ADMINISTRATIVE LAW POLITICAL LAW

2. By Authorities of Law
A. GENERAL PRINCIPLES 3. Legislative Enactments

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW FACTORS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE EMERGENCE

OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES
It is a branch of public law fixing the organization and
determines the competence of administrative authorities, 1. Growing complexities of modern life
and indicates the individual remedies for the violation of the 2. Multiplication of number of subjects needing
rights. government regulation
3. Increased difficulty of administering laws
[Pangasinan Transportation Co. vs. Public Service
KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Commission, GR No. 47065 (1940)]
1. Statutes setting up administrative authorities.
2. Body of doctrines and decisions dealing with the
creation, operation, and effect of determinations
B.3 KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE
and regulations of such administrative authorities.
3. Rules, regulations, or orders of such administrative AGENCIES
authorities in pursuance of the purposes, for which 1. As to Purpose:
administrative authorities were created or a. Government Grant or gratuity, special
endowed. privilege (e.g. Bureau of Lands, Phil. Veterans
4. Determinations, decisions, and orders of such Admin, GSIS, SSS, PAO)
administrative authorities in the settlement of
controversies arising in their particular field. b. Carrying out the actual business of
government (e.g. BIR, Customs, Immigration,
2 DIFFERENT SENSES OF LRA)
ADMINISTRATION c. Service for public benefit (e.g. Philpost, PNR,
AS A FUNCTION MWSS, NFA, NHA)
It is the execution, in a non-judicial matters, of the law or will
of the State as expressed by competent authority. d. Regulation affected with Public Interest (e.g.
Insurance Commission, LTFRB, NTC, HLURB)
AS AN ORGANIZATION
The group of persons holding the reins of the government for e. Regulation of Businesses and individuals (e.g.
the time being. SEC)

f. Adjustment of Individual Controversies

because of a strong social policy involved
B. ADMINISTRATIVE (e.g. ECC, NLRC, SEC, DAR, COA)

AGENCIES g. Government as private party (e.g. GSIS)

B.1. DEFINITION 2. As to the Organic Law of Creation

It is an organ of government, other than a court and the a. 1987 Constitutional Provisions
legislature, which affects the rights of private parties either
through adjudication or rule making. [Nachura] • Civil Service Commission1

An administrative agency has no discretion whether or not to • Commission on Election 2

implement a law. Its duty is to enforce the law. Thus, if there
is a conflict between the circular issued by the agency and an • Commission on Audit3
EO issued by the president, the latter prevails. [Eastern
Shipping Lines vs. CA, GR No. 116356 (1998)] • Commission on Human Rights4

• Commission on Appointment5
B.2. MANNER OF CREATION
1. By Constitutional Provision

1 (Art. IX B) 4 (Art. XIII, Sec. 17)

2 (Art. IX C) 5 (Art. VI, Sec. 18)
3 (Art. IX B)
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW POLITICAL LAW

• SET6 Commissions

• HRET7 • CSC, COMELEC, COA

• JBC8
c. Other Constitutional Bodies
• Office of the Ombudsman9
Sandiganbayan, Ombudsman, Office of Special
• NEDA10 Prosecutor

• Agency of Cooperatives 11
• Central Monetary Authority, economic
• Independent Central Monetary Authority and Planning Agency
12

• CHR
• National Language Commission 13
• National Language Commission
• National Police Commission 14
• National Police Commission
• Consultative Body on Indigenous Cultural
Communities • Commission on Indigenous Cultural
Communities

b. Legislative Enactment/Congressional Statute

d. Regulatory Commission
• NLRC
• SEC, NLRC, Office of Insurance
• SSC Commissioner, Land transportation
Commission, Bureau of Customs, CID, BIR
• SEC

• PPO e. Public Corporations

• PRC • NPC, MWSS, NDC, DBP

• Games and Amusement Board

• BOE
C. POWERS OF
• Insurance Commission
ADMINISTRATIVE
• Dangerous Drug Board AGENCIES
1. Quasi-legislative (Rule-making) Power
c. Executive Orders 2. Quasi-judicial (Adjudicatory) Power
3. Fact-finding, Investigative, Rate-fixing Power
4. Determinative Power
3. As to Hierarchy:
a. Office of the President and Cabinet
C.1. QUASI-LEGISLATIVE (RULE-
MAKING) POWER
b. Independent Constitutional
This is the exercise of delegated legislative power,
involving no discretion as to what the law shall be, but

6 (Art. VI, Sec. 17) 11 (Art. XII, Sec. 15)

7 (Art. VI, Sec. 17) 12 (Art. XII, Sec. 20)
8 (Art, VIII, Sec. 8) 13 (Art. XIV Sec. 9)
9 (Art IX, Sec. 5) 14 (Art. XII Sec. 20)
10 (Art. XII, Sec. 20)
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW POLITICAL LAW

merely the authority to fix the details in the execution or
enforcement of a policy set out in the law itself.
This is the authority delegated by the law-making body
to the administrative agency to adopt rules and
regulations intended to carry out the provisions of a law
and implement a legislative enactment.
2. Cannot make rules or regulations which are inconsistent
with the provision of the Constitution or statute.
3. Cannot defeat the purpose of the statute.
4. May not amend, alter, modify, supplant, enlarge, or limit
the terms of the statute.
5. A rule or regulation must be uniform in operation,
reasonable and not unfair or discriminatory.

DOCTRINE OF SUBORDINATE LEGISLATION NON-DELEGATION DOCTRINE

Power of administrative agency to promulgate rules and Potestas delegate non delegare potest means “what has
regulations on matters within their own specialization. been delegated cannot be delegated.

