Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
1
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative Judge Paderanga should have dismissed the replevin
LT. GEN. ALFONSO P. remedies is basic. Courts, for reasons of law, suit outright for three reasons. First, under the doctrine
DAGUDAG
3
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
Go, SR vs Ramos Deportation may be effected any time after entry, but
shall not be effected under any other clause unless the
arrest in the deportation proceedings is made within
five years after the cause of deportation arises. The
court a quo is correct when it ruled that the 5-year
period should be counted only from the time when Luis
filed his complaint for deportation. It is the legal
possibility of bringing the action which determines the
starting point for the computation of the period of
prescription. A prescription shall begin to run from the
dayof the commission of the violation of the law, and if
the same be not known at the time, from the discovery
thereof and the institution of judicial proceedings for its
investigation and punishment. The counting could not
logically start when his passport was issued because
the government was unaware that he was not a Filipino
citizen,
5
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
FELICITAS M. MACHADO Jurisdiction is conferred by law and a judgment issued by a The COSLAP does not have jurisdiction over the
and MARCELINO P. quasi-judicial body without jurisdiction is void present case.
MACHADO, Petitioners,
vs.
RICARDO L. GATDULA, Ejusdem generic prescribes that where That the Commission may, in the following cases,
COMMISSION ON THE general words follow an enumeration of persons or things, by assume jurisdiction and resolve land problems or
SETTLEMENT OF LAND words of a particular and specific meaning, such general disputes which are critical and explosive in nature
PROBLEMS, and IRINEO words are not to be construed in their widest extent but are to considering, for instance, the large number of the
S. PAZ, Sheriff IV, Office of be held as applying only to persons or things of the same parties involved, the presence or emergence of social
the Provincial Sheriff, San kind as those specifically mentioned. tension or unrest, or other similar critical situations
Pedro, requiring immediate action:
Laguna, Respondents. (a) Between occupants/squatters and pasture lease
agreement holders or timber concessionaires;
(b) Between occupants/squatters and government
reservation grantees;
(c) Between occupants/squatters and public land
claimants or applicants;
(d) Petitions for classification, release and/or
subdivision of lands of the public domain; and
(e) Other similar land problems of grave urgency and
magnitude.
Under these terms, the COSLAP has two different rules
in acting on a land dispute or problem lodged before
it, e.g., COSLAP can assume jurisdiction only if the
matter is one of those enumerated in paragraph 2(a) to
(e) of the law. Otherwise, it should refer the case to the
agency having appropriate jurisdiction for settlement or
6
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
University of Santo Tomas The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires In this case, the doctrine does not apply because petitioners
vs Danes B. Sanchez that where a remedy before an administrative agency is provided, failed to demonstrate that recourse to the CHED is
the administrative agency concerned must be given the opportunity mandatory or even possible in an action such as that
to decide a matter within its jurisdiction before an action is brought brought by the respondent, which is essentially one for
before the courts.[12] Failure to exhaust administrative remedies is a mandamus and damages. The doctrine of exhaustion of
ground for dismissal of the action.[13] administrative remedies admits of numerous
exceptions,[14] one of which is where the issues are purely
legal and well within the jurisdiction of the trial court, as in the
present case.[15] Petitioners liability if any for damages will
have to be decided by the courts, since any judgment
inevitably calls for the application and the interpretation of the
Civil Code.[16] As such, exhaustion of administrative
remedies may be dispensed with.
