I.

!.

ADMINISTRATIVE LAWS

Scope of Power of Administrative Agencies

W"at are t"e two #asic de$egated powers of administrative agencies% W"at are t"e two tests of va$id de$egation%

ANSWERS: Quasi-judicial and quasi-legislative. In exercising its quasi-judicial function, an ad inistrative !od" adjudicates t#e rig#ts of $ersons !efore it, in accordance %it# t#e standards laid do%n !" la%, including t#e require ents of notice and #earing. &#e deter ination of facts and t#e a$$lica!le la%s, as t#e !asis for official action and t#e exercise of judicial discretion, are essential for t#e $erfor ance of t#is function. Quasilegislative $o%er is exercised !" ad inistrative agencies t#roug# t#e $ro ulgation of rules and regulations %it#in t#e confines of t#e granting statute and t#e doctrine of nondelegation of certain $o%ers flo%ing fro t#e se$aration of t#e great !ranc#es of t#e govern ent. 'rior notice and #earing are not essential to t#e validit" of rules or regulations $ro ulgated to govern future conduct. (Abella vs. CSC, 442 SCRA 507) &#e t%o tests of valid delegation are t#e () co $leteness test and *) sufficient standard test. +nder t#e first test, t#e la% ust !e co $lete in all its ter s and conditions %#en it leaves t#e legislature suc# t#at %#en it reac#es t#e delegate, t#e onl" t#ing #e %ill #ave to do is to enforce it. &#e second test andates t#at t#ere s#ould !e adequate guidelines or li itations in t#e la% to deter ine t#e !oundaries of t#e delegate,s aut#orit" and $revent t#e delegation fro running riot. (Ibid.)
&. Is t"e esta#$is"ment of a nationa$ comp'teri(ed identification reference s)stem #) virt'e of an administrative order iss'ed #) t"e President va$id%

ANSWER: N-. An ad inistrative order is an ordinance issued !" t#e 'resident %#ic# relates to s$ecific as$ects in t#e ad inistrative o$eration of t#e govern ent. Ad inistrative -rder No. ./0 did not erel" i $le ent t#e Ad inistrative 1ode. It esta!lis#es a national co $uteri2ed identification reference s"ste %#ic# requires a delicate adjust ent of various contending state $olicies, t#e $ri ac" of national securit", t#e extent of $rivac" against dossier-gat#ering !" t#e govern ent, and c#oices of $olicies. It deals %it# a su!ject t#at s#ould !e covered !" la%. (Ople vs. Torres, 293 SCRA 141) *peration and Effects of Laws+ P'#$ication Re,'irement
-. W"en do $aws ta.e effect%

ANSWERS: W#ere a la% $rovides for its o%n date of effectivit", suc# date $revails over t#at $rescri!ed !" E.-. *//. &#ere is not#ing in E.-. *// t#at $revents a la% fro ta3ing effect on t#e date ot#er t#an or even !efore t#e (4-da" $eriod after its $u!lication. W#at is andator" and %#at due $rocess requires is t#e $u!lication of t#e la%, for %it#out suc# notice and $u!lication, t#ere %ould !e no !asis for t#e a$$lication of t#e axi 5ignorantia legis ne ine excusat.6 ( a !"#al$!%laa& Tribal Asso'ia(io& vs. Ra)os, *R +o. 127,,2, -a&"ar. 27, 2004) S'#de$egation of a't"orit)
/. W"at do )o' 'nderstand #) t"e doctrine of s'#de$egation of a't"orit)% Is t"is permissi#$e in t"is 0'risdiction% Disc'ss its rationa$e.

Su!delegation of aut#orit" is t#e trans ission of aut#orit" fro t#e #eads of agencies to su!ordinates. Settled is t#e rule t#at a delegate a" exercise #is aut#orit" t#roug# $ersons #e a$$oints to assist #i in t#e $erfor ance of #is functions as long as t#e decisions re ains %it#in t#e sco$e of #is jurisdiction and is ade !" suc# officer. &#e follo%ing instances of su!delegation of $o%er #ave !een sustained as valid: a) t#e 'resident under t#e doctrine of qualified $olitical agenc" delegates $o%er and aut#orit" to t#e e !ers of #is official fa il" %#o are considered as #is alter ego. (Carpio vs. /0e'"(ive Se're(ar., 201 SCRA 290) and !) t#e Securities and Exc#ange 1o ission a" delegate to su!ordinate officials t#e aut#orit" to exercise t#e s$ecific $o%ers assigned to it !" la%. (S2.3orld Co&do)i&i") O3&ers Asso'ia(io& vs. S/C, 211 SCRA 515) 1!1