REQUISITES FOR VALID DELEGATION

C.1.A KINDS OF ADMINISTRATIVE RULES 1. The law must be complete in itself and must set forth the
AND REGULATION policy to be executed.
2. The law must fix a standard, the limits of which are
1. Supplementary or detailed legislation
sufficiently determinate or determinable to which the
Refers to rules and regulation, which intends to fill in the
delegate must conform. [Pelaez vs. Auditor General
details of the law and to make explicit what is only
(1965)]
general. e.g. Rules and Regulations Implementing the
Labor Code.
SUFFICIENT STANDARD
1. Defines legislative policy, marks its limits, maps out its
2. Contingent legislation
boundaries and specifies the public agency to apply it;
Refers to rules and regulations made by an
and
administrative authority on the existence of certain facts
2. Indicates the circumstances under which the legislative
or things upon which the enforcement of the law
command is to be effected. [ABAKADA Guro List vs.
depends.
Ermita, G.R. No. 168056 (2005)]
3. Interpretative legislation
FORM OF STANDARD
Refers to rules and regulations construing or
May be:
interpreting the provisions of a statute to be enforced
1. express
and binding on all concerned until changed. They have
2. implied
the effect of law and are entitled to great respect having
3. embodies in other statutes on the same matter
in their favor the presumption of legality, e.g., BIR
circulars.
a. Examples of Valid Delegation: [People vs. Vera, G.R.
No. L-45685 (1937)]
C.1.B REQUISITES FOR A VALID
EXERCISE OF QUASI‐LEGISLATIVE 1. Fix Tariff, import and export quotas, tonnage
POWER and wharfage fees
2. Emergency powers
1. Promulgated in accordance with the prescribed 3. Delegation to the People at Large.
procedure. 4. Delegation to Local Authorities.
2. Reasonable. 5. Delegation to administrative agencies.
3. Issued under authority of law.
4. Administrative regulations, issued for the purpose of b. What cannot be Delegated:
implementing existing law, pursuant to a valid
delegation are included in the term “laws” under Article 1. Creation of Municipalities (for legislative
2, of the Civil Code and must therefore be published in matter)
order to be effective. 2. Defining a crime [US vs. Ang Tang Ho, G.R. No.
5. It must be within the Scope and purview of the law. 17122 (1922)]
6. Filing with the Office of the National Administrative
Register (ONAR) of the University of the Philippines Law PERMISSIBLE DELEGATION
Center
1. Ascertainment of Facts
LIMITATIONS ON THE EXERCISE OF QUASI‐ 2. Filling in of Details
LEGISLATIVE POWER 3. Administrative Rule-Making
1. It must be within the limits of the powers granted to
administrative agencies.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
ASCERTAINMENT OF FACT
The mere fact that an officer is required by law
(1) to inquire the existence of certain facts, and (2)
to apply the law thereto, in order to determine
what his official conduct shall be, and the fact that
these acts may affect private rights do not
constitute an exercise of Judicial Power, statutes
may give non-judicial officers the power (i) to
declare the existence of facts which call
into operation the statute’s provisions, and (ii) to
ascertain appropriate facts as a basis for procedure
in the enforcement of particular laws. Such
functions are merely incidental to the exercise of
power granted by law to clear navigable streams
of unauthorized obstructions. [Lovina v. Moreno,
G.R. No. L-17821 (1963) ]
FILLING IN OF DETAILS
For necessity and as a means of enforcement and
execution. [Alegre v. Collector of Customs, G.R. No.
L-30783 (1929)]
LIMITATIONS ON ADMINISTRATIVE RULE MAKING
1. Must be authorized by law
The Legislature has not defined what shall be the
standard or the type of leaf or manufactured tobacco
which may be exported to the United States, or even
specified how or upon what basis the Collector
of Internal Revenue should fix or determine the
standard. All of that power is delegated to the
Collector of Internal Revenue. [Olsen v. Aldanese]
2. Must not amend the law or must not be inconsistent
with the law.
Memo order is void because it is inconsistent with
law, since the RAC specifically provides for an appeal
to the commissioner before he can review the case.
[Syman v. Jacinto]
3. Must not define a criminal act
The lawmaking body cannot delegate to an executive
official the power to declare what acts should
constitute an offense. It can authorize the issuance of
regulations and the imposition of the penalty
provided for in the law itself. [People v. Macere]
4. Must be germane to the purpose of the law which it was
meant to implement
Commission later promulgated the Revised Civil Rules
which was published on the OG. Sec 5, Rule 6 provided
– a prohibition on the appointment of 57year olds and
above in the service. RA 2260 however contained no
provision prohibiting appointment in the Gov’t service
of any person who’s already 57 years old. This
prohibition was entirely a creation of the CSC. Thus
such rules cannot be accorded validity. [Toledo vs.
CSC]
POLITICAL LAW
5. Must not restrict, expand, diminish, supplant or modify
the law
All administrative issuances must be in harmony with
the law and must NOT modify it. In this case, it was an
act of administrative legislation. (CIR v. CA)
EO 146 organized NTC as a 3-man commission. Thus
all memo circulars negating the collegial nature of
NTC are illegal. Administrative regulations derive their
validity from the statute that they intend to
implement. [GMCR v. Bell Telecommunications]
6. Action will be set aside if there is an error of law, grave
abuse or lack of jurisdiction clearly conflicting with either
the letter or the spirit of the law
Sec 16 of RA 6657 provides that deposit must be made
only in cash or in LBP bonds. DAR exceeded the limits
of its power to enact rules that allowed the opening
of a trust account in behalf of the land owner.
Function of promulgating rules and regulations may
be exercised only for the purpose of carrying the
provisions of the law into effect. Admin regulations
cannot extend the law and amend a legislative
enactment. [Landbank v. CA]
7. The basic law shall prevail as embodiment of the
legislative purpose; rules and regulations cannot go
beyond the laws terms and provisions
8. If there is discrepancy between the basic law and an
administrative rule, the basic law prevails.
9. May not unilaterally impose a new legislative policy
requiring the adjustment of various other contending
policies.
10. May not dismantle a regulatory system that was set up
by law
11. May not be delegated to a mere constituent unit
Publication and Effectivity
General Rule: In rule making, administrative agencies are not
directly answerable to the people since administrative
officers were not elected by the masses. Hence, there is a need
for publication and public participation.
Exception: Administrative rules and regulations must be
published if their purpose is to enforce or implement existing
law pursuant also to a valid delegation. [Nasecore v. ERC]
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Admin Code, Sec. 3. Filing
Every agency shall file with UP Law Center 3 certified copies of
every rule adopted by it. Rules in force on the date of the effectivity
of this code which are not filed within 3 months from that date
shall not thereafter be the basis of any sanction against any party
or persons.
The records officer of the agency, or his equivalent functionary,
