Chapter 6: Judicial Review

General Rule
Administrative decisions may be appealed to the courts of justice only if:
1. The Constitution; or
2. The law permits; or
3. The issues to be reviewed involve questions of law.
The right to appeal is NOT a constitutional right. -> The administrative decision MAY
be validly rendered final and inappealable at the administrative level without
allowing the aggrieved party a final resort to the courts of justice.
General rule: PURELY administrative and discretionary functions may not be
interfered with by the courts; but when the exercise of such functions by the
administrative officer is tainted by a FAILURE to abide by the command of the law,
then it is incumbent on the courts to set matters right.
Rules on Appeals (Constitution and
Special Laws)
Constitutional Commissions:
COMELEC; COA; CSC

Social Security Commission, Civil

Aeronautics Board et al
Appeal to the Court of Tax Appeals of
any decision rendered by the
Commission on Internal Revenue,
Commissioner of Customs or any
provincial or city board of assessment
appeals

Unless otherwise provided in this

Constitution or by law, any decision,
order or ruling of each Commission may
be brought to the SC on certiorari by the
aggrieved party within 30 days from
receipt of a copy thereof
RA 5434 provides for uniform procedure
for appeals to CA
RA 1125

Sec 16 of the Interim Rules and Guidelines implementing Section 9(3) BP Blg 129:
the CA may review final decisions, orders, awards or resolutions of RTC and of all
quasi-judicial bodies
Exceptions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)

the COMELEC;
the COA;
the Sandiganbayan;
decisions issued under the Labor Code of the Philippines;
the Central Board of Assessment Appeals.

Nota Bene: SC Revised Administrative Circular 1-95 authorizes decisions of the CSC
to be appealed to the CA (check also Rule 43, ROC)
On questions of law: administrative decisions thereon are appealable to the courts
of justice EVEN WITHOUT LEGISLATIVE PERMISSION. WHY? Judicial tribunal cannot
be deprived of their inherent authority to decide questions of law. Being inherent,
the power cannot be withdrawn by the legislature through law making.

There is an underlying power in the courts to scrutinize the acts of

administrative agencies exercising quasi-judicial or legislative power on
questions of law and jurisdiction EVEN THOUGH NO RIGHT OF REVIEW is
given by statute. Even decisions of administrative agencies which are
declared FINAL by law are not exempt from judicial review.

Medalla v Sayo
Facts: A decision of the CSC appealed to and affirmed by the Office of the Pres was
subsequently brought to the CFI in a petition for certiorari, prohibition and
mandamus
Issue: WON CFI had jurisdiction to review decisions of the President and the CSC
rendered in the exercise of their quasi-judicial functions
Ruling: the power of judicial review should be upheld. It is inherent in the courts of
general jurisdiction as an essential function of the judicial department. NB: decisions
of CSC may under the new Constitution be brought to the SC on certiorari for
review.
Ortua v Singson Encarnacion: it certainly was not intended by the legislative
body to remove from the jurisdiction of courts all right to review decisions of the
Bureau of Lands, for to do so would be to attempt something that cannot be legally
done. Question of law is conclusive upon the courts and is subject to review.
Methods of Review

Methods may be specific or general

May be prescribed by the Constitution, statutes, or Rules of Court

Example from RA 5434:

An appeal from the decision of the Patent Office shall be taken by filing with said
office & CA