A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7

8P &

&#is is $er issi!le in ad inistrative $roceedings !ecause su!delegation of $o%er is dictated !" sound anage ent $rinci$les and t#e exigencies of t#e service. 7" su!delegation of aut#orit" %#ic# is de anded !" ad inistrative efficienc", t#e leaders in t#e #ierarc#" of an organi2ation ust !e a!le to concentrate t#eir attention u$on a larger and ore i $ortant questions of $olic" and $ractice, and t#eir ti e free, as uc# as $ossi!le, fro t#e consideration of a s aller and far less atters of details unless !" $rovision of la% it is %it##eld. (A)eri'a& Toba''o Co. vs. 4ire'(or o9 :a(e&(s, 17 SCRA 2,7) Su!delegation of aut#orit" is $er issi!le in order to ac#ieve $ro $t and ex$editious disc#arge of $u!lic functions and res$onsi!ilities. &o %it##old suc# $o%er to su!delegate t#e aut#orit" %ould !e to i $air ad inistrative efficienc". 8oreover, t#e (90: 1onstitution co ands $u!lic officers and e $lo"ees to serve %it# ut ost efficienc", #ence to insure co $liance %it# t#is constitutional andate, su!delegation ust, $erforce, !e allo%ed to attain $ro $t and efficient service. R'$e1ma.ing power
2. W"at are t"e re,'isites for a va$id e3ercise of r'$e1ma.ing power #) an administrative agenc)%

ANSWER: &#e requisites are: () t#e rule ust !e issued under t#e aut#orit" of la% or its $ro ulgation ust !e aut#ori2ed !" t#e legislature; *) t#e ad inistrative issuance ust !e %it#in t#e sco$e and $urvie% of t#e la%; or aut#orit" given !" t#e legislature .) t#e rule ust !e $ro ulgated in accordance %it# t#e $rescri!ed $rocedure, including $u!lic $artici$ation, filing and $u!lication; As a general rule, $rior notice and #earing are not essential to t#e validit" of rules and regulations $ro ulgated to govern future conduct. (Abella vs. CSC, 442 SCRA 507); and .) t#e rules ust !e reasona!le (<5= vs. 4ire'(or$*e&eral, +/4A, *R +o.11779,, April 19, 2001) . Additional requisites if rules contain penal sanctions () <a% itself ust declare as $unis#a!le t#e violation of ad inistrative rule or regulation (:eople vs. 5a'ere&, 79, SCRA 450); and *) <a% s#ould define or fix $enalt" t#erefor. In :ere> vs. :* Re9illers Asso'ia(io& o9 (?e :?ilippi&es, 492 SCRA 13,, t#e Su$re e 1ourt cited t%o requisites for an ad inistrative regulations to #ave force and effect of $enal la%, to %it: () t#e violation of t#e ad inistrative regulation ust !e ade a cri e !" t#e delegating statute itself, and *) t#e $enalt" for suc# violation ust !e $rovided !" t#e statute itself.
4. 5an P*EA Administrative 5irc'$ar No &6 Series of !78-6 iss'ed p'rs'ant to t"e agenc)9s ,'asi1$egis$ative power6 #e 'sed as a #asis for t"e imposition of administrative sanctions against erring recr'itment agencies%

ANSWER: N-. 1onsidering t#at '-EA Ad inistrative 1ircular No. * Series of (90., #as t#e force and effect of a la% and #as not "et !een $u!lis#ed or filed %it# t#e National Ad inistrative Register, t#e sa e is ineffective and a" not !e enforced. +nder 7oo3 =I, 1#a$ter II, Section . of t#e Ad inistrative 1ode of (90: 5rules in force on t#e date of effectivit" of t#is 1ode %#ic# are not filed %it#in t#ree >.) ont#s fro t#at date s#all not t#ereafter !e t#e !asis of an" sanction against an" $art" or $ersons.6 An Ad inistrative 1ircular t#at %as never filed %it# t#e NAR cannot !e used as !asis for t#e i $osition of ad inistrative sanctions. &#e fact t#at '-EA Ad inistrative 1ircular No. * is addressed onl" to s$ecified grou$-na el" $rivate e $lo" ent agencies or aut#orit" #olders, does not ta3e it a%a" fro t#e a !it of t#e ruling in Ta&ada vs. T"vera, 131 SCRA 27, %#ic# is clear and categorical ?