shall carry out the requirements of this section under pain of
disciplinary action.
A permanent register of all rules shall be kept by the issuing agency
and shall be open to public inspection.
The fact that the 1993 Revised Rules were filed with the UP
Law Center on February 3, 1993 is of no moment. There is
nothing in the Administrative Code of 1987 which implies that
the filing of the rules with the UP Law Center is the operative
act that gives the rules force and effect. The National
Administrative Register is merely a bulletin of codified rules
and it is furnished only to the Office of the President,
Congress, all appellate courts, the National Library, other
public offices or agencies as the Congress may select, and to
other persons at a price sufficient to cover publication and
mailing or distribution costs. Still, publication in the Official
Gazette or a newspaper of general circulation is a condition
sine qua non before statutes, rules or regulations can take
effect. [Republic v. EXPRESS Telecommunications]
With regard to Memo Circular 98-17,the Administrative code
of 1987, particularly Section 3, requires each agency to file
with the Office of the National Administrative Register
(ONAR) of the UP Law Center three certified copies of every
rule adopted by it. Administrative issuances not published or
registered with the ONAR are ineffective and may not
be enforced. The memo here which provides for penalties for
offenses of exhibiting programs without a valid permit has
not been registered with the ONAR. It is the unenforceable
since it hasn’t been registered; hence the petitioner is not
bound by said circular and should not have been meted with
the sanction provided. (GMA v. MTRCB)
Admin. Code Sec. 4. Effectivity
In addition to other rule-making requirements provided by law not
inconsistent with this Book, each rule shall become effective fifteen
(15) days from the date of filing as above provided unless a different
date is fixed by law, or specified in the rule in cases of imminent
danger to public health, safety and welfare, the existence of which
must be expressed in a statement accompanying the rule. The
agency shall take appropriate measures to make emergency rules
known to persons who may be affected by them
POLITICAL LAW
Art. 2, NCC (as amended by EO 200)
Law shall take effect after 15 days following the completion of their
publication either in the Official Gazette or in a newspaper of
general circulation in the Philippines, unless otherwise provided.
General Rule: Administrative rules and regulations are
subject to the publication and effectivity rules of Admin code
in relation to civil code.
Effectivity: 15 days after publication, not 15 days from the
date of filing with the UP law center. [Republic vs. Express
Tel.]
Exceptions:
• Different date is fixed by law
• In case of imminent danger to public health, safety and
welfare
Admin. Code Sec. 5. Publication and Recording
The University of the Philippines Law Center shall:
1. Publish a quarter bulletin setting forth the text of rules
filed with it during the preceding quarter; and
2. Keep an up-to-date codification of all rules thus
published and remaining in effect, together with a
complete index and appropriate tables.
Purpose of Publication: Due Process
To give the general public adequate notice of the various
laws which are to regulate their actions and conduct as
citizens. It would be the height of injustice to punish
or otherwise burden a citizen for the transgression of a law of
which he had no notice whatsoever.
General Rule: Publication is indispensable especially if the
rule is general.
Exceptions:
• Interpretative Rules
• Internal Regulations, that is, regulating only
the personnel of the administrative agency and not the
public
LOI issued by admin. Superior to subordinates
Other presidential issuances which apply only to particular
persons or class of persons such as administrative and
executive orders need not be published on the assumption
that they have been circularized to all concerned.
But mere interpretative regulations, and those merely
internal in nature, i.e. regulating only the personnel of the
administrative agency and not the public, need not be
published. [Tañada v. Tuvera]
Strict compliance with the requirements of publication
cannot be annulled by a mere allegation that parties were
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
notified of the existence of the implementing rules
concerned. [RP v. Shell]
Penal Regulation
Admin. Code Sec. 6. Omission of Some Rules
xxxx
(2) Every rule establishing an offense or defining an act
which, pursuant to law, is punishable as a crime or subject
to a penalty shall in all cases be published in full text.
General Rule: Administrative bodies cannot make penal rules
as they are exclusive to the legislature and cannot be
delegated.
Exception: Administrative agency can promulgate rules
providing for penal sanction provided the following requisites
are complied with:
1. The law must declare the act punishable;
2. The law must define the penalty;
3. The rules must be published in the Official Gazette. [The
Hon. Secretary Vincent S. Perez v. LPG Refillers
Association of the Philippines]
The law itself must declare the act as punishable and must
also define or fix the penalty for the violation. Admin bodies
cannot make penal rules as they are exclusive to the
legislature and cannot be delegated. For an administrative
regulation to have the force of penal law:
(1) the violation of the administrative regulation must be
made a crime by the delegating statute itself; and
(2) the penalty for such violation must be provided by the
statute itself [Perez v. LPG]
Interpretative Rules
Administrative agencies in the discharge of their duties are
necessarily called upon to construe and apply the provision
of law under which they function. They can interpret their
own rules provided:
1. Such does not change the character of a ministerial duty.
2. It does not involve unlawful use of legislative or judicial
power.
Administrative officers tasked to implement the law also
authorized to interpret the law because they have expertise
to do so. (PLDT v. NTC)
Legislative Rules v. Interpretative
Rules
Legislative rules Interpretative rules
Legislative Judicial
POLITICAL LAW
It supplements the statute by It says what the statute
filling in the details means
Legislative regulations have the
force and effect of law Merely persuasive/
immediately upon going into Received by the courts with
effect. Such is accorded by the much respect but not
courts or by express provision of accorded with finality
statute.
Need for Previous Notice and Hearing
General Rule: Administrative rules of GENERAL application do
NOT require previous notice and hearing
Exception: When the legislature itself requires that the
regulation shall be based on certain facts as determined at an
appropriate investigation.
If the regulation is in effect a settlement of a controversy
between specific parties, it is considered an administrative
adjudication, requiring notice and hearing.
Power to Amend, Revise, Alter or
Repeal Rules
The grant of express power to formulate implementing rules
and regulations must necessarily include the power to
amend, revise, alter, or repeal the same. [Yazaki Torres
Manufacturing, Inc. vs. CA (2006)]
C.2. QUASI-JUDICIAL (ADJUDICATORY)
POWER
It is the power of administrative authorities to make
determination of facts in the performance of their official
