ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Course Requirements:
1. Read CAREFULLY the entire Administrative Code of 1987.
2. Review the applicable AC provisions before each class
3. Expect to be called to recite on AC provisions, and related rules.
General Class Policies:
There is NO required Textbook. Students are not allowed to drop except for meritorious reasons.
Cheating in any form (i.e. radio) will be dealt with promptly and severely. Three (3) unexcused
absences will merit a 5 in the Class Participation component for grading.
SESSION 1
I. Historical and Constitutional Considerations
A. Read background material available in textbook of your choice.
B. Development of Administrative Law as a Distinct field of Public Law
i. Factors responsible for the emergence of administrative agencies
ii. Refinement of the doctrine of Separation of Powers to accommodate administrative
agencies
iii. Constitutional position of administrative agencies
C. Defining Key Terms Administrative Law, Administrative Agencies; Types of Administrative
Agencies
D. Administrative Law vis-a-vis Constitutional Law
E. Benefits and Costs of Administrative Action over Traditional Action by the 3 Branches
II. Control of Administrative Action
A. Executive Power of the President
i. Art. VII, Secs 1, 17, 1987 Constitution
B. Congressional Oversight
i. Degree and Scope by which Congress controls Administrative Agencies
ii. Emerging trend
C. The Ombudsman
Concerned Officials of MWSS v. Vasquez, 240 SCRA 502 (1995)
Lastimosa v. Vasquez, 243 SCRA 497 (1995)
Fuentes v. Office of the Ombudsman - Mindanao, G.R. No. 124295, Oct. 23,
2011
SESSION 2
III. Powers and Functions of Administrative Agencies
A. Legislative Function
i. Legislation (Article VI Section 1, Constitution) vs. Rule-making
(Book VII, Administrative Procedure, Secs. 1-9, Administrative Code of 1987)
ii. Non-Delegation Doctrine

Compania General de Tabacco v. Public Utility Commission, 34 Phil. 136

(1916)

US v. Ang Tang Ho, 43 Phil 1 (1922)

Pelaez v. Auditor General,15 SCRA 569 (1965)

Edu v. Ericta, 35 SCRA 481 (1970)

Agustin v. Edu, 88 SCRA 195 (1979)

Philippine Communications Satellite Corp. v. Alcuaz, 180 SCRA 218 (1989)

Santiago v. COMELEC, 270 SCRA 106 (1997)
ALA Schecter Poultry Corp. v. US, 295 U.S. 495 (1935)
White v. Roughton, 530 F 2d 750 (CA 71976)

iii. Forms of Permissible Delegation

a) Delegation to Local Governments
b) Delegation to the President in Specific Instances
c) Ascertainment of Fact

Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935)

d) Filling In of Details
e) Interpretative Rules

Victorias Co. v. Social Security Commission, 114 Phil. 555 (1962)

Peralta v. Civil Service Commission, 212 SCRA, 425 (1992)

f) Fixing of Rates, Wages and Prices
Panay Autobus Co. v. Phil. Railway Co., 57 Phil. 172 (1933)
KMU Labor Center v. Garcia, 239 SCRA 386 (1994)
Vigan Electric Co. v. PSC, 10 SCRA 46 (1964)

g) Licensing
Secs. 17-18, Book VII, Administrative Code of 1987
Gonzalo Sy Trading v. Central Bank of the Philippines, 70 SCRA 570 (1976)

SESSION 3
iv. Parameters of Administrative Rule-Making
a) Scope and Reach

Olsen & Co. v. Aldanese, 43 Phil. 259 (1922)

People v. Maceren, 79 SCRA 450 (1977)

Land Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 249 SCRA 149 (1995)

Ople v. Torres, 293 SCRA 141 (1998)