A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7

8P -

ad inistrative rules and regulations ust !e $u!lis#ed if t#eir $ur$ose is to enforce or i $le ent existing la% $ursuant to a valid delegation. (:?ilsa I&(er&a(io&al :la'e)e&( a&d Servi'e Corpora(io& vs. Se're(ar. o9 abor, 351 SCRA 174)
:. Is *M;1D*< <oint 5irc'$ar N*. 721 ! ineffective on t"e gro'nd t"at it was not p'#$is"ed%

ANSWER: &#e circular is erel" an internal circular !et%een t#e @-A and t#e -ffice of t#e - !uds an, outlining aut#orit" and res$onsi!ilities a ong $rosecutors of t#e @-A and t#e -ffice of t#e - !uds an in t#e conduct of $reli inar" investigation. &#e circular @-ES N-& regulate t#e conduct of $ersons or t#e $u!lic in general. Internal regulations and t#ose erel" internal in nature, t#at is, regulating onl" t#e $ersonnel of t#e ad inistrative agenc" and not t#e $u!lic, need not !e $u!lis#ed. Neit#er is $u!lication required of t#e so-called letters of instruction issued !" ad inistrative su$eriors concerning rules or guidelines to !e follo%ed !" t#eir su!ordinates in t#e $erfor ance of t#eir duties. (@o&asa& vs. T?e :a&el o9 I&ves(i#a(i&# :rose'"(ors o9 (?e 4O-, *R +o. 159747, April 13, 2004) Rate1fi3ing
8. An administrative agenc) passes a reso$'tion prescri#ing rates. S"o'$d t"ere #e prior notice and "earing to t"e parties to #e affected #) t"e rates fi3ed% E3p$ain.

ANSWER: It de$ends. In :?ilippi&e Co&s")ers Ao"&da(io& :?ilippi&es vs. Se're(ar. o9 4/CS, 153 SCRA 122, it %as #eld t#at t#e function of $rescri!ing rates !" an ad inistrative agenc" a" eit#er !e a legislative or an adjudicative function. If it %ere a legislative function, t#e grant of $rior notice and #earing to t#e affected $arties is not a require ent of due $rocess. As regards rates $rescri!ed !" an ad inistrative agenc" in t#e exercise of its quasi-judicial function, $rior notice and #earing are essential to t#e validit" of suc# rates. W#ere t#e rules and t#e rates are eant to a$$l" to all enter$rises of a given 3ind t#roug#out t#e countr", t#e" a" $arta3e of a legislative c#aracter. 7ut if t#e" a$$l" exclusivel" to a $articular $art" !ased u$on a finding of facts, t#en its function is quasi-judicial in c#aracter.
7. Does t"e Energ) Reg'$ator) 5ommission "ave t"e power to grant provisiona$ rate ad0'stments% W"at is t"e proced'ra$ re,'irement in t"e e3ercise of s'c" power%

ANSWERS: BES. &#e $o%er to a$$rove $rovisional rate increases is included a ong t#e $o%ers transferred to t#e ER1 and t#e grant of suc# aut#orit" is not inconsistent %it# t#e E'IRA. Neit#er is t#e notion of $rovisional rate adjust ent inco $ati!le %it# t#e $olic" to $rotect $u!lic interest. &#e ER1 is required to conduct a full-!lo%n #earing on t#e $ro$riet" of t#e grant of $rovisional rate adjust ents %it#in ./ da"s fro t#e issuance of t#e $rovisional order. (Areedo) 9ro) 4eb( Coali(io& vs. /RC, 432 SCRA 157) Administrative interpretation of t"e $aw
! . 5an administrative #odies interpret $aws w"ic" t"e) are tas.ed to enforce%

ANSWER: BES. Ad inistrative !odies a" inter$ret t#e la% t#e" are tas3ed to i $le ent. &o ot#er%ise de$rive ad inistrative !odies t#e dut", at t#e first instance, to inter$ret t#e la%s %#ic# t#e" are andated to execute %ould a3e t#e i $otent !odies. &#e construction and inter$retation given !" ad inistrative officers $ossessed of t#e necessar" s$ecial 3no%ledge, ex$ertise and ex$erience of %#at t#e la% is deserves greatest res$ect and can onl" !e set aside on $roof of gross a!use of discretion. (: 4T vs. +TC, 190 SCRA 717) It is t#e general $olic" of t#e Su$re e 1ourt to sustain t#e decision of ad inistrative aut#orities not onl" on t#e !asis of se$aration of $o%ers !ut also for t#eir $resu ed 3no%ledgea!ilit" and even ex$ertise in t#e la%s t#e" are entrusted to enforce. (Sa&(ia#o vs. 4ep. /0e'. Se're(ar., 192 SCRA 199) &#e inter$retation of an ad inistrative govern ent agenc", %#ic# is tas3ed to i $le ent a statute, is accorded great res$ect and ordinaril" controls t#e construction of t#e courts. W#en an ad inistrative agenc" renders an o$inion or issues a state ent of $olic", it erel" inter$rets a $re-existing la% and t#e ad inistrative inter$retation is at !est advisor" for it is t#e courts t#at finall" deter ine %#at t#e la% eans. (5ele&dres, -r. 6s. CO5/ /C, 319 SCRA 212 a&d !al(a>ar vs. CO5/ /C, 350 SCRA 51,,)

A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7 Power to iss'e s'#poena and cite for contempt

!!.