G.R. No. L-45839 June 1, It is a settled principle of law that in determining whether a Indeed, a reading of Section 1, PD 101, shows a grant of powers
1988 board or commission has a certain power, the authority given to the respondent Board to issue provisional permits as a step
should be liberally construed in the light of the purposes for towards the legalization of colorum taxicab operations without
RUFINO MATIENZO, which it was created, and that which is incidentally necessary the alleged time limitation. There is nothing in Section 4, cited by
GODOFREDO ESPIRITU, to a full implementation of the legislative intent should be the petitioners, to suggest the expiration of such powers six (6)
DIOSCORRO FRANCO, upheld as being germane to the law. Necessarily, too, where months after promulgation of the Decree. Rather, it merely
AND LA SUERTE the end is required, the appropriate means are deemed given provides for the withdrawal of the State's waiver of its right to
TRANSPORTATION (Martin, Administrative Law, 1979, p. 46). punish said colorum operators for their illegal acts. In other
CORPORATION, petitioners words, the cited section declares when the period of moratorium
, suspending the relentless drive to eliminate illegal operators
vs. shall end. Clearly, there is no impediment to the Board's exercise
HON. LEOPOLDO M. of jurisdiction under its broad powers under the Public Service
ABELLERA, ACTING Act to issue certificates of public convenience to achieve the
CHAIRMAN OF THE avowed purpose of PD 101 (Sec. 16a, Public Service Act, Nov.
BOARD OF 7, 1936).
TRANSPORTATION, HON.
8
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
[ GR No. 79684, Feb 19, We likewise take cognizance of the wealth of jurisprudence on Given the premises that both projects, mapping and cadastral
1991 ] this doctrine of primary administrative jurisdiction and survey, have the same purpose or registering titles and that one
DIRECTOR OF LANDS v. exhaustion of administrative remedies. The Court has may substitute for the other, do not justify the sweeping
CA consistently held that "acts of an administrative agency must conclusion that the undertaking of one would render the other
not casually be overturned by a court, and a court should as a unnecessary.
rule not substitute its judgment for that of the administrative
agency acting within the parameters of its own The question on the necessity of either or both projects must be
competence,"[9] unless "there be a clear showing of arbitrary better addressed to the sound discretion of the proper
action or palpable and serious error."[10] In similar vein, we administrative officials who admittedly have the competence and
reiterated recently the rule that the findings of fact of technical expertise on the matters. In the case at bar, the
quasi-judicial agencies which have acquired expertise petitioner Director of Lands is "the official vested with direct and
because their jurisdiction is confined to specific matters, executive control of the disposition of the lands of the public
in the present case cadastral surveys and mappings and land domain."
registration, are accorded not only respect but more often than
not even finality
9
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. Nos. 95122- True, it is beyond cavil that the Bureau of Immigration has the In the case at bar, the competent court which could properly take
23 May 31, 1991 exclusive authority and jurisdiction to try and hear cases cognizance of the proceedings instituted by respondent
against an alleged alien, and in the process, determine also Gatchalian would nonetheless be the Regional Trial Court and
BOARD OF their citizenship (Lao Gi vs. Court of Appeals, 180 SCRA 756 not the Court of Appeals in view of Sec. 21 (1), BP 129, which
COMMISSIONERS [1989]). And a mere claim of citizenship cannot operate to confers upon the former jurisdiction over actions for prohibition
(COMMISSION ON divest the Board of Commissioners of its jurisdiction in concurrently with the Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court
IMMIGRATION AND deportation proceedings (Miranda vs. Deportation Board, 94 and in line with the pronouncements of this Court in Chua
DEPORTATION), BOARD Phil. 531 [1954]). Hiong and Co cases.
OF SPECIAL INQUIRY,
COMMISSIONER ANDREA However, the rule enunciated in the above-cases admits of an
D. DOMINGO, ASSOCIATE exception, at least insofar as deportation proceedings are
COMMISSIONER JORGE V. concerned. Thus, what if the claim to citizenship of the alleged
SARMIENTO, ACTING deportee is satisfactory? Should the deportation proceedings
ASSOCIATE be allowed to continue or should the question of citizenship be
COMMISSIONER REGINO ventilated in a judicial proceeding? In Chua Hiong vs.
