UST FACULTY OF CIVIL LAW

EPA – 2A & 2C
Prof.: Atty. Anicia Concepcion-Marquez
x-------------------------------x

Part II
Topics for Discussion

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

a. Rules of Procedure

The Constitution empowers quasi-judicial agencies to issue their own rules of procedure. Even
in the absence of such constitutional provision or even the law creating the agency is silent on the
matter, a quasi-judicial body has the implied power to promulgate its own rules of procedure. The grant
of quasi-judicial power to an administrative agency carries with it the power to promulgate its own rules
of procedure for the proper exercise of its adjudicatory power.

All procedural rules, whether issued by quasi-judicial agencies or embodied in statutes enacted
by Congress are subject to alteration or modification by the Supreme Court in the exercise of its
constitutional rule-making power.
Case: First Lepanto Ceramics, Inc. v. CA, 237 SCRA 519 (1994)

Technical rules of procedure and of evidence prevailing in the courts of law and equity are not
controlling in administrative proceedings. However, the fundamental and essential right of due process
such as the right to be heard and the existence of substantial evidence to support its decision cannot be
dispensed with by the administrative agency.
Case: Police Commission v. Lood, 127 SCRA 757 (19894)

The assumption of jurisdiction by an administrative agency in exercise of its adjudicatory power

requires an appropriate case involving a justiciable controversy. In contested cases where claims are
asserted and reliefs are sought, the proceedings shall commence from the filing of a complaint or
petition. It may be a formal one which alleges the ultimate facts and prays for specific reliefs. Where the
applicable law requires a verification, the complainant or petitioner must make a verification. Also, since
the rule against forum shopping applies in quasi-judicial proceedings, there must also be a certification
of non-forum shopping.

There is forum shopping whenever, as a result of an adverse opinion in one forum, a party
seeks a favorable opinion in another forum. The principle also applies to cases filed in courts while
administrative proceeding is pending, in order to defeat administrative processes and in anticipation of
an unfavorable administrative ruling and favorable court ruling.
Case: Minister of Natural Resources v. Heirs of Huges, 155 SCRA 566 (1987)

The test to determine whether there was violation of the rule against forum shopping is
whether the elements of litis pendentia are present or whether a final judgment in one case
constitutes res judicata in the other.
a) Filing of complaint or petition with the administrative agency
b) Issuance of summons against the respondent
c) Filing of an answer by respondent/ Default
d) Pre-trial
e) Hearing, subpoena, presentation of evidence, contempt of court
f) Decision or ruling

b. Due Process in Quasi-Judicial Proceedings

The Constitution provides that no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without
due process of law. This principle applies in administrative proceedings.
Case: NDC v. Collector of Customs, 9 SCRA 429 (1963)

Cardinal Primary Requirements of Due Process

“(1)The right to a hearing, which includes the right to present one’s case and submit evidence in support
thereof.
(2)The tribunal must consider the evidence presented.
(3)The decision must have something to support itself.
(4)The evidence must be substantial.
(5)The decision must be rendered 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 or any of its judges must act on its or his own independent consideration of the
law and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of a subordinate in arriving at a
decision.
(7)The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such a manner that the
parties to the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the reason for the decision
rendered.
Case: Philippine National Bank vs. Apalisok, 199 SCRA 92 (1991)

Where the act complained of results from the exercise of police power of the state, prior notice
and hearing are not required, unless the applicable law expressly provides. Considerations of
procedural due process cannot outweigh the evil sought to be prevented by the exercise of police
power.
Cases: Central Bank of the Philippines v. CA, 220 SCRA 536 (1993)
Philippines Comunications Satellite Corp. v. Alcuaz, 180 SCRA 218 (1989)
Lumiqued v. Exevea, 282 SCRA 125 (1997)

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. (Sec. 14, Book VII, 1987 Administrative
Code) Decisions of administrative agencies become final and executory fifteen days after receipt of a
copy thereof by the party adversely affected unless within that period, administrative appeal or judicial
review, if proper, has been perfected. (Sec. 15, Chapter III of Book VII of the 1987 Administrative Code)
Assignment:

a) Read the notes and cases cited.

b) Study:
- doctrine of primary jurisdiction
- principle of exhaustion of administrative remedies & the exceptions
- Villaflor v. CA, 280 SCRA 327-328
Machete v. CA, 250 SCRA 176
Teotico v. Agda, 197 SCRA 675, 693 (1991)
Paat v. CA, 266 SCRA 167 (1997)

Where the law provides for the remedies against the action of an administrative board, body, or
officer, relief to courts can be sought only after exhausting all remedies provided, the reason resting
upon the presumption that the administrative body, if given the chance to correct its mistake or error,
may amend its decision on a given matter and decide it properly. (Lopez vs. City of Manila, 303 SCRA 448
[1999])

——o0o—— Land Bank of the Philippines vs. Court of Appeals, 318 SCRA 144, G.R. No. 126332
November 16, 1999

The proceedings having been conducted without according to Virtudazo the “cardinal primary
rights of due process” guaranteed to every party in an administrative or quasi-judicial proceeding,28
said proceedings must be pronounced null and void. The case thus comes within one of the recognized
exceptions to the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, i.e.: the administrative action for
which relief is sought is so patently illegal as to be deemed to have

______________

28 SEE opening paragraph of this opinion.

102

102

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

Vasquez vs. Court of Appeals

been done without or in excess of jurisdiction,29 or the question involved is purely a legal
one.30 Philippine National Bank vs. Apalisok, 199 SCRA 92, G.R. No. 52439 July 12, 1991