8P /

Are administrative agencies granted t"e power to iss'e s'#poena and p'nis" individ'a$s for contempt%

ANSWER: As a general rule, t#e $o%er to issue su!$oena and cite a $erson in conte $t is not in#erent to an ad inistrative agenc" and t#us de$ends on a statutor" grant. Wit#out suc# grant, a $erson ust a$$l" in court. E- *9* grants ad inistrative agencies in general t#e $o%er to issue su!$oenas !" requiring t#e attendance of %itnesses or t#e $roduction of docu ents. >7oo3 =II, Sec. (.), !ut onl" as an incident of t#eir $o%er to investigate. &#e $o%er to $unis# conte $t ust !e ex$ressl" granted to t#e ad inistrative !od"; and %#en so granted a" !e exercised onl" %#en t#e ad inistrative !od" is actuall" $erfor ing quasi-judicial functions. &#e 1-8E<E1, SE1 and t#e Insurance 1o issioner are granted t#ese $o%ers !" s$ecial statutor" grant. In cases of violation of its rules of $rocedures, t#e 1o ission on Cu an Rig#ts a" cite for conte $t a $erson in accordance %it# t#e Rules of 1ourt. > Cari&o vs. C@R, 204 SCRA 4,3) &#e 1o ission on Cu an Rig#ts, in cases of violation of its rules of $rocedure a" cite a $erson for conte $t in accordance %it# t#e Rules of 1ourt. > Cari&o vs. C@R, 204 SCRA 4,3) <i3e%ise, t#e aut#orit" to conduct #earings or inquiries and t#e $o%er to #old an" $erson in conte $t a" !e exercised !" t#e 1oo$erative @evelo$ ent Aut#orit" !ut li ited onl" in t#e $erfor ance of its ad inistrative functions. (C4A vs. 4ole9il A#raria& Re9or) !e&e9i'iaries Coopera(ive I&', 3,2 SCRA 552) *t"er powers+ =orm and prom'$gation of ,'asi10'dicia$ determination
!&. Are administrative #odies in t"e performance of t"eir ,'asi10'dicia$ f'nctions% >!? a't"ori(ed to grant imm'nities from crimina$ and civi$ prosec'tions+ >&? empowered to award damages in civi$ case+ >-? re,'ired to state t"e facts c$ear$) and distinct$) stating t"erein t"e $ega$ #asis w"en rendering decisions%

ANSWERS: >() N-. &#e rule is t#at ad inistrative !odies in t#e $erfor ance of t#eir quasijudicial functions cannot grant cri inal and civil i unities to $ersons unless t#e la% ex$licitl" and s$ecificall" confers suc# $rerogative or $o%er. ED1E'&I-NS: Insofar as t#e '1EE is concerned, it is conferred suc# $o%er under Sec. 4 of E- No. (F. (Rep"bli' vs. Sa&di#a&ba.a&, 173 SCRA 72) Also, t#e 1o ission on Cu an Rig#ts a" grant i unit" fro $rosecution to an" $erson %#ose testi on" or %#ose $ossession of docu ents or ot#er evidence is necessar" or convenient to deter ine t#e trut#. (Cari&o vs. Co))issio& o& @")a& Ri#?(s, 204 SCRA 4,3) >*) 'o%ers of ad inistrative agencies are li ited and usuall" ad inistrative in nature. In case of injur" or inconvenience suffered !" a $erson !ecause of !reac# of contractual o!ligation arising fro negligence, t#e $ro$er foru for #i to ventilate t#eir grievances for $ossi!le recover" of da ages s#ould !e in t#e courts and not in ad inistrative agencies. 7eing a creature of t#e legislature, ad inistrative agencies can exercise onl" suc# jurisdiction and $o%er as are ex$ressl" or !" necessar" i $lication conferred u$on it !" statute. (RC:I vs. !oard o9 Co))"&i'a(io&s, $43153, $4537,, +ove)ber 29, 1977) /0'ep(io&s. Co%ever, t#e National Cousing Aut#orit" >no% t#e Cousing and <and +se Regulator" 7oard) #as !een conferred !" '@ (.FF, t#e co $etence to a%ard da ages including attorne",s fees %#ic# are recovera!le eit#er !" agree ent of t#e $arties or under Article **/0 of t#e 1ivil 1ode. (Solid @o)es vs. :a.a3al, 177 SCRA 72) <i3e%ise, in *5A +e(3or2, I&'. vs. A!S$C!+ !road'as(i&# Corp, 470 SCRA 727, it %as #eld t#at %#ere t#e %rongful acts co $lained of and u$on %#ic# t#e da ages $ra"ed for are !ased #ave to do %it# t#e o$eration and o%ners#i$ of ca!le co $anies, t#e resolution of t#ese factual atters undou!tedl" $ertains to t#e National &eleco unications 1o ission and not t#e regular courts. W#ile it is true t#at t#e regular courts are $ossessed of general jurisdiction over actions for da ages, it