duties and to apply the law as they construe it to the facts so
found. It partakes the nature of judicial power, but is
exercised by a person other than a judge.
An administrative body to which quasi‐judicial power has
been delegated is a tribunal of limited jurisdiction and as such
it could wield only such powers as are specifically granted to
it by its enabling statute. Its jurisdiction is interpreted
strictissimi juris
It is incidental to the power of regulation but is often
expressly conferred by the legislature through specific
provisions in the charter of the agency.
C.2.A. ADMINISTRATIVE DUE PROCESS
While administrative agencies are free from the rigidity of
certain procedural requirements, they cannot entirely ignore
or disregard the fundamental and essential requirements of
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
due process in trials and investigations of an administrative
character. [Ang Tibay vs. CIR (1940)]
Essence of Due Process
It lies simply in the opportunity to explain one’s side or to
seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.
What is proscribed is the absolute lack of notice and hearing.
[Office of the Ombudsman vs. Coronel (2006)]
Cardinal Primary Requirements of Due
Process in Administrative Proceedings
[Ang Tibay vs. CIR (1940)]
1. The right to a hearing which includes the right to present
one’s case and submit evidence in support
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented
3. The decision must be supported by evidence
4. Such evidence must be substantial
5. The decision must be based on the evidence presented
at the hearing or at least contained in the record, and
disclosed to the parties affected
6. The tribunal or body of any of its judges must act on its
own independent consideration of the law and facts of
the controversy in arriving at a decision;
7. The board or body should render its decision in such a
manner that the parties to the proceeding can know the
various issues involved, and the reasons for the
decisions rendered.
In administrative proceedings, due process has been
recognized to include the following:
[Fabella vs. Court of Appeals (1997)]
(1) the right to actual or constructive notice of the
institution of proceedings which may affect a
respondent’s legal rights;
(2) a real opportunity to be heard personally or with the
assistance of counsel, to present witnesses and evidence
in one’s favor, and to defend one’s rights;
(3) a tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction and so
constituted as to afford a person charged
administratively a reasonable guarantee of honesty as
well as impartiality; and
(4) a finding by said tribunal which is supported by
substantial evidence submitted for consideration during
the hearing or contained in the records or made known
to the parties affected. [Fabella vs. Court of Appeals
(1997)]
Note:
• Due process does not always entail notice and hearing
prior to the deprivation of a right. Hearing may occur
after deprivation, as in emergency cases, in which case,
there must be a chance to seek reconsideration. [UP
Board of Regents vs. CA (1999)]
• Presence of a party at a trial is not always the essence of
due process. All that the law requires is the element of
fairness. [Rivera vs. CSC (1995)]
POLITICAL LAW
• Holding of an adversarial trial is discretionary. Parties
cannot demand it as a matter of right. [Vinta Marine vs.
NLRC (1978)] But the right of a party to confront and
cross-examine opposing witness is a fundamental right
which is part of due process. If without his fault, this right
is violated, he is entitled to have the direct examination
stricken off the record. [Bachrach Motors vs. CIR (1978)]
3 Instances When Due Process is
Violated:
1. Failure to sufficiently explain the reason for the decision
rendered
2. Not supported by substantial evidence
3. Imputation of a violation and imposition of a fine despite
absence of due notice and hearing [Globe Telecom vs.
NTC (2004)]
Right against Self-incrimination
The respondent may invoke this at the time he is called by the
complainant as a witness.
He can be cross-examined if he voluntarily takes the witness
stand, but he may still invoke the right when the question call
for an answer, which incriminates him for an offense other
than, that charged. [People vs. Ayson (1989)]
Notice and Hearing
When Required:
1. When the law specifically requires it
2. When it affects a person’s status and liberty
When not required:
1. Urgent reasons
2. Discretion is exercised by an officer vested with it upon
an undisputed act
3. If it involves the exercise of discretion and there is no
grave abuse
4. When it involves rules to govern future conduct of
persons or enterprises, unless law provides otherwise
5. In the valid exercise of police power
Instances when Notice and Hearing is
Required under the Administrative Code
1. Contested cases [Book VII, Section 3]
2. Certain licensing procedures, involving grant, renewal,
denial or cancellation of a license [Sec.17 (1)]
3. All licensing procedures, when a license is withdrawn,
suspended, revoked or annulled [Sec. 17 (2)]
• Note: Notice and hearing is not required in cases of:
o Willful violation of pertinent laws, rules
and regulations
o When public security, health, safety
require otherwise [Sec. 17 (2)]
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
C.2.B. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AND
REVIEW
Admin. Code Sec. 16 (1). Publication and Compilation of
Decision
(1) Every agency shall publish and make available for public
inspection all decisions or final orders in the adjudication
of contested cases.
Admin. Code Sec. 19. Appeal
Unless otherwise provided by law or executive order, an
appeal from a final decision of the agency may be taken to the
Department head.
Admin. Code Sec. 20. Perfection of Administrative Appeals
1. Administrative appeals under this Chapter shall be
perfected within fifteen (15) days after receipt of a copy
of the decision complained of by the party adversely
affected, by filing with the agency which adjudicated
the case a notice of appeal, serving copies thereof upon
the prevailing party and the appellate agency, and
paying the required fees.
2. If a motion for reconsideration is denied, the movant
shall have the right to perfect his appeal during the
remainder of the period for appeal, reckoned from
receipt of the resolution of denial. If the decision is
reversed on reconsideration, the aggrieved party shall
have fifteen (15) days from receipt of the resolution of
reversal within which to perfect his appeal.
3. The agency shall, upon perfection of the appeal,
transmit the records of the case to the appellate
agency.
Admin. Code Sec. 21. Effect of Appeal
The appeal shall stay the decision appealed from unless
otherwise provided by law, or the appellate agency directs
execution pending appeal, as it may deem just, considering
the nature and circumstances of the case.
Admin. Code Sec. 22. Action on Appeal
The appellate agency shall review the records of the
proceedings and may, on its own initiative or upon motion,
receive additional evidence.
POLITICAL LAW
Admin. Code Sec. 23. Finality of Decision of Appellate
Agency.
In any contested case, the decision of the appellate agency
shall become final and executory fifteen (15) days after
the receipt by the parties of a copy thereof.
A party must prove that it has been affected or aggrieved by
an administrative agency in order to entitle it to a review by