R. SANTIAGO, MEMBERS Deportation Board (96 Phil. 665 [1955]), this Court answered
OF THE BOARD OF the question in the affirmative, and We quote:
SPECIAL INQUIRY,
ESTANISLAO CANTA, LEO When the evidence submitted by a respondent is
MAGAHOM and BENJAMIN conclusive of his citizenship, the right to immediate
KALAW, petitioners, review should also be recognized and the courts
vs. should promptly enjoin the deportation
HON. JOSELITO DELA proceedings. A citizen is entitled to live in peace,
ROSA, Presiding Judge, without molestation from any official or authority, and
RTC Manila, Branch 29, if he is disturbed by a deportation proceeding, he has
WILLIAM T. the unquestionable right to resort to the courts for his
GATCHALIAN,respondents. protection, either by a writ of habeas corpus or of
prohibition, on the legal ground that the Board lacks
jurisdiction. If he is a citizen and evidence thereof is
satisfactory, there is no sense nor justice in allowing
the deportation proceedings to continue, granting him
the remedy only after the Board has finished its
investigation of his undesirability
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction of petitioners Board of
Commissioners over deportation proceedings is, therefore, not
without exception (Calacday vs. Vivo, 33 SCRA 413 [1970];
10
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. No. 84811 August 29, The applicable law is PD No. 957, as amended by PD No. The argument that the trial court could also assume jurisdiction
1989 1344, entitled "Empowering the National Housing Authority to because of Section 41 of PD No. 957, earlier quoted, is also
Issue Writs of Execution in the Enforcement of Its Decisions unacceptable. We do not read that provision as vesting
SOLID HOMES, Under Presidential Decree No. 957." concurrent jurisdiction on the Regional Trial Court and the Board
INC., petitioner, over the complaint mentioned in PD No. 1344 if only because
vs. The language of this section, especially the italicized portions, grants of power are not to be lightly inferred or merely implied.
TERESITA PAYAWAL and leaves no room for doubt that "exclusive jurisdiction" over the The only purpose of this section, as we see it, is to reserve.
COURT OF case between the petitioner and the private respondent is to the aggrieved party such other remedies as may be
APPEALS, respondents vested not in the Regional Trial Court but in the National provided by existing law, like a prosecution for the act
Housing Authority. complained of under the Revised Penal Code. 6
G.R. No. On the other hand, prior exhaustion of administrative remedies In the present petition for certiorari, we find that there are four (4)
156164 September may be dispensed with and judicial action may be validly compelling reasons to allow the petitioners' invocation of our
4, 2009 resorted to immediately: (a) when there is a violation of due jurisdiction in the first instance, even without prior recourse to a
process; (b) when the issue involved is purely a legal question; motion for reconsideration or to the exhaustion of administrative
SPS. LEONARDO AND (c) when the administrative action is patently illegal amounting remedies, and even in disregard of the principle of hierarchy of
MILAGROS to lack or excess of jurisdiction; (d) when there is estoppel on courts:
CHUA, Petitioners, the part of the administrative agency concerned; (e) when
vs. there is irreparable injury; (f) when the respondent is a
HON. JACINTO G. ANG, department secretary whose acts as an alter ego of the First, the petitioners raise a pure question of law involving
DENNIS R. PASTRANA, IN President bear the implied and assumed approval of the latter; jurisdiction over criminal complaints for violation of P.D. No. 957.
THEIR CAPACITIES AS (g) when to require exhaustion of administrative remedies
CITY AND ASSISTANT would be unreasonable; (h) when it would amount to a Second, the present case requires prompt action because public
PROSECUTOR OF PASIG, nullification of a claim; (i) when the subject matter is a private interest and welfare are involved in subdivision and
RESPECTIVELY, land in land case proceedings; (j) when the rule does not condominium development, as the terms of P.D. Nos. 957 and
FERDINAND T. SANTOS, provide a plain, speedy and adequate remedy; or (k) when 1344 expressly reflect.16 Questions of conflicting processes,
ROBERT JOHN L. there are circumstances indicating the urgency of judicial essentially based on jurisdiction, will consistently recur as
SOBREPEÑA, NOEL M. intervention people’s need for housing (and hence, subdivisions and
CARIÑO, ROBERTO S. condominiums) escalate. Shelter is a basic human need whose
ROCO, ALICE ODCHIQUE- Generally, the extent to which an administrative agency may fulfillment cannot afford any kind of delay
BONDOC,* ROMULO T. exercise its powers depends largely, if not wholly, on the
SANTOS AND ENRIQUE A. provisions of the statute creating and defining the terms of the .1Third, considering that this case has been pending for nearly
SOBREPEÑA, agency’s mandate. seven (7) years (since the filing of the Complaint-Affidavit on
JR., Respondents. September 3, 2002) to the prejudice not only of the parties
Significantly, nothing in P.D. No. 957 vests the HLURB involved, but also of the subdivision and condominium regulatory
with jurisdiction to impose the Section 39 criminal system and its need for the prompt determination of
penalties. What the Decree provides is the authority of the controversies, the interests of justice now demand the direct
HLURB to impose administrative fines under Section 38, as resolution of the jurisdictional issue this proceeding poses.
implemented by the Rules Implementing the Subdivision and
Condominium Buyer’s Protective Decree.