%ould nonet#eless !e A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7

8P 2

$ro$er for t#e courts to "ield its jurisdiction in favor of an ad inistrative !od" %#en t#e deter ination of underl"ing factual issues requires t#e s$ecial co $etence or 3no%ledge of t#e latter. >.) BES. Ever" decision of an agenc" s#all !e in %riting and s#all state t#e facts and t#e la% on %#ic# it is !ased. >7oo3 =II, Section (F) &#e andate of Section (F, Article =III of t#e 1onstitution requiring courts to state clearl" and distinctl" t#e facts and t#e legal !asis of t#eir decisions is equall" a$$lica!le to ad inistrative !odies. (+a#"ia( vs. + RC, 219 SCRA 514 a&d :ilipi&as <ao I&'. vs. CA, 372 SCRA 54,)) Administrative D'e Process
!-. W"at rig"ts are inc$'ded in administrative d'e process%

ANSWER: Ad inistrative due $rocess is recogni2ed to include t#e rig#t to: A. :ro'ed"ral 4"e :ro'ess () Notice, !e it actual or constructive, of t#e institution of t#e $roceedings t#at a" affect a $erson,s legal rig#t; *) Reasona!le o$$ortunit" to a$$ear and defend #is rig#ts, and to introduce %itnesses and relevant evidence in #is favor; !. .) F) S"bs(a&(ive 4"e :ro'ess A tri!unal so constituted as to give #i reasona!le assurance of #onest" and i $artialit", and one of co $etent jurisdiction; And a finding or decision !" t#at tri!unal su$$orted !" su!stantial evidence $resented at t#e #earing, or at least ascertained in t#e records or disclosed to t#e $arties. (Air 5a&ila, I&'. vs. !ala(ba(, 3, SCRA 4,9 a&d Aabella vs. CA, 2,2 SCRA 251)
In administrative proceedings6 inc$'ding t"ose #efore t"e *m#'dsman6 ma) cases #e s'#mitted for reso$'tion on t"e #asis of affidavits and p$eadings wit"o't vio$ating d'e process%

!/.

ANSWER: BES. It is not legall" o!jectiona!le for !eing violative of due $rocess for an ad inistrative tri!unals to resolve a case !ased solel" on $osition $a$ers, affidavits or docu entar" evidence su! itted !" t#e $arties as affidavits of %itnesses a" ta3e t#e $lace of t#eir direct testi onies. (5ar'elo vs. !"&#"b"&#, 552 SCRA 5,9)
!2. Is it mandator) for administrative #odies to cond'ct tria$1 t)pe proceedings as a re,'irement of d'e process%

ANSWER: N-. A for al trial t"$e #earing is not at all ti es essential to due $rocess. W#ere t#e litigants are given t#e o$$ortunit" to !e #eard eit#er t#roug# oral argu ents or $leadings, $rocedural due $rocess is fulfilled. &#e essence of due $rocess is found in t#e reasona!le o$$ortunit" to !e #eard and su! it evidence in su$$ort of one,s defense. Exce$tions: >() In quasi judicial $roceedings %#en an adjudicative fact is at issue, a trialt"$e #earing oug#t to !e #eld. (5ab"?a. Te0(ile 5ills Corp. 6s O&#pi&, 141 SCRA 437) >*) actual adversarial $roceedings !eco e necessar" onl" for clarification or %#en t#ere is a need to $rofound searc#ing questions to %itnesses %#o give vague testi onies. In la!or cases, it is a $rocedural rig#t %#ic# t#e e $lo"ee ust as3 for. It is not an in#erent rig#t. If $etitioner requested t#at an investigation !e conducted !ut res$ondents ve#e entl" refused, clearl" t#e $etitioner %as de$rived of #is rig#t to due $rocess. ( avador vs. B-C 5ar2e(i&# Corp., 411 SCRA 497)
!4. @ive at $east si3 >4? instances w"en notice and "earing are not re,'ired in administrative proceedings.