an appellate administrative body or another administrative
body.
Doctrine of Qualified Political Agency
A decision of the department head generally need not be
appealed to the Office of the President, since the department
head is the alter ego of the President, and the former’s acts
are presumably the President’s. However, the doctrine does
not apply when:
a) the act is repudiated by the President, or
b) the act is required by law to be performed specifically
by the department head
C.2.C. ADMINISTRATIVE RES JUDICATA
The doctrine of res judicata applies only to judicial or quasi
judicial proceedings and not to the exercise of purely
administrative functions. Administrative proceedings are non
litigious and summary in nature; hence, res judicata does not
apply. [Nasipit Lumber Co. vs. NLRC (1989)]
Requisites:
1. Former final judgment;
2. Rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction;
3. Judgment on the merits;
4. There being, between the first and second action:
a. identity of parties
b. subject matter and
c. cause of action
• The principle of res judicata may not be invoked in labor
relations proceedings considering that Section 5, Rule
XIII, Book V of the IRR of the Labor Code provides that
such proceedings are “non-litigious and summary in
nature” without regard to legal technicalities obtaining
in courts of law. [Nasipit vs. NLRC]
• The rule of res judicata, which forbids the reopening of
a matter once judicially determined by competent
authority applies as to the judicial and quasi-judicial acts
of public, executive or administrative officers and boards
acting within their jurisdiction. The decisions and orders
of administrative agencies rendered pursuant to their
quasi-judicial authority have, upon their finality, the
force and binding effect of a final judgment within the
purview of the doctrine of res judicata. (Dulay v. Minister
of Natural Resources)
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Quasi-legislative
Power
Quasi‐Legislative
Operates on the future
Has general application
Issuance pursuant to the
exercise of quasi‐legislative
power may be assailed in
court without subscribing to
the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies.
A valid exercise of quasi‐
legislative power does
not require prior notice
and hearing (except
when the law requires it).
An issuance pursuant to the
exercise of quasi‐legislative
power may be assailed in
court through an ordinary
action.
I. INVESTIGATION AND ADJUDICATION
Admin. Code Sec. 10. Compromise and Arbitration.
To expedite administrative proceedings involving conflicting rights
or claims and obviate expensive litigations, every agency shall, in
the public interest, encourage amicable settlement, comprise and
arbitration.
v. Quasi-judicial
Quasi‐Judicial
Operates based on past facts
Has particular application
(applies only to the parties
involved in a dispute)
Issuance pursuant to the exercise
of quasi‐judicial power may, as a
rule, only be challenged in court
with prior exhaustion of
administrative remedies.
A valid exercise of quasi‐judicial
power requires prior notice and
hearing.
An issuance pursuant to the
exercise of quasi‐judicial function
is appealed to the Court of
Appeals via petition for review
(Rule 43).
POLITICAL LAW
Admin Code Sec. 11. Notice and Hearing in Contested Cases
1. In any contested case all parties shall be entitled to notice
and hearing. The notice shall be served at least five (5)
days before the date of the hearing and shall state the
date, time and place of the hearing.
2. The parties shall be given opportunity to present
evidence and argument on all issues. If not precluded by
law, informal disposition may be made of any contested
case by stipulation, agreed settlement or default.
The agency shall keep an official record of its proceedings.
Admin Code Sec. 12. Rules of Evidence
In a contested case:
1. The agency may admit and give probative value to
evidence commonly accepted by reasonably prudent
men in the conduct of their affairs.
2. Documentary evidence may be received in the form of
copies or excerpts, if the original is not readily available.
Upon request, the parties shall be given opportunity
to compare the copy with the original. If the original is
in the official custody of a public officer, a certified copy
thereof may be accepted.
3. Every party shall have the right to cross-examine
witnesses presented against him and to submit rebuttal
evidence.
The agency may take notice of judicially cognizable facts and
of generally cognizable technical or scientific facts within its
specialized knowledge. The parties shall be notified and afforded
an opportunity to contest the facts so noticed.
Admin. Code Sec. 14. Decision
Decision. - Every decision rendered by the agency in a contested
case shall be in writing and shall state clearly and distinctly the facts
and the law on which it is based. The agency shall decide each case
within thirty (30) days following its submission. The parties shall be
notified of the decision personally or by registered mail addressed
to their counsel of record, if any, or to them.
Admin. Code Sec. 15. Finality of Order
Finality of Order. - The decision of the agency shall become final
and executory fifteen (15) days after the receipt of a copy thereof
by the party adversely affected unless within that period an
administrative appeal or judicial review, if proper, has been
perfected. One motion for reconsideration may be filed, which shall
suspend the running of the said period.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Note: Administrative agencies have inherent power to
conduct investigations and hearings. Power of Adjudication is
not inherent. Most Administrative Agencies only have power
of investigation and not of Adjudication except in case of
agencies with specific GRANT of ADJUDICATIVE POWER. (e.g.
NLRC, SEC)
II. POWER TO ISSUE SUBPOENA AND
DECLARE CONTEMPT
Admin. Code Section 13. Subpoena
Subpoena. - In any contested case, the agency shall have the power
to require the attendance of witnesses or the production of books,
papers, documents and other pertinent data, upon request of any
party before or during the hearing upon showing of general
relevance. Unless otherwise provided by law, the agency may, in
case of disobedience, invoke the aid of the Regional Trial Court
within whose jurisdiction the contested case being heard falls. The
Court may punish contumacy or refusal as contempt.
Subpoena
All agencies with quasi-judicial functions have the power to
issue a subpoena even if the charter is silent on the power. It
is implied in investigatory functions. It is the lifeblood
of investigatory power.
Subpoenas may be enforced:
1. Whether or not there is adjudication
2. Whether or not there is probable cause
3. Before the issuance of a complaint.
The purpose of the subpoena is to discover evidence, not to
prove a pending charge, but upon which to make one if the
discovered evidence so justifies.
Test for valid enforcement of
subpoena:
1. within the authority of the agency;
2. The demand is not too indefinite; and
3. The information is reasonably relevant. [Evangelista vs.
Jarencio]
III. POWER TO CITE FOR CONTEMPT
Power to cite contempt can be used for quasi judicial
functions but NOT Ministerial ones.
• Although the negotiation has resulted in controversy, it
merely refers to a ministerial duty which COMELEC has
performed in its administrative capacity in relation to