Fourth, the petition is meritorious. The public respondents
committed grave abuse of discretion in dismissing the criminal
12
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
[G.R. No. 128354. April 26, . It correctly relied on Union Bank of the Philippines vs. Petitioner claims that HLURB has no power to declare the
2005] HLURB, et al.[18] where we squarely ruled on the question of mortgage contract over real property executed between a real
HLURBs jurisdiction to hear and decide a condominium buyers estate developer and petitioner, a banking institution, void or
HOME BANKERS SAVINGS complaint for: (a) annulment of a real estate mortgage unenforceable, as it is properly within the jurisdiction of the
& TRUST constituted by the project owner without the consent of the Regional Trial Court. Petitioner asserts that being a mortgagee
CO., petitioner, buyer and without the prior written approval of the NHA; (b) of the subject lots and a purchaser in good faith, it is not a project
vs. THE annulment of the foreclosure sale; and (c) annulment of the owner, developer, or dealer contemplated under P.D. No. 1344,
HONORABLE condominium certificate of title that was issued to the highest the law which expanded the jurisdiction of the NHA; and that
COURT OF bidder at the foreclosure sale. since there is no seller-buyer relationship existing between it and
APPEALS, PABLO private respondents, HLURB has no jurisdiction to rule on the
N. AREVALO, validity of the mortgage and to annul foreclosure proceedings.
FRANCISCO A. UY, We hold that the jurisdiction of the HLURB to regulate the real
SPOUSES estate trade is broad enough to include jurisdiction over The argument is untenable.
LEANDRO A. complaints for specific performance of the sale, or annulment
SORIANO, JR. and The CA did not err in affirming the decision of the Office of
of the mortgage, of a condominium unit, with damages. the President that HLURB has jurisdiction to declare invalid the
LILIAN SORIANO,
ALFREDO LIM and mortgage contract executed between Garcia/TransAmerican
FELISA CHI and petitioner over the subject lots insofar as private
LIM/ALFREDO respondents are concerned
LIM, respondents.
G.R. No. An examination of Section 1 of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. We agree with the ruling of the RTC that it has jurisdiction over
180394 September 1344,16 which enumerates the regulatory functions of the the case based on the allegations of the complaint. Nothing in
29, 2008 HLURB,17 the complaint or in the contract to sell suggests that petitioner is
The aforequoted provision must be read in the light of the the proper party to invoke the jurisdiction of the HLURB. There
MARJORIE B. CADIMAS, statute’s preamble or the introductory or preparatory clause is nothing in the allegations in the complaint or in the terms and
by her Attorney-In-Fact, that explains the reasons for its enactment or the contextual conditions of the contract to sell that would suggest that the
VENANCIO Z. ROSALES,
13
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
[G.R. No. 131683. June 19, Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and determine a cause the In the case at bar, petitioners complaint is for specific
2000] right to act in a case.[12] It is conferred by law and not by mere performance to enforce their rights as purchasers of subdivision
administrative policy of any court or tribunal.[13] It is determined lots as regards rights of way, water, open spaces, road and
JESUS LIM ARRANZA; by the averments of the complaint and not by the defense perimeter wall repairs, and security. Indisputably then, the
LORENZO CINCO; contained in the answer.[14] Hence, the jurisdictional issue HLURB has jurisdiction over the complaint.
