Doctrines

Separation of Powers
- ULTIMATE OBJECTIVE: to limit the powers of the
State

not categorically stated that these two tests must be

complied with or whether one test is sufficient. See
below for more.)

- the obvious solution is to delegate power to

administrative agencies

Characteristics of Administrative Law

**Q: Is there a specific provision in the

1.
two powers: quasi-legislative and quasiConstitution that mandates separation of powers?
judicial
A: The Doctrine of Separation of Powers is not
2.
recent development
3.
object and scope: regulation of private
expressly stated in the Constitution but it can be
rights for public welfare
implied from the distribution of powers among the
4.
provides remedies in case of violation of
executive, legislative and judiciary. The Constitution
rights
does not mandate that there shall be separation of
5.
pertain to the executive branch
powers of government because the powers are
6.
recent development (modern law)
actually already separated.
- It is that field of public law that deals with the
Constitution, jurisprudence, and rules and regulations
o
Non-Delegation of Powers
relative to or depicting the establishment, function,
- Potestas delegata non delegari potest
and actual operations of Philippine administrative
- Corollary to the Doctrine of Separation of Powers
agencies.
- as a rule, delegation of powers of government is not
allowed for it will constitute an abdication of duty of
the branch concerned
Reasons for Growth of Administrative
Agencies
1.
increasing
complexity
of task of
**Q: When may delegation of powers be allowed?
government
A: The general rule of non-delegation of powers is
2.
growing inability of legislature to cope
susceptible of exceptions, such as: (1) through
with the myriad problems demanding its
attention
immemorial practice, powers are delegated to the
growth of society which created peculiar
LGUs; (2) as provided by the Constitution under Art. 3.
and sophisticated problems that the legislature
VI, sec. 23 (2); (3) permissible delegation to
cannot be expected to reasonably comprehend
administrative agencies; and (4) to the people in
4.
competence of legislature to provide the
Initiative and Referendum, provided that the two tests
required direct and efficacious and specific
solutions
of a valid delegation are observed. (NOTA BENE: It is

PANTRANCO vs. PSC, 70 Phil 229 (1940)

FACTS:
PANTRANCO, a holder of an existing Certificate of
Public Convenience is applying to operate additional
buses with the Public Service Commission (PSC).
The PSC granted the application but added several
conditions for PANTRANCOs compliance.
ISSUE:
PANTRANCO is questioning whether PSC can
impose said conditions. If so, wouldnt this power of
the PSC, as provided for under sec. 15, CA 146,
constitute undue delegation of powers?
HELD:
SC held that there was valid delegation of powers.
The theory of the separation of powers is designed by
its originators to secure action at the same time
forestall overaction which necessarily results from
undue concentration of powers and thereby obtain
efficiency and prevent deposition. But due to the

growing complexity of modern life, the multiplication of

subjects of governmental regulation and the increased
difficulty of administering laws, there is a constantly
growing tendency toward the delegation of greater
powers by the legislature, giving rise to the adoption,
within certain limits, of the principle of subordinate
legislation.

ISSUE:
W/N the issuance of Memorandum Circular No. 2 is a
violation of non-delegation of powers
HELD:
SC held that there was valid delegation of powers.

All that has been delegated to the Commission is the

administrative function, involving the use of discretion
to carry out the will of the National Assembly having in
view, in addition, the promotion of public interests in a
proper and suitable manner.

Eastern Shipping Lines v. POEA, 166 SCRA 533

(1988)

FACTS:
Vitaliano Saco, the Chief Officer of a ship, was killed
in an accident in Tokyo, Japan. The widow filed a
complaint for damages against the Eastern Shipping
Lines with the POEA, based on Memorandum Circular
No. 2 issued by the latter which stipulated death
benefits and burial expenses for the family of an
overseas worker. Eastern Shipping Lines questioned
the validity of the memorandum circular.
Nevertheless, the POEA assumed jurisdiction and
decided the case.

In questioning the validity of the memorandum

circular, Eastern Shipping Lines contended that POEA
was given no authority to promulgate the regulation,
and even with such authorization, the regulation
represents an exercise of legislative discretion which,
under the principle, is not subject to delegation.
It is true that legislative discretion as to the
substantive contents of the law cannot be delegated.
What can be delegated is the discretion to determine
how the law may be enforced, not what the law shall
be. The ascertainment of the latter subject is a
prerogative of the legislature. This prerogative cannot
be abdicated or surrendered by the legislature to the
delegate.
There are two accepted tests to determine whether or
not there is a valid delegation of legislative power, viz,
the completeness test and the sufficient standard test.
Under the first test, the law must be complete in all its
terms and conditions when it leaves the legislature
such that when it reaches the delegate the only thing
he will have to do is to enforce it. Under the sufficient

standard test, there must be adequate guidelines or

stations in the law to map out the boundaries of the
delegates authority and prevent the delegation from
running riot.
Both tests are intended to prevent a total transference
of legislative authority to the delegate, who is not
allowed to step into the shoes of the legislature and
exercise a power essentially legislative.
Xxx The delegation of legislative power has become
the rule and its non-delegation the exception.
The reason is the increasing complexity of the task of
government and the growing inability of the legislature
to cope directly with the myriad problems demanding
its attention. The growth of society has ramified its
activities and created peculiar and sophisticated
problems that the legislature cannot be expected to
reasonably comprehend. Specialization even in
legislation has become necessary. Too many of the
problems attendant upon present-day undertakings,
the legislature may not have the competence to
provide the required direct and efficacious, not to say,
specific solutions. These solutions may, however, be
expected from its delegates, who are supposed to be
experts in the particular fields.
The reasons given above for the delegation of
legislative powers in general are particularly
applicable to administrative bodies. With the
proliferation of specialized activities and their