the conduct of elections ordained your Constitution. It
only discharged a ministerial duty; it did not exercise any
judicial function. Such being the case, it could
POLITICAL LAW
not exercise the power to punish for contempt as
postulated in the law, for such power is inherently
judicial in nature. [Guevara v. COMELEC]
• The power to investigate, to be conscientious and
rational at the very least, requires an inquiry into existing
facts and conditions. The documents required to be
produced constitutes evidence of the most solid
character as to whether or not there was a failure to
comply with the mandates of the law. It is not for this
Court to whittle down the authority conferred
on administrative agencies to assure the effective
administration of a statute, in this case intended to
protect the rights of union members against its officers.
The matter was properly within its cognizance and the
means necessary to give it force and effectiveness
should be deemed implied unless the power sought to
be exercised is so arbitrary as to trench upon private
rights of petitioners entitled to priority. [Catura v. CIR]
• Public Officials exercise powers NOT rights. A labor
official’s power to hold a person for contempt for refusal
to comply with its order cannot extend to a CFI judge.
[Tolentino v. Inciong]
IV. POWER TO ISSUE SEARCH WARRANT
(ADMINISTRATIVE SEARCHES) OR WARRANT
OF ARREST
1987 Constitution, Art. III Sec. 2.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses,
papers, and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures of
whatever nature and for any purpose shall be inviolable, and
no search warrant or warrant of arrest shall issue except
upon probable cause to be determined personally by the judge
after examination under oath or affirmation of the complainant and
the witnesses he may produce, and particularly describing the place
to be searched and the persons or things to be seized.
The phrase “to be determined personally by the
judge” means to give more responsibility to the judge who
will issue the warrant of arrest and be accountable for it.
General Rule: Administrative Agencies cannot issue warrant
of Arrest.
• Art. 38 of the Labor Code is void because only a judge
may issue warrants of search and arrest. The POEA
administrator or the Secretary of Labor, not being judges
may not issue search or arrest warrants. [Salazar v.
Acachoso]
Exception: Deportation of Illegal and undesirable aliens
following the final order of deportation. [Qua Chee Gan v.
Deportation Board]
There are two ways of Deporting:
a) By Commissioner of Immigration [CA 617, Sec. 37];
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
b) b) By the President after due investigation [Admin. Code.
Sec. 69]
• “The Constitution does not distinguish between
warrants in a criminal case and administrative warrants
in administrative proceedings.” [Qua Chee Gan v.
Deportation Board]
• The warrants of arrest issued by the Commissioner are
void because: (a) the arrests were not administrative
arrest that are valid but instead were for the sole
purpose of investigation and before a final order of
deportation had been issued, where the brothers had
been ordered exactly for the purpose of showing cause
why they should not be deported. The consequence
of such orders of arrest is the operation of
the Constitutional limitation that (b) the power
to determine probable cause for warrants of arrest is
limited to judges exclusively. [Vivo v. Montesa]
• The arrest of a foreigner, which is necessary to carry into
effect the power of deportation, is valid only when, as
already stated, there is already an order of deportation.
To carry out the order of deportation, the President
obviously has the power to order the arrest of the
deportee But, certainly, during the investigation, it is not
indispensable that the alien be arrested. [Santos v.
Commissioner]
• Camara has been charged with a crime for his refusal to
permit housing inspectors to enter his leasehold without
a warrant. There was no emergency demanding
immediate access; in fact, the inspectors made three
trips to the building in an attempt to obtain Camara’s
consent to search. Camara had a constitutional right to
insist that the inspectors obtain a warrant to search and
that appellant may not constitutionally be convicted for
refusing to consent to the inspection. [Camara v.
Municipal Court]
• The businessman, like the occupant of a residence, has
a constitutional right to go about his business free from
unreasonable official entries upon his private
commercial property. (See v. Seattle)
Imposition of Fines and Penalties
TEST FOR VALID IMPOSITION:
1. Subject matter must be within the control of
Congress
2. Penalty is administrative or civil NOT criminal
3. Must be expressly conferred to an administrative
official. [Oceanic v. Stranahan]
POLITICAL LAW
• Sec. 25 of RA 875, entitled Penalties, provides that any
person who violates Sec. 3 of this act shall be punished
by a fine of P100-P1000, or by imprisonment of 1 month
to 1 year, or both. Any other violation which is declared
unlawful shall be punished by a fine ranging from P50-
P500 for each offense, at the court’s discretion. The
above provision is general in nature since it doesn’t
specify the “court” that may act when the violation
charged calls for the imposition of the penalties. The
word ‘court’ cannot refer to the CIR, for to give that
meaning would be violative of the safeguards
guaranteed to every accused by the Constitution.
[Scoty’s Department Store v. Micaller]
• Though it is true that the power to impose fines is
a judicial function, administrative agencies empowered
by legislation to regulate certain sectors are empowered
to impose administrative fines. [Civil Aviation Board v.
PAL]
• Under Sec. 13(3), Art. XI of the 1987 Constitution, the
“recommendation” of Ombudsman after investigation is
not merely advisory but binding and mandatory. The
Ombudsman can determine the administrative liability
of a public official or employee and direct and compel
the head of the office or agency concerned to implement
the penalty imposed. [Ledesma vs. CA (2005)]
V. JUDICIAL DETERMINATION OF
SUFFICIENCY OF STANDARDS
1. Interest of Law and Order
2. Public Interest
3. Justice, Equity, and substantial merits of the case
4. What is moral, and educational?
5. What is sacrilegious?
6. Adequate and efficient instruction
7. Reasonableness as an implied standard
8. To promote simplicity, economy or efficiency
9. Maintain monetary stability
VI. Writs of Execution
General Rule: Administrative agencies performing quasi-
judicial functions have the implied power to issue writs of
execution. When the law is silent, presume that the agency
has the power to enforce its decisions emanating from its
Quasi-Judicial powers.
Exception: When the enabling law expressly provides
otherwise.
Note: If the law is silent, presume that the agency has the
power to enforce its decisions emanating from its quasi
judicial powers. [Apolega vs. Hizon]
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
C.3. FACT-FINDING, INVESTIGATIVE,
LICENSING, AND RATE-FIXING POWERS
Fact-finding Power
A statute may give to non-judicial officers:
1. Power to declare the existence of facts which call into
operation the statute’s provisions
2. May grant them and their subordinate officers the
power to ascertain and determine appropriate facts as a
basis of procedure in the enforcement of laws
3. Functions incidental to the exercise of power granted by