QUINTIN TAN; JOSE involved here shall be determined upon an examination of the
ESCOBAR; ELBERT applicable laws and the allegations of petitioners complaint The fact that respondent is under receivership does not divest
FRIEND; CLASSIC HOMES before the HLURB. the HLURB of that jurisdiction. A receiver is a person appointed
VILLAGE ASSOCIATION, by the court, or in this instance, by a quasi~judicial administrative
INC.; BF NORTHWEST agency, in behalf of all the parties for the purpose of preserving
HOMEOWNERS Similarly, in Alcasid v. Court of Appeals,[18] the Court ruled that and conserving the property and preventing its possible
ASSOCIATION, INC.; and the HLURB, not the RTC, has jurisdiction over the complaint destruction or dissipation, if it were left in the possession of any
UNITED BF of lot buyers for specific performance of alleged contractual of the parties.[19] It is the duty of the receiver to administer the
HOMEOWNERS and statutory obligations of the defendants, to wit, the assets of the receivership estate; and in the management and
ASSOCIATIONS, INC., execution of contracts of sale in favor of the plaintiffs and the disposition of the property committed to his possession, he acts
petitioners, vs. B.F. introduction in the disputed property of the necessary facilities in a fiduciary capacity and with impartiality towards all interested
HOMES, INC. AND THE such as asphalting and street lights. persons.[20] The appointment of a receiver does not dissolve a
HONORABLE COURT OF corporation, nor does it interfere with the exercise of its corporate
APPEALS, respondent. rights.[21] In this case where there appears to be no restraints
imposed upon respondent as it undergoes rehabilitation
receivership,[22] respondent continues to exist as a corporation
14
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
[G.R. No. 125447. August Forum shopping is the act of a party against whom an adverse Contrary to MARINAs assertion, H.L. CARLOS complaint was
14, 1998] judgment has been rendered in one forum, of seeking another hardly a duplication of Civil Case No. 89-5870 which was filed to
(and possibly favorable) opinion in another forum other than collect the sum of money corresponding to unpaid billings from
MARINA PROPERTIES by appeal or the special civil action of certiorari, or the their Construction Contract. The cause of action in the civil case
CORPORATION, pe institution of two (2) or more actions or proceedings grounded was, therefore, totally distinct from the cause of action in the
titioner, vs. COURT on the same cause on the supposition that one or the other complaint before the HLURB. For this reason, neither could
OF APPEALS and court might look with favor upon the party there have been splitting of a cause of action.
H.L. CARLOS
CONSTRUCTION,
INC., respondents.
G.R. No. The necessity for vesting administrative authorities with power
135808 October 6, to make rules and regulations is based on the impracticability
2008 of lawmakers' providing general regulations for various and
SECURITIES AND varying details of management.30 To rule that the absence of
EXCHANGE implementing rules can render ineffective an act of Congress,
COMMISSION, petitioner, such as the Revised Securities Act, would empower the
vs. administrative bodies to defeat the legislative will by delaying
INTERPORT RESOURCES the implementing rules. To assert that a law is less than a law,
CORPORATION, MANUEL because it is made to depend on a future event or act, is to rob
S. RECTO, RENE S. the Legislature of the power to act wisely for the public welfare
VILLARICA, PELAGIO whenever a law is passed relating to a state of affairs not yet
RICALDE, ANTONIO developed, or to things future and impossible to fully know.31 It
REINA, FRANCISCO is well established that administrative authorities have the
ANONUEVO, JOSEPH SY power to promulgate rules and regulations to implement a
and SANTIAGO TANCHAN, given statute and to effectuate its policies, provided such rules
JR., respondents. and regulations conform to the terms and standards
prescribed by the statute as well as purport to carry into effect
its general policies. Nevertheless, it is undisputable that the
rules and regulations cannot assert for themselves a more
extensive prerogative or deviate from the mandate of the
statute.32 Moreover, where the statute contains sufficient
standards and an unmistakable intent, as in the case of
15
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
Padua vs. Ranada, Doctrines of Primary Jurisdiction The laws and the TRB Rules of Procedure have
390 SCRA 663 Under the principle of primary jurisdiction, courts cannot or will provided the remedies of an interested expressway
G.R. No. 141949 not determine a controversy involving question within the user—there must be a prior resort to the Toll
October 14, 2002 jurisdiction of an administrative body prior to the decision of Regulatory Board since it is the agency assigned to
that question by the administrative tribunal where: supervise the collection of toll fees and the operation of
toll facilities.
1. The question demands administrative determination
requiring special knowledge, experience and services of the Obviously, the laws and the TRB Rules of Procedure
administrative tribunal; have provided the remedies of an interested
2. The question requires determination of technical and Expressways user. The initial proper recourse is to file
intricate issues of a fact; a petition for review of the adjusted toll rates with the
TRB. The need for a prior resort to this body is with
3. The uniformity of ruling is essential to comply with reason. The TRB, as the agency assigned to supervise
purposes of the regulatory statute administered the collection of toll fees and the operation of toll
facilities, has the necessary expertise, training and
Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies skills to judiciously decide matters of this kind. As may
This doctrine calls for resort first to the appropriate be gleaned from the petition, the main thrust of
administrative authorities in the resolution of a controversy petitioner Zialcita’s argument is that the provisional toll
falling under their jurisdiction and must first be appealed to rate adjustments are exorbitant, oppressive, onerous
the administrative superiors up to the highest level before the and unconscionable. This is obviously a question of
same may be elevated to the courts of justice for review. fact requiring knowledge of the formula used and the
factors considered in determining the assailed rates.
Definitely, this task is within the province of the TRB.
G.R. No. L-50141 January Findings of facts of Administrative agencies respected unless There is moreover so strong a presumption respecting
29, 1988 there is absolutely no evidence in support thereof or such the correctness of the acts and determinations of
evidence is clearly, manifestly and patently insubstantial. administrative agencies like the BOI, that the policy has
BEAUTIFONT, INC. and been adopted for courts not to interfere therewith
AURA LABORATORIES, unless there be a clear showing of arbitrary action or
INC., petitioners, palpable and serious error. The legal presumption is
vs. that official duty has been duly performed; and it is
COURT OF APPEALS, “particularly strong as regards administrative agencies
RUSTAN MARKETING x x vested with powers said to be quasi-judicial in
CORP. and HOLIDAY nature, in connection with the enforcement of laws
COSMETICS, affecting particular fields of activity, the proper
INC., respondents. regulations and/or promotion of which requires a
technical or special training, aside from a good
16
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
18
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
Chiongbian vs. Orbos The division of the country into regions is intended to Thus the creation and subsequent reorganization of
facilitate not only the administration of local administrative regions have been by the President
governments but also the direction of executive pursuant to authority granted to him by law. In
departments which the law requires should have conferring on the President the power “to merge [by
regional offices. administrative determination] the existing regions”
following the establishment of the Autonomous Region
in Muslim Mindanao, Congress merely followed the
pattern set in previous legislation dating back to the
initial organization of administrative regions in 1972.
The choice of the President as delegate is logical
because the division of the country into regions is
intended to facilitate not only the administration of local
governments but also the direction of executive
departments which the law requires should have
regional offices.
Guilles vs CA Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, courts cannot and Under the doctrine of primary jurisdiction, courts cannot
will not determine a controversy involving a question which is and will not determine a controversy involving a
within the jurisdiction of an administrative tribunal, especially question which is within the jurisdiction of an
where the question demands the exercise of sound administrative tribunal, especially where the question
administrative discretion requiring the special knowledge, demands the exercise of sound administrative
experience and services of the administrative tribunal to discretion requiring the special knowledge, experience
determine technical and intricate matters of fact and where a and services of the administrative tribunal to determine
uniformity of ruling is essential to comply with the purposes of technical and intricate matters of fact and where a
the regulatory statute administered. uniformity of ruling is essential to comply with the
purposes of the regulatory statute administered.