ANSWER: (. Erant of $rovisional aut#orit" for increased rates, or to engage in a $articular line of !usiness; *. Su ar" $roceedings of distraint and lev" u$on t#e $ro$ert" of a delinquent

tax$a"er; A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7

8P 4

.. 1ancellation of a $ass$ort %#ere no a!use of discretion is co itted !" t#e Goreign Secretar"; F. Su ar" a!ate ent of nuisance $er se %#ic# affects t#e i ediate safet" of $ersons or $ro$ert". 4. Su ar" sequestration of ill-gotten %ealt# !" t#e '1EE. H. 'reventive sus$ension of a $u!lic officer $ending investigation. E3"a'stion of Administrative Remedies
!:. >!? >&? Disc'ss t"e doctrine of e3"a'stion of administrative remedies and its e3ceptions. W"en is it app$ica#$e% W"at is its rationa$e% W"at is t"e effect of t"e fai$'re to o#serve t"e doctrine%

ANSWERS: >() &#e doctrine of ex#austion of ad inistrative re edies si $l" $rovides t#at !efore a $art"-litigant can see3 judicial intervention, #e ust ex#aust all eans of ad inistrative redress availa!le under t#e la%. &#e exce$tions are: () doctrine of qualified $olitical agenc", %#en t#e res$ondent is a de$art ent secretar" %#ose acts as an alter ego of t#e 'resident !ears t#e i $lied and assu ed a$$roval of t#e latter; exce$t %#ere la% ex$ressl" $rovides ex#austion; *) issue involved is $urel" legal .) ad inistrative re ed" is fruitless; F) %#ere t#ere is esto$$el on t#e $art of t#e ad inistrative agenc"; 4) ad inistrative action is $atentl" illegal, a ounting to lac3 or excess of jurisdiction; H) %#ere t#ere is unreasona!le dela" or official inaction; :) %#ere t#ere is irre$ara!le injur", or t#reat t#ereof, unless judicial recourse is i ediatel" ade 0) in land case, %#ere t#e su!ject atter is a $rivate land; 9) %#ere la% does not a3e ex#austion a condition $recedent to judicial recourse; (/) %#ere o!servance of t#e doctrine %ill result in nullification of clai ; (() %#ere t#ere are s$ecial reasons or circu stances de anding i ediate court action; (*) %#en due $rocess of la% is clearl" violated. (.) %#en t#e issue is rendered oot and acade ic ( a&d !a&2 o9 (?e :?ilippi&es vs. Co"r( o9 Appeals, 31, SCRA 144) (F) %#en t#e issue is invested %it# $u!lic interest. In t#e case of, I&dia&a Aerospa'e =&iversi(. vs. C@/4, 351 SCRA, t#e Su$re e 1ourt ruled t#at it is $atentl" clear t#at t#e regulation or ad inistration of educational institutions, es$eciall" on tertiar" level, is invested %it# $u!lic interest. Cence t#e #aste %it# %#ic# t#e solicitor general raised t#ese issues !efore t#e a$$ellate court is understanda!le. Gor t#e reason entioned, t#e res$ondent,s $etition for certiorari did not require $rior resort to a otion for reconsideration. &#e rule on ex#austion of ad inistrative re edies a$$lies onl" %#ere t#ere is an ex$ress legal $rovision requiring suc# ad inistrative ste$ as a condition $recedent to ta3ing action in court. (CSC vs. 4!5, 414 SCRA 11) -ne of t#e reasons for t#e doctrine of ex#austion of ad inistrative re edies is t#e se$aration of $o%ers %#ic# enjoins u$on t#e judiciar" a !eco ing $olic" of noninterference %it# atters co ing $ri aril" %it#in t#e co $etence of ot#er de$art ent. &#e legal reason is t#at t#e courts s#ould not act and correct its ista3es or errors and a end its decision on a given atter and decide it $ro$erl". ( ope> vs. Ci(. o9 5a&ila, 303 SCRA 44,) And t#e $ractical reason is t#at t#e ad inistrative $rocess is intended to $rovide less ex$ensive and ore s$eed" solution to dis$utes. >*) Gailure to ex#aust ad inistrative re edies %ill not affect t#e jurisdiction of t#e courts. Non-co $liance %it# t#e doctrine %ill de$rive t#e co $lainant of a cause of action %#ic# is a ground for a otion to dis iss t#e case. Co%ever, if no otion to dis iss is filed on t#is ground, t#ere is dee ed to !e a %aiver. (Rosario vs. CA, 211