law to clear navigable streams of unauthorized
obstructions. They can be conferred upon executive
officials provided the party affected is given the
opportunity to be heard. [(Lovina v. Moreno (1963)]
Investigative Power
Administrative agencies’ power to conduct investigations and
hearings, and make findings and recommendations thereon
is inherent in their functions is as administrative agencies.
It includes power to inspect the records and premises, and
investigate the activities of persons or entities coming under
its jurisdiction, or to secure, or to require the disclosure of
information by means of accounts, records, reports,
statements, testimony of witnesses, production of
documents, or otherwise.
Licensing Power
Admin. Code Sec. 17. Licensing Procedure.
When the grant, renewal, denial or cancellation of a license is
required to be preceded by notice and hearing, the provisions
concerning contested cases shall apply insofar as practicable.
Except in cases of willful violation of pertinent laws, rules and
regulations or when public security, health, or safety require
otherwise, no license may be withdrawn, suspended, revoked or
annulled without notice and hearing.
Admin. Code Sec. 18. Non-expiration of License
Where the licensee has made timely and sufficient application for
the renewal of a license with reference to any activity of a continuing
nature, the existing license shall not expire until the application
shall have been finally determined by the agency.
Admin. Code Sec. 2
(10)"License" includes the whole or any part of any agency permit,
certificate, passport, clearance, approval, registration, charter,
membership, statutory exemption or other form of permission, or
regulation of the exercise of aright or privilege.
(11)"Licensing" includes agency process involving the grant, renewal,
denial, revocation, suspension, annulment, withdrawal, limitation,
amendment, modification or conditioning of a license.
POLITICAL LAW
A license is a special privilege, permission or authority to do
what is within the terms. It is not in any way permanent,
vested or absolute. A license granted by the state is
revocable. As a consequence of the power to grant licenses,
the State and its instrumentalities have the power to revoke
it. The absence of an expiry date does not make it perpetual,
and it cannot last beyond the life of the basic authority under
which it was issued. (Gonzalo Sy v. Central Bank of the
Philippines)
Notice and hearing in licensing is only required if it is a
CONTESTED case. Otherwise, it can be dispensed with.
Rate-fixing Power
Admin. Code SEC. 9, Public Participation
… (2) In the fixing of rates, no rule or final order shall be valid unless
the proposed rates shall have been published in a newspaper of
general circulation at least two (2) weeks before the first hearing
thereon.
Admin. Code Sec. 2
(3)"Rate" means any charge to the public for a service open to all
and upon the same terms, including individual or joint rates, tolls,
classifications, or schedules thereof, as well as commutation,
mileage, kilometerage and other special rates which shall be
imposed by law or regulation to be observed and followed by any
person.
Note: Generally, the power to fix rates is a quasi-legislative
function. It only becomes judicial when the rate is applicable
only to an individual.
The Administrative Code specifically requires notice and
public hearing in the fixing of rates.
• The power to fix rate cannot be delegated to a common
carrier or other public service. The latter may propose
new rates, but they will not be effective without the
approval of administrative agency. [KMU vs. Garcia]
• In fixing rate, the ff. must be considered:
1. The present valuation of all the property of a public
utility
2. The fixed assets.
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
4. DETERMINATIVE POWER 15
It is the power of administrative agencies to better enable
them to exercise their quasi‐judicial authority.
Determinative Powers consist of:
1. Enabling
Permits the doing of an act which the law
undertakes to regulate and which would be
unlawful without government approval.
Ex. Issuance of licenses to engage in a particular
business.
2. Directing
Orders the doing or performance of particular acts
to ensure the compliance with the law and are
often exercised for corrective purposes.
3. Dispensing
To relax the general operation of a law or to exempt
from general prohibition, or to relieve an individual
or a corporation from an affirmative duty.
4. Examining
This is also called investigatory power. It requires
production of books, papers, etc., the attendance
of witnesses and compelling their testimony.
5. Summary
Power to apply compulsion or force against persons
or property to effectuate a legal purpose without
judicial warrants to authorize such actions.
Ex. Abatement of nuisance, summary destraint,
levy of property of delinquent tax payers
D. JUDICIAL RECOURSE
AND REVIEW
AVAILABILITY OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
1. Whether the enabling law permits judicial review
When the law is silent, generally, judicial review is
available. Since administrative agencies have a narrower
view of the case, and its existence derogates the judicial
prerogative lodged in the courts by the constitution,
judicial review is needed to offer these considerations.
2. Whether the parties has legal standing
Means a personal and substantial interest in the case
such that the party has sustained or will sustain direct
15 Nachura
POLITICAL LAW
injury as a result of the governmental act that is being
challenged.
The technical rules on standing comes from the general
doctrine of separation of powers as there is a need for
an actual case or controversy before judicial
review becomes available.
3. Whether the forum is a proper forum
4. Whether the timing for the filing of the case is proper
5. Whether the case is Ripe for adjudication
EXTENT OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
A. Question of Law
A question of law exists when the doubt or controversy
concerns the correct application of law or jurisprudence to a
certain set of facts; or when the issue does not call for an
examination of the probative value of the evidence
presented, the truth or falsehood of facts being admitted.
Administrative decisions may be appealed to the courts
independently of legislative permission. It may be appealed
even against legislative prohibition because the judiciary
cannot be deprived of its inherent power to review all
decisions on questions of law.
What may be questioned?
1. Constitutionality of the Statute creating the agency and
granting its powers;
2. Validity of the agency action if this transcends the limit
established by law;
3. Correctness of the agency’s interpretation and
application of the law.
• Any action of the Director of Lands which is based upon
a misconstruction of the law can be corrected by the
courts. The question of law herein is Ortua’s citizenship.
[Ortua v Singson Encarnacion]
• “[A] decision rendered by the Director of Lands and
approved by the Secretary upon a question of fact is
conclusive and not subject to be reviewed by the
courts.” But this does not apply when the decision of the
Director was NOT approved, but was revoked by the
Secretary. [Mejia v. Mapa]
• The argument against “majority” is contrary to the
findings of fact of the lower court, which was based on a
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW POLITICAL LAW