China Banking Corp., v. Members of the Board of Trustees, Home

Development

Mutual Fund, 307 SCRA 443 (1999)

b) Sufficiency of Standards in the Statute
Reasonableness as an Implied Standard - Wisconsin Inspection v. Whitman, 196
Wis. 427, 220 MW 929 (1928)
Why is Reasonableness an Implied Standard in every statute?
To Promote Simplicity, Economy or Efficiency; Maintain Monetary Stability,
Promote Rising Level of Production and Real Income - People v. Joliffe, 105
Phil. 177 (1959)
Interest of Law and Order - Rubi v. Provincial Board of Mindoro, 39 Phil. 661
(1919)
Public Interest - People v. Rosenthal & Osmea, 68 Phil. 328 (1939)
Justice Equity and Substantial Merits of the Case - Int'l Hardwood & Veneer Co.
v. Pangil Federation, 70 Phil. 602 (1940)

Morality? - Mutual Film Corp. v. Industrial Commission, 236 US 230 (1914)

Sacrilegious? - Burstyn v. Wilson, 343 US 495 (1952)

c) Publication and Effectivity

Tanada v. Tuvera, 146 SCRA 446

Philippine Association of Service Exporters, Inc. v. Torres, 212 SCRA 298

(1992)

People v. Que Po Lay, 94 Phil. 640 (1954)

SESSION 4
B. Judicial Function
i. Source of Power

Secs. 10-15, Book VII, Administrative Code

ii. Classifications
a) Enabling Power
b) Directing Power
Dispensing v. Examining v. Summary Power
iii. Subpoenas, Contempt
a) In General Sec. 13, Book VII, Administrative Code
b) Special Statutory Grant

Evangelista v. Jarencio, 68 SCRA 99 (1975)

Guevarra v. Commission on Elections, G.R. No. 12596 July 25, 1958

iv. Administrative Search and Seizure; Warrants of Arrest

Art. III, Sec. 2, 1987 Constitution as compared with Art. IV, Sec. 3, 1973
Constitution

Qua Chee Gan v. Deportation Board, 9 SCRA 27 (1963)

Harvey v. Defensor- Santiago, 74 SCRA 96 (1976)

Board of Commissioners (CID) v. De la Rosa , 197 SCRA 853 (1991)

Camara v. Municipal Court, 387 US 523, 87 S. Ct. 1727, 18 L. Ed. 2930

(1967)

See v. Seattle, 387 US 541, 87 S. Ct. 1737, 18 L Ed. 2d 943

v. Administrative Sanctions; Fines and Penalties
Oceanic Stream Navigation Co. v. Stranahan, 214 US 230 (1908)
RCPI v. Board of Communications, GR No. L-43653, Nov. 29, 1977
Perez v. LPG Refillers Association of the Philippines, Inc., 492 SCRA 638 (2006)
SESSION 5
IV. Administrative Procedure
Book VII, Secs. 1-26, Administrative Code.
A. Cardinal Rights
Ang Tibay v. CIR, 69 Phil. 635 (1950)
Vinta Maritime Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 284 SCRA 656 (1998)
UP Board of Regents v. Court of Appeals, 313 SCRA 404 (1999)
American Inter-Fashion Corp. v. Office of the President, 197 SCRA 409 (1991)
Pefianco v. Moral, 322 SCRA 439 (2000)
B. Jurisdiction
i. Sources of Jurisdiction
ii. Concept of Limited Jurisdiction v. Plenary Jurisdiction

iii. Cases

Go Tek v. Deportation Board, 79 SCRA 17 (1977)

Vera v. Cuevas, 90 SCRA 379 (1979)
Carino v. Commissioner on Human Rights, 204 SCRA 483 (1991)
Simon v. Commissioner on Human Rights, 229 SCRA 117 (1994)
Laguna Lake Development Authority v. Court of Appeals, 231 SCRA 292 (1994)
Delta Ventures Resources Inc., v. CAB, 270 SCRA 538 (1997)
Arranza v. BF Homes Inc., GR No. 131683, June 19, 2000