SCRA 3,4 a&d !a#"ioro vs. !asa, 214 SCRA 437) A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7 8P :

Co%ever, in t#e case of 5/RA CO vs. !arlis, 317 SCRA ,32, t#e Su$re e 1ourt ruled t#at, an error in t#e assess ent ust !e ad inistrativel" $ursued to t#e exclusion of ordinar" courts %#ose decision %ould !e void for lac3 of jurisdiction. Primar) <'risdiction
!8. >!? >&? E3p$ain t"e doctrine of primar) 0'risdiction. W"at is t"e effect of fai$'re to o#serve t"e doctrine%

ANSWERS: >() &#e @octrine of 'ri ar" Aurisdiction eans t#at judicial action of a case is deferred $ending t#e deter ination of so e issues %#ic# $ro$erl" !elong to an ad inistrative !od" !ecause t#eir ex$ertise, s$eciali2ed s3ills, 3no%ledge and resources are required for t#e resolution of factual and non-legal atters. In suc# a case, relief ust first !e soug#t and o!tained in t#e ad inistrative !od" concerned !efore t#e re ed" %ill !e su$$lied !" t#e 1ourt. W#ere a statute lodges exclusive original jurisdiction in an ad inistrative agenc", t#e courts %ill refuse to ta3e u$ a case unless t#e agenc" #as finall" co $leted its $roceedings. &#e doctrine does not %arrant a court to arrogate unto itself aut#orit" to resolve a controvers" t#e jurisdiction over %#ic# is initiall" lodged %it# an ad inistrative !od" of s$ecial co $etence. (Ro0as D Co. I&'. vs. Co"r( o9 Appeals, 321 SCRA 101 a&d :rovi&'e o9 Ea)boa&#a del +or(e vs. Co"r( o9 Appeals, 342 SCRA) >*) &#e a$$lication of t#e doctrine of $ri ar" jurisdiction does not call for t#e i ediate dis issal of t#e case $ending !efore t#e court. &#e case is erel" sus$ended until t#e issues resolva!le !" t#e ad inistrative !od" are t#res#ed out and full" deter ined. (I&d"s(rial /&(erprises, I&'. vs. CA, 1,4 SCRA 421) <'dicia$ Review and <'risdiction
!7. Are acts and decisions of administrative agencies s'#0ect to 0'dicia$ review%

ANSWER: BES. Eiven t#e ex$anded sco$e of judicial revie% as including t#e $o%er to deter ine %#et#er or not t#ere #as !een a grave a!use of discretion a ounting to lac3 or excess of jurisdiction on t#e $art of an" !ranc# or instru entalit" of t#e Eovern ent, t#e courts can revie% acts of all ad inistrative agencies, not onl" in t#e $erfor ance of t#eir adjudicative function >generall" !" t#e 1ourt of A$$eals t#roug# t#e s$ecial civil action of certiorari), !ut even in t#e $erfor ance of t#eir ot#er functions including quasilegislative or rule- a3ing and ad inistrative functions >!" t#e R&1). 1ourts #ave t#e $o%er to scrutini2e t#e acts of ad inistrative agencies even t#oug# no rig#t of revie% is given !" statute. Audicial revie% is $ro$er in case of lac3 of jurisdiction, grave a!use of discretion, error of la%, fraud or collusion. (4ab"e( vs. Ro'?e :?ar)a'e"(i'als, I&'., 149 SCRA 3,1)
& . W"at co'rts e3ercise t"e power of 0'dicia$ review over administrative determinations%

ANSWER: Eeneral Rule: It is t#e 1ourt of A$$eals t#at is conferred %it# t#e $o%er of judicial revie% over t#e decisions of ad inistrative agencies. exce$t 1-8E<E1, 1-A, and - !uds an in cri inal cases in %#ic# case t#e Su$re e 1ourt exercises jurisdiction. 7' (*9 $rovides t#at t#e 1ourt of A$$eals s#all exercise 5xxx exclusive a$$ellate jurisdiction over all final judg ents, decisions, resolutions, orders or a%ards of quasijudicial agencies, instru entalities, !oards or co issions, exce$t t#ose falling %it#in t#e a$$ellate jurisdiction of t#e Su$re e 1ourt in accordance %it# t#e 1onstitution.6 <i3e%ise, Rule F. of t#e (99: Rules of 1ivil 'rocedure $rovides t#at t#e 1ourt of A$$eals s#all #ave a$$ellate jurisdiction over a%ards, judg ents, final orders or resolutions of an" quasi-judicial agenc" in t#e exercise of its quasi- judicial function.