list of the salesmen or agents affiliated to the Union. Court shall deem conclusive and cannot be compelled to
Hence, said findings may not be disturbed in this overturn this particular factual finding. [German Marine
proceeding for review by certiorari. [Ysmael v. Santos] Agencies v. NLRC]

C. Question of Discretion

• The determination of W/N the accident arose out of, or Discretionary Ministerial
in the course of Valek’s employment is a question of law
Power or right conferred upon A response to a duty which has
that is cognizable by the courts. The question of whether agencies to act officially under been positively imposed by law
or not an employer-employee relationship existed certain circumstances according and its performance required at
between Valek and BPMI is also a question of law. All to the dictates of their own a time and in a manner or upon
that is required is that the "obligations or conditions" of judgment and conscience and conditions specifically
employment create the "zone of special danger" out of not controlled by the judgment designated. Not dependent
which the injury arose. [O’Leary v. Brown Pacific Maxon] of others upon the officer’s judgment or
discretion
B. Question of Fact
Power to make a choice among Nothing is left to discretion. It is
A question of fact exists when the doubt or difference arises permissive action or policies. a simple definite duty arising
as to the truth or falsehood of facts or when the query invites Person or persons exercising it under conditions admitted or
calibration of the whole evidence considering mainly the may choose which of several proved to exist
credibility of the witnesses, the existence and relevancy of courses of action should be
followed
specific surrounding circumstances, as well as their relation
to each other and to the whole, and the probability of the
situation. Reviewing courts can look into determinations of
fact by lower courts ONLY if the same are unsupported by General Rule: Courts have no power to substitute their own
substantial evidence. Questions of law, however, are always judgments with that of the administrative official because it
reviewable by higher courts. is a recognition of the expertise of the agency.
General Rule: Finality is attached to findings of fact of some Exception: When there is grave abuse of discretion.
agencies when these findings are supported by substantial
evidence and as long as there is no grave abuse of discretion. Grave abuse of discretion is present “when there is a
capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is
Exception: If findings are not supported by substantial equivalent to lack of jurisdiction, such as where the power
evidence. Question of fact is raised when the issue involved is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of
is: passion or personal hostility, and it must be so patent and
1. W/N a certain thing exists; or gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or to a
2. W/N an event has taken place; or virtual refusal to perform the duty enjoined or to act at all
3. Which versions of events, among 2 or more, are correct
in contemplation of law.” In other words, the tribunal or
administrative body must have issued the assailed decision,
• Employees were dismissed for pilferage. Substantial order or resolution in a capricious or despotic manner.
evidence rule is that findings of fact will not be disturbed [Duco v. COMELEC]
on appeal as long as they are supported by substantial
evidence. [Gonzales v. Victory Labor Union]

• Just because there was a difference or erroneous

appreciation of the competing facts
• The SC is bound by the finding of facts of the CTA, which presented before the officer, the court will not
enjoys wide discretion in construing tax statutes. The substitute its judgment with that of the PSC. No grave
CTA is dedicated exclusively to the study and abuse of discretion is present. The only time when it
consideration of tax problems and has necessarily could be reversed (1) such order is without reasonable
developed an expertise on the subject. The CTA’s support in evidence (2) such was rendered in violation of
determination of insulating oil as within the meaning of the law. [Laguna Tayabas Bus v. PSC]
insulators is thus accorded respect. [Acting
Commissioner v. Meralco]
D.1. PRIMARY JURISDICTION OR
• Whether or not petitioners actually paid the balance of
the sickness wages to private respondent is a factual
PRELIMINARY RESORT
question. In the absence of proof that the labor arbiter There is a concurrence of jurisdiction between the court and
or the NLRC had gravely abused their discretion, the the administrative agency such that there is a choice as to
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
which body the relief shall be sought. This doctrine does not
apply where the law grants exclusive jurisdiction to a body.
Requisites:
1. Admin body and regular court have concurrent and
original jurisdiction
2. Question to be resolved requires expertise of
administrative agency
3. Legislative intent on the matter is to have uniformity in
rulings.
4. Administrative agency is performing a quasi-judicial
function not rule making or quasi-legislative function.
Doctrine is inapplicable when:
1. Agency has exclusive jurisdiction
2. Issue is not within the competence of the admin body to
act on
3. Issue involved is clearly a factual question.
• Courts will not intervene if the question to be resolved
is one which requires the expertise of administrative
agencies and the legislative intent on the matter is
to have uniformity in the rulings. It can only occur where
there is a concurrence of jurisdiction between the court
and the administrative agency. It is a question of the
court yielding to the agency because of the latter’s
expertise, and does not amount to ouster of the court.
[Texas v. Abilene]
• Doctrine of Primary Jurisdiction does not apply when the
questions are purely legal; administrative agencies have
no competence to act on such questions. The doctrine
only calls for application when there is such competence
to act on the part of an administrative body. [Phil Global
Communications v. Relova]
• However, if the case is such that its determination
requires the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge
of the proper administrative bodies because technical
matters or intricate questions of facts are involved, then
relief must first be obtained in an administrative
proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by the
courts even though the matter is within the proper
jurisdiction of a court. This is the doctrine of
primary jurisdiction. It applies "where a claim is
originally cognizable in the courts, and comes into
play whenever enforcement of the claim requires the
resolution of issues which, under a regulatory scheme,
have been placed within the special competence of an
administrative body, in such case the judicial process is
suspended pending referral of such issues to the
POLITICAL LAW
administrative body for its view. (Industrial Enterprises
v. CA)
D.2. EXHAUSTION OF ADMINISTRATIVE
REMEDIES
This doctrine calls for resort first to the appropriate
administrative authorities in the resolution of a controversy
falling under their jurisdiction and must first be appealed to
the administrative superiors up to the highest level before
the same may be elevated to the courts of justice for review.
Reasons:
1. To enable the administrative superior
to correct the errors committed by
their subordinates.
2. Courts should refrain from disturbing the findings of
administrative bodies in deference to the doctrine of
separation of powers.
3. Courts should not be saddled with the review
of administrative cases
Exceptions (Laguna CATV Network v. Maraan):
a. Violation of due process
b. When there is estoppel on the part of the administrative
agency concerned
c. When the issue involved is a purely Legal question
d. When there is Irreparable injury
e. When the administrative action is patently illegal
amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
f. When the respondent is a Department Secretary whose
acts as an Alter ego of the President bears the implied
and assumed approval of the latter
g. When the subject matter is a private land case
proceedings
h. When it would be Unreasonable
i. When no administrative review is provided by Law
j. When the rule does not provide a Plain, speedy, and
adequate remedy
k. When the issue of non-exhaustion of administrative
remedies has been rendered Moot
l. When there are circumstances indicating the Urgency of
judicial intervention
m. When it would amount to a nullification of a claim; and
n. Where the rule of qualified political agency applies.
D.3. DOCTRINE OF FINALITY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS
General rule: The courts will not interfere with the decision
of administrative bodies or officials in their exercise of their
administrative functions.
Exceptions:
1. Has gone beyond his statutory authority
2. Exercised unconstitutional powers
 ADMINISTRATIVE LAW POLITICAL LAW

3. Clearly acted arbitrarily and without regard to his duty

or with grave abuse of discretion
4. The decision was vitiated by fraud, imposition or
mistakes
5. When judicial review is valid despite finality of
Administrative decisions
6. Decision is wrong
7. Lack of Jurisdiction
8. Not based upon any reasonable interpretation of law.