SESSION 6
C. Notice and Hearing
i. When Required
National Development Co. v. Collector, 9 SCRA 429 (1963)
Felix Uy v. COA, GR No. 130685, March 21, 2000
ii. When NOT required
Suntay v. People, 101 Phil. 833 (1957)
Bishop v. Galang, 8 SCRA 244 (1963)
Pollution Adjudication Board v. Court of Appeals, 195 SCRA 112 (1991)
D. Applicable Rules of Procedure and Evidentiary Rules
i. Authority to promulgate rules
ii. Limits
iii. Construction of Administrative Rules of Procedure
iv. Standards of Evidence; Burden and Proof;
Philippine Movie Pictures v. Premier Production, 92 Phil. 844 (1953)
Estate of Florencio Buan v. Pambusco, 99 Phil. 373 (1956)
Rizal Light v. Municipality of Rizal, 24 SCRA 285
SESSION 7
E. Form and Promulgation of Judgment
Indias v. Phil Iron Mines, 107 Phil. 297 (1957)
Serrano v. PSC, 24 SCRA 867 (1968)
American Tobacco Co. v. Director of Patents, 67 SCRA 287 (1975)
Neria v. Commissioner of Immigration, 23 SCRA 806 (1968)
Sichangco v. Board of Commissioners of Immigration, GR No. L-23545, Nov. 7,
1979
Realty Exchange Venture Corp. v. Sendino, 233 SCRA 665 (1994)
F. Administrative and Judicial Proceedings Arising from the Same Facts
Galang v. Court of Appeals, 2 SCRA 234
Co San v. Director of Patents, GR No. 10563, Feb. 23, 1961
Villanos v. Subido, 45 SCRA 142
PNR v. Domingo, 42 SCRA 142
Tan v. COMELEC, 237 SCRA 353 (1994)

V. Executive Branch Review of Administrative Decisions

A. Authority of Department Heads Sec. 79 (c), Administrative Code
B. Authority of President and the Executive Secretary
i. When Appeal to the President indispensable
Dimaisip v. Court of Appeals

SESSION 8
VI. Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions
A. Sources of Authority to Conduct Judicial Review of Executive Action
i. Phil. Constitution v. US Constitution
ii. Statute
iii. General Principles and Jurisprudence
a) Whether considered Trial De Novo
B. Standing and Ripeness; Finality of Administrative Action
Ursal v. Court of Tax Appeals, 101 Phil. 209 (1957)
Kilosbyan v. Guingona, 232 SCRA 110 (1994)
Kilosbayan v. Morato, 246 SCRA 540 (1995)
Abbot Laboratories v. Gardner, 387 US 136 (1967)
National Automatic v. Shultz, 448 F 2d 689 (CADC 1971)

C. Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies

i. Rationale
ii. Links to Separation of Powers
iii. Effect on pending case of a ruling finding that remedies were not exhausted
iv. Cases
Pascual v. Provincial Board, 106 Phil. 446 (1959)
Alzate v. Aldana, 107 Phil. 298 (1960)
Cipriano v. Marcelino, 43 SCRA 291 (1972)
Corpuz v. Cuaderno, GR No. 1-17860, March 30, 1962
De Lara v. Clorivel, 14 SCRA 269 (1965)
PAAT v. Court of Appeals, 266 SCRA 167 (1997)
Quasha v. SEC, 83 SCRA 557 (1978)
Pestanas v. Dyogi, 81 SCRA 574 (1978)
Republic v. Sandiganbayan, 255 SCRA 438 (1996)
SESSION 9
D. Primary Jurisdiction
i. Rationale
ii. Links to Separation of Powers
iii. Effect on pending case of a finding of primary jurisdiction
iv. Cases
Texas & Pacific Railway Co. v. Abilene, 204 US 426 (1907)
Phil. Global Communications, Inc. v. Relova, 145 SCRA 385 (1986)
Viadad v. RTC of Negros Oriental, 227 SCRA 271 (1993)
Industrial Enterprises v. Court of Appeals, 184 SCRA 426 (1990)

VII.

Phil. Veterans Bank v. Court of Appeals, 322 SCRA 139 (2000)

Conrad and Co. v. Court of Appeals, 246 SCRA 691 (1995)

Factors Affecting Judicial Review of Administrative Action

A. Law-Fact Distinction
i. Legal Basis
ii. Purpose of distinguishing
iii. Effect on Remedy to be used
iv. Case
Aboitiz Shipping Corp. v. Pepeti, 18 SCRA 1028 (1966)

SESSION 10
B. Questions of Law
O'Leary v. Brown Pacific-Maxon Inc.., 340 US 504 (1951)
O'Keeffe v. Smith Associates, 380 US 359 (1965)
Ortua v. Encarnacion, 59 Phil 440 (1934)
Mejia v. Mapa, 50 OG No. 6, 2507 (1954)
Ysmael v. CIR, 108 Phil. 407 (1960)
C. Questions of Fact
Universal Camera v. NLRB, 340 US 474 (1951)
Banco Filipino v. Monetary Board, 204 SCRA 767 (1991)
PAL v. Confessor, 231 SCRA 41 (1994)
German Marine Agencies v. NLRC, 350 SCRA 629 (2001)
D. Questions of Discretion
Laguna Tayabas v. PSC, GR No. 10903, Jan. 18, 1957
Kapisanan sa La Suerte v. Noriel, 77 SCRA 414 (1977)
Federation of Free Workers v. Noriel, 86 SCRA 132 (1978)
SESSION 11
VIII.
Modes of Judicial Review
A. Common Provisions
Art. IX, A. Common Provisions, Sec. 7, 1987 Constitution
BP Blg. 129, Sec. 9 as amended by R.A. No. 7902 (1995)
Book VII, Sec. 25, 1987 Administrative Code
B. Rule 43 Appeals
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure
C. Special Civil Action (Rule 65 Certiorari)
Purefoods v. NLRC, 171 SCRA 415 (1989)
Azores v. SEC, 252 SCRA 387 (1996)

Villaruel v. NLRC, 284 SCRA 399 (1998)

D. Prohibition
Chua Hiong v. Deportation Board, 96 Phil. 665 (1955)
Simon v. Commission on Human Rights, 229 SCRA 117 (1994)
Paredes v. Court of Appeals, 253 SCRA 126 (1996)
E. Declaratory Relief
Mirando v. Wellington Ty & Bros. Inc., 81 SCRA 506 (1978)
F. Common Provisional Remedies Against Administrative Agency Action
i. Mandamus
Blanco v. Board of Examiners, 46 Phil. 190 (1955)
Ng Gloc Liu v. Sec of Foreign Affairs, 85 Phil. 842 (1950)
Policarpio v. Phil Veterans Board, 99 Phil. 797 (1956)
Tan v. Veterans Backpay Commission, 105 Phil. 377 (1959)
Province of Pangasinan v. Reparations Commission, 80 SCRA 376
(1977)
ii. Injunction
a) In General
Collector v. Reyes, 90 Phil. 70 (1951)
Pineda v. Lantin, 6 SCRA 757 (1962)
Lemi v. Valencia, 7 SCRA 469 (1963)
Honda v. San Diego, 16 SCRA 406 (1966)
Nocnoc v. Vera, 88 SCRA 529 (1979)
b) Special Note: Injunction Against Government Projects
SESSION 12
IX. Enforcement of Agency Action
A. Res Judicata, Finality of Judgment
Ipekdjian Merchandising v. Court of Tax Appeals, 9 SCRA 72 (1963)
Nasipit Lumber Co., Inc. v. NLRC, 177 SCRA 93 (1989)
Dulay v. Minister of Natural Resources, 218 SCRA 562 (1993)
Phil. American General Insurance Co. Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 222 SCRA 155
(1993)
Manila Electric Co. v. Phil. Consumers Foundations, et al., GR No. 101783 Jan.
23, 2002
B. Writ of Execution, Mandamus
Apolega v. Hizon, 25 SCRA 336 (1968)
Vda. De Corpuz v. Commanding General, Phil. Army, GR No. L-44077, Sept. 30, 1978
Ambrosio v. Salvador, GR No. L-47651, Dec. 11, 1978
Merano v. Tutaan, 115 SCRA 343 (1982)
GSIS v. Civil Service Commission, 202 SCRA 799 (1991)

Clavano v. HLURB, GR No. 143781, Feb. 27, 2002