large. Administrative law
encompasses laws and legal principles governing the administration and regulation of government agencies
(both Federal and state). Such agencies are delegated power by Congress (or in the case of a state agency,
the state legislature) to act as agents for the executive. Generally, administrative agencies are created to
protect a public interest rather than to vindicate private rights.

• Administrative Law - Definition

Administrative law is the body of law that governs the activities of administrative agencies of government.
Government agency action can include rulemaking, adjudication, or the enforcement of a specific regulatory
agenda. Administrative law is considered a branch of public law.
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 2
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

2. ADMINISTRATIVE POWER

What is Administrative Power?

Held: Administrative power is concerned with the work of applying policies and enforcing orders as
determined by proper governmental organs.It enables the President to fix a uniform standard of administrative
efficiency and check the official conduct of his agents.To this end, he can issue administrative orders, rules
and regulations.(Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, July 23, 1998 [Puno])

What is an Administrative Order?

Held: An administrative order is an ordinance issued by the President which relates to specific aspects in the
administrative operation of government.It must be in harmony with the law and should be for the sole purpose
of implementing the law and carrying out the legislative policy. (Ople v. Torres, G.R. No. 127685, July 23,
1998 [Puno])

3. ORIGIN OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW (Sources)

Administrative law is derived from four sources or is of four (4) kinds:

1. Constitution or statutory enactments – e.g. Social Security Act which established the Social

Security Commission.

2. Decisions of courts interpreting the charters of administrative bodies

3. Rules and regulations issued by the administrative bodies – e.g. Omnibus Rules Implementing the

Labor Code.

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

4. ADMINISTRATION

a. Function

function – administration as the actual running of the government by the executive authorities through the
enforcement of laws and implementation of policies.

Government (as distinguished from administration) is the agency or instrumentality through which the will of
the State is formulated, expressed and realized.

b. Institution

institution – administration as the aggregate of individuals in whose hands the reins of government are for the

time being.
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 3
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

c. Internal Administration

- Legal side of public administration, e.g., matters concerning personnel, fiscal and planning
activities.

d. External Administration

- Deals with problems of government regulations, e.g., regulation of lawful calling or

profession, industries or businesses.

e. Law vs. Administration

Law is impersonal command provided with sanctions to be applied in case of violation, while

Admi nistration is preventive rather punitive and is accepted to be more personal than law.

Law maintains a watchful eye on those who would violate its order. While administration on the other hand
seeks to spare individuals from punishments of the law by persuading him to observe its commands.

5. CHARACTERISTICS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Does the petition for annulment of proclamation of a candidate merely involve the exercise by the COMELEC
of its administrative power to review, revise and reverse the actions of the board of canvassers and, therefore,
justifies non-observance of procedural due process, or does it involve the exercise of the COMELEC’s quasi-
judicial function?

Held: Taking cognizance of private respondent’s petitions for annulment of petitioner’s proclamation,
COMELEC was not merely performing an administrative function.The administrative powers of the
COMELEC include the power to determine the number and location of polling places, appoint election
officials and inspectors, conduct registration of voters, deputize law enforcement agencies and governmental
instrumentalities to ensure free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections, register political parties,
organizations or coalition, accredit citizen’s arms of the Commission, prosecute election offenses, and
recommend to the President the removal of or imposition of any other disciplinary action upon any officer or
employee it has deputized for violation or disregard of its directive, order or decision.In addition, the
Commission also has direct control and supervision over all personnel involved in the conduct of
election.However, the resolution of the adverse claims of private respondent and petitioner as regards the
existence of a manifest error in the questioned certificate of canvass requires the COMELEC to act as an
arbiter.It behooves the Commission to hear both parties to determine the veracity of their allegations and to
decide whether the alleged error is a manifest error.Hence, the resolution of this issue calls for the exercise by
the COMELEC of its quasi-judicial power.It has been said that where a power rests in judgment or discretion,
so that it is of judicial nature or character, but does not involve the exercise of functions of a judge, or is
conferred upon an officer other than a judicial officer, it is deemed quasi-judicial. The COMELEC therefore,
acting as quasi-judicial tribunal, cannot ignore the requirements of procedural due process in resolving the
petitions filed by private respondent. (Federico S. Sandoval v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 133842, Jan. 26, 2000
[Puno])
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 4
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

a. Definition of "Quasi-legislative power"

It is the authority delegated by the law-making body to the administrative body to adopt rules and
regulations intended to carry out the provisions of a law and implement legislative policy.