A45I+ISTRATI6/ A7

8P 8

&#us, if a $art" disagrees %it# t#e decision of t#e -ffice of t#e 'resident, #e s#ould elevate t#e atter !" $etition for revie% !efore t#e 1ourt of A$$eals for t#e latter,s exercise of judicial revie%, $ursuant to Sec. 9>.) of 7' (*9. (Sa&ado vs. CA, 351 SCRA 541 a&d Sero&do vs. CA, 375 SCRA 117) As %it# ot#er ad inistrative agencies disc#arging quasi-judicial functions, recourse ust first !e #ad t#roug# t#e 1ourt of A$$eals under Rule F. of t#e (99: Rules of 1ivil 'rocedure on t#e orders, resolutions or decisions of t#e follo%ing: >() t#e 1o ission on t#e Settle ent of <and 'ro!le s >1-S<A') (Rep"bli' vs. 4a)a.a& &# :"ro2 14, I+C., *R +o. 143135, April 4, 2003), >*) t#e 7oard of 1o issioners of t#e 7ureau of I igration (A#"s 43i2ar)a vs. 4o)i&#o, *R +o. 153454, -"l. 7, 2004), >.) voluntar" ar!itrators (Silver Tradi&# Co. vs. Se)a&a, *R +o. 152451, April 2,, 2004), >F) National <a!or Relations 1o ission (S(. 5ar(i& A"&eral @o)es vs. + RC, 295 SCRA 494), >4) Secretar" of <a!or (+a(io&al Aedera(io& o9 abor vs. a#"es)a, 304 SCRA 407), >H) @irector of 7ureau of <a!or Relations (Abbo( abora(ories :?il. 6s. Abbo( abora(ories /)plo.ees =&io&) and >:) @-A Secretar" in $etitions for revie% (:"bli' =(ili(ies 4epar()e&(, Olo&#apo Ci(. vs.*"i&#o&a, 315 SCRA 417) Exce$tions: &#e Su$re e 1ourt, #o%ever, exercises a$$ellate jurisdiction over all final judg ents, decisions, resolutions or orders of t#e 1-8E<E1, 1o ission on Audit and - !uds an in cri inal cases in accordance %it# t#e 1onstitution. (*ar'ia$ R"eda vs. :as'asio, 27, SCRA 719) Rule F. of Rules on 1ivil 'rocedure $rovides t#at final resolutions of t#e 1ivil Service 1o ission s#all !e a$$eala!le !" certiorari to t#e 1ourt of A$$eals. <i3e%ise, under RA 9*0*, t#e 1ourt of &ax A$$eals exercises a$$ellate jurisdiction over t#e decisions or ruling of t#e 1entral 7oard of Assess ent A$$eals, 1usto s 1o issioner, 7IR, and t#e Secretaries of t#e @-G, @A and @&I.
&!. Is a government1owned and contro$$ed corporation part of t"e @overnment of t"e P"i$ippines% Is t"e Po$)tec"nic Aniversit) of t"e P"i$ippines part of t"e government% W"en is a government1owned or contro$$ed corporation deemed to #e performing proprietar) f'nction% W"en is it deemed to #e performing governmenta$ f'nction%

ANSWER: A govern ent-o%ned and controlled cor$oration %#ic# also $erfor s govern ental function is a $art of t#e govern ent. If it solel" $erfor s $ro$rietar" functions, t#en it is not. &#e '+' and t#e N@1 #ave t#eir res$ective c#arters and t#erefore eac# $ossesses a se$arate and distinct individual $ersonalit". 7e"ond cavil, a govern ent-o%ned and controlled cor$oration #as a $ersonalit" of its o%n distinct and se$arate fro t#at of t#e govern ent. (:=: vs. CA, 31, SCRA 191) Eovern ent-o%ned or controlled cor$orations a" $erfor govern ental or $ro$rietar" functions or !ot#, de$ending on t#e $ur$ose for %#ic# t#e" #ave !een created. If t#e $ur$ose is to o!tain s$ecial cor$orate !enefits or earn $ecuniar" $rofit, t#e function is $ro$rietar". If it is in t#e interest of #ealt#, safet" and for t#e advance ent of $u!lic good and %elfare, affecting t#e $u!lic in general, t#e function is govern ental. 'o%ers classified as 5$ro$rietar"6 are t#ose intended for $rivate advantage and !enefits. (!laF"era vs. Al'ala, 295 SCRA 311)
--oo/oo--