Additional Info:
20
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. No. L- The Supreme Court of the Philippines and its members The grant by Republic Act 1151 to the Commissioner of Land
28790 April 29, 1968 should not and cannot be required to exercise any power or Registration of the "same privileges as those of a Judge of the
to perform any trust or to assume any duty not pertaining to Court of First Instance" did not include, and was not intended to
ANTONIO H. NOBLEJAS, or connected with the administration of judicial functions; and include, the right to demand investigation by the Supreme
as Commissioner of Land a law requiring the Supreme Court to arbitrate disputes Court, and to be suspended or removed only upon that Court's
Registration, vs. CLAUDIO between public utilities is void. recommendation; for otherwise, the said grant of privileges
TEEHANKEE, as Secretary would be violative of the Constitution and be null and void.
of Justice, and RAFAEL M. Such grant of privileges would be unconstitutional, since it Consequently, the investigation and suspension of the
SALAS, as Executive would violate the fundamental doctrine of separation of aforenamed Commissioner pursuant to sections 32 and 34 of
Secretary powers, by charging this court with the administrative function the Civil Service Law (R. A. 2260) are neither abuses of
of supervisory control over executive officials, and discretion nor acts in excess of jurisdiction.
simultaneously reducing pro tanto the control of the Chief
Executive over such officials. The decision of the Land Registration Commissioner "shall be
conclusive and binding upon all Registers of Deeds" alone, and
not upon other parties. This limitation in effect identifies the
resolutions of the Land Registration Commissioner with those
of any other bureau director, whose resolutions or orders bind
his subordinates alone. That the Commissioner's resolutions
are appealable does not prove that they are not administrative;
any bureau director's ruling is likewise appealable to the
corresponding department head.
G.R. No. 84592 October 27, Findings of administrative agencies are generally accorded The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Commission
1988 not only respect but also finality when the decision and order on Audit finding that "to the effect that there is positive showing
ESTHER E. CUERDO vs. are not tainted with unfairness or arbitrariness that would of negligence on the part of the applicant in not taking
COMMISSION ON AUDIT, amount to abuse of discretion or lack of jurisdiction. The necessary precaution or zeal in returning the money in the safe
respondent. findings of facts must be respected, so long as they are in order to safeguard it not only from fire but also from theft or
Esther Cuerdo supported by substantial evidence even if not overwhelming robbery. In the instant case the sole issue raised being factual,
or preponderant. the same is not reviewable by this Court on certiorari.
Section 128, being a valid implementing rule, has the force and
effect of law. Thus, public respondents were duly empowered
to inquire into the validity of the mining claims involved in the
protest case, even if not raised in issue.
Still, when an administrative agency renders an opinion or Petitioner contends that public respondent committed grave
issues a statement of policy, it merely interprets a pre- abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction in not
existing law and the administrative interpretation is at best dismissing the election protest for failing to comply with the
advisory for it is the courts that finally determine what the law required payment of filing and legal research fees as
means. Thus an action by an administrative agency may be prescribed in the COMELEC Rules of Procedure, such
set aside by the judicial department if there is an error of law, requirement being jurisdictional, as opposed to the contention
abuse of power, lack of jurisdiction or grave abuse of of public respondent. The COMELEC Rules of Procedure, Rule
discretion clearly conflicting with the letter and spirit of the 37, Sec. 6, states:
law.
Sec. 6. Filing fee. — No protest shall be given due course
without the payment of a filing fee of One Hundred Pesos
(P100.00) and the legal research fee as required by law.
(Emphasis supplied).
With the basic policy as well as, specific policies clearly set
forth in its various provisions, the Act is complete in itself and
does not leave any part of the policy-making, a strictly
legislative function, to any administrative agency.
25
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. No. L-23825 Although Congress may delegate to another branch of the Section 68 of the Revised Administrative Code does not meet
December 24, 1965 Government the power to fill in the details in the execution, these well settled requirements for a valid delegation of the
enforcement or administration of a law, it is essential, to power to fix the details in the enforcement of a law. It does not
EMMANUEL PELAEZ vs. forestall a violation of the principle of separation of powers, enunciate any policy to be carried out or implemented by the
THE AUDITOR GENERAL that said law: (a) be complete in itself — it must set forth President. Neither does it give a standard sufficiently precise to
therein the policy to be executed, carried out or avoid the evil effects above referred to. In this connection, we
implemented by the delegate — and (b) fix a standard — do not overlook the fact that, under the last clause of the first
the limits of which are sufficiently determinate or sentence of Section 68, the President:
determinable — to which the delegate must conform in
the performance of his functions. Indeed, without a ... may change the seat of the government within any
statutory declaration of policy, the delegate would in effect, subdivision to such place therein as the public welfare may
make or formulate such policy, which is the essence of every require.
law; and, without the aforementioned standard, there would
be no means to determine, with reasonable certainty, It is apparent, however, from the language of this clause, that
whether the delegate has acted within or beyond the scope of the phrase "as the public welfare may require" qualified, not the
his authority. Hence, he could thereby arrogate upon himself clauses preceding the one just quoted, but only the place to
the power, not only to make the law, but, also — and this is which the seat of the government may be transferred. This fact
worse — to unmake it, by adopting measures inconsistent becomes more apparent when we consider that said Section
with the end sought to be attained by the Act of Congress, 68 was originally Section 1 of Act No. 1748,3 which provided
thus nullifying the principle of separation of powers and the that, "whenever in the judgment of the Governor-General the
system of checks and balances, and, consequently, public welfare requires, he may, by executive order," effect the
undermining the very foundation of our Republican system. changes enumerated therein (as in said section 68), including
the change of the seat of the government "to such place ... as
the public interest requires." The opening statement of said
Section 1 of Act No. 1748 — which was not included in Section
68 of the Revised Administrative Code — governed the time at
which, or the conditions under which, the powers therein
conferred could be exercised; whereas the last part of the first
sentence of said section referred exclusively to the place to
which the seat of the government was to be transferred.
28
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. No. L-30918 July 18, The Philippine Nursing Act, Republic Act No. 877 as [In relation to the power to inspect] where the board finds in the
1974 amended by Republic Act No. 4704 (approved June 18, course of its periodic inspection that a nursing school does not
ANNIE SAND, LYDIA 1966) expressly empowers in section 9 thereof the Board of meet the standing minimum requirements and standards then it
VALDES, LUZ SABAS, Nursing "subject to the approval of the President of the is the board's duty, as provided in the rule, to require
JOSEFINA A. MENDOZA Philippines [to] promulgate such rules and regularly as may the deficient school to make the required improvements as
and ROSARIO A. ORDIZ, in be necessary to carry out the provisions of this Act." would enable it to meet the minimum standards which must be
their capacity as Chairman carried out within one year and meanwhile to bar the would-be
and Members of the Board graduates of such deficient school from the nurses'
of Examiners for examination until its deficiency and that of its would-be
Nurses, petitioners, graduates shall have been removed.
vs.
ABAD SANTOS
EDUCATIONAL
INSTITUTION, SCHOOL OF
NURSING and HON.
WALFRIDO DE LOS
ANGELES, Judge of the
Court of First Instance of
Rizal, Branch IV, Quezon
City, respondents
G.R. No. 78385 August 31, The function of prescribing rates by an administrative agency Is Department Order No. 37 issued by the DECS in the
1987 may be either a legislative or an adjudicative function. If it exercise of its legislative function? We believe so. The assailed
PHILIPPINE CONSUMERS were a legislative function, the grant of prior notice and Department Order prescribes the maximum school fees that
FOUNDATION, hearing to the affected parties is not a requirement of due may be charged by all private schools in the country for
INC., petitioner, process. As regards rates prescribed by an administrative schoolyear 1987 to 1988. This being so, prior notice and
vs. agency in the exercise of its quasi-judicial function, prior hearing are not essential to the validity of its issuance.
THE SECRETARY OF notice and hearing are essential to the validity of such rates.
When the rules and/or rates laid down by an administrative
32
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
33
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
34
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
G.R. No. 113097 April 27, The Labor Code, as amended by RA 6727 (the Wage NWPC and not the RTWPB has the power to "prescribe the
1998 Rationalization Act), grants the National Wages and rules and guidelines" for the determination of minimum wage
NASIPIT LUMBER Productivity Commission (NWPC) the power to prescribe and productivity measures. While the RTWPB has the power to
COMPANY, INC., and rules and guidelines for the determination of appropriate issue wage orders under Article 122 (b) of the Labor Code,
35
ADMINISTRATIVE AND ELECTION LAWS
36