Distinctions between Quasi-legislative power and legislative power

1. LEGISLATIVE power involves the discretion to determine what the law shall be. QUASI- legislative power

only involves the discretion to determine how the law shall be enforced.

2. LEGISLATIVE power CANNOT be delegated. QUASI-legislative power CAN be delegated.

Tests of Delegation (applies to the power to promulgate administrative regulations )

1. COMPLETENESS test. This means that 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 it.

2. SUFFICIENT STANDARD test. The law must offer a sufficient standard to specify the limits of the

delegate’s authority, announce the legislative policy and specify the conditions under which it is to be

implemented.

Quasi legislative powers

• While it is fundamental that an administrative agency has only such powers as are expressly granted to it by
law, it is likewise a settled rule that an administrative agency has also such powers as are necessary implied in
the exercise of its express powers. ( LLDA vs. CA)

• The orders of the Bureau of Agriculture, while they may possibly said to have the force of law, are statues
and particularly not penal statues and violation of such orders is not a penal offense unless the statue itself
makes a violation thereof a violation and penalizes it. (US vs. Panlilio)

• An act not punished by a law cannot be held as a penal offense by an administrative order.Regulation of
administrative bodies should be germane to the objects and purposes of the law (People vs. Maceren)

• Only the legislature can alter the jurisdiction of the courts. If done by executive orders, it would be an excess
of powers delegated by congress. (UST vs. Board of Tax Appeals)

• Power of regulation and rule making, even if vested upon administrative agencies, are still subject to the
statutory requirement of due process. Note: rate fixing in exercise of quasi-legislative powers, only publication
is required. When it is in the exercise of quasi-judicial powers, since it applies only to a particular entity,
hearing is neaded. (PHILCOMSAT vs. Alcuaz)

• Regulations internal in nature need not be published but otherwise publication is still needed. (Tanada vs.
Tuvera) • Ifan agency is vested powers and such agency is under the office of the President, an EO pursuant to
such granted power is valid. (Araneta vs. Gatmaitan)
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 5
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

b. Definition of Quasi-Judicial Power

It is the power of administrative authorities to make determinations of facts in theperformance of
their official duties and to apply the law as they construe it to the facts sofound. The exercise of this power is
only incidental to the main function of administrativeauthorities, which is the enforcement of the law.

Quasi-Judicial powers

• When an administrative body is conferred with quasi-judicial powers all subject matter pertaining to its
specialization are deemed to be included within the jurisdiction of said administrative body. Split jurisdiction
is not favored. ( Tejeda vs. Homestead Property Co.) Requisites of quasi-judicial powers: 1. jurisdiction 2.due
process i.e. notice and hearing

• authority to receive evidence and make factual conclusions must be accompanied by the authority of the
applying law. (Carino vs. CHR)

• power to investigate does not necessarily mean the power to decide on the merit. Quasi judicial powers are;
a) to hear cases b) to decide based on the merits Administrative proceedings:

• Where the statute does not require ant particular method of procedure to be followed by an administrative
agency, the agency may adopt any reasonable method to carry out its functions. The courts cannot determine a
controversy involving questions which is within the jurisdiction of the administrative tribunal where the
question demands the exercise of sound administrative discretion. (Provident Tree Farms vs. Batario)

• Guide for administrative proceeding (Ang Tibay vs. CIR) 1.right of the parties to present case 2.tribunal must
consider evidence presented 3.decision must be substantially supported 4.evidence must be substantial
(relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion) 5.decision must be
rendered on the evidence presented 6.tribunal must act independently on the law and facts of the controversy
7.decision must be in a manner that issues are known as well as reasons for such decision

• administrative bodies are not bound by technical rules on procedure, but substantive requirements of due
process must be observed. This includes also the right to counsel. ( Salaw vs. NLRC)

• Requirements of due process are satisfied by the opportunity to submit position papers by the parties. What
the law abhors is not the absence of previous notice but rather the absolute lack ofopportunity to ventilate a
party’s side. (PNOC- Energy Dev. Co. vs. NLRC)

• Judicial review does not include questioning the sufficiency of evidence because the agency is said to be an
expert on the subject. Judicial review is limited to the determination of grave abuse of discretion.

• Additional evidence will not cure an error of lack of notice and due process. (Lawrence vs. NLRC)

• Procedure must follow the natural sequence of notice , hearing and judgment. (Lawrence case)

• In absence of a clear showing of grave abuse of discretion, the courts cannot interfere with the findings of an
administrative agency.

Specific Powers:

• Power to cite of contempt is inherent to the courts. Such power is available to administrative bodies if the law
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 6
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

provides for such power.

Even if there is no penalty for contempt, it may be filed under the Rules of Court.
Way/language of the law, which contempt may be cited;
-“as contempt of court”
-“body may summary punish violation of orders as contempt” plus penalty
-if penalty is provided in the contempt clause, “triable by the proper court”

• Power to summon is attached in the power to take testimony or evidence. Such must be provided by law.
This cannot be impliedly delegated. It should be vested by law to the administrative body.

• Power to investigate is not necessarily power to take testimonies.

• Power to impose fines criminal in nature must be resorted into the courts.

Administrative rules and regulations, although has the force of a law, are not laws. A penalty for violating
such rules is void.

Conditions where an administrative rule can prescribe a penalty:

1.if the law itself prescribes a penalty

2.if the law considers violation of the rule punishable

• Civil fines may be imposed in order to preserve the integrity and function of administrative agencies against
wanton disregard of regulation.

Civil Fines- serves as a reminder

• The administrative act of deportation, although not criminal in nature, is so harsh it should be treated as one
in terms of compliance with due process. The administrative body should also first conduct a preliminary
investigation to determine sufficient cause. Private intervention should also not be allowed. (Lao Gi vs. CA)

Administrative decisions:

• In administrative review, a reviewing official should not be the same one who originally decided on the case.
Otherwise there would be no real review of the decision. (Zambales Chormite vs. CA)

• Bar on amending final and executory decisions apply also to quasi judicial bodies to avoid endless litigation.
( Mendiola vs. CSC)

• Writs of executions from administrative decisions may be applied to the proper courts but the administrative
body cannot issue such writ. (Divinagracia vs. CFI)

Generally, administrative bodies can execute their decisions unless proven otherwise

• Automatic review of an administrative agency is not allowed if there is first another agency which should
hear the appeal.

• Jurisdiction is vested by law and is not lost nor be legally transferred by voluntary surrender in favor of a
body not vested by law with such jurisdiction. (GSIS vs. CSC)
 Administrative Law (Atty. Erwin M. 7
Enad)
Cor Jesu College of Law Nelson Puno
Hernandez

Exhaustion of administrative remedies:

• Primary jurisdiction- an administrative body vested with a special jurisdiction should be first resorted to.
Further administrative remedies are not provided by law.

• Failure to exhaust administrative remedies will not affect jurisdiction of the courts but will deprive the
complainant of a cause of action which is a ground to dismiss. If not invoked at the proper time, its shall be
deemed waived. (Soto vs. Jareno)

• Exceptions to the rule of exhaustion of administrative remedies:

1 .estoppel on the party invoking the doctrine

2. when the administrative act is patently illegal amounting to lack of jurisdiction.

3. unreasonable delay or official action that will irretrievably prejudice the complainant.

4. partial execution

5.when the question involved is purely legal.

• Poverty is a ground for exempting one from exhausting administrative remedies. (Sabello vs. Dept. of
Education)

• When administrative appeals are not provided by law, resort to the courts is allowed.

Judicial Review:

• Finding of facts by administrative agencies must be respected as long as they are supported by substantial
evidence and judicial review should be invoked if there is a grave abuse of discretion. (Timbancaya vs.
Vicente)

• What can be considered by the court;

1. decision of the agency
2. all records considered

• Even acts of the Office of the President may be review by the RTC upon the principle of separation of
powers (Lupangco vs. CA)

• Direct appeal to the CA of administrative decisions must be provided by law. Otherwise, such review shall
be concurrent with the RTC. (Board of Commissioners vs. De la Rosa)

Rights for judicial review:

1. decision must be final, based on the merits

2. exhaust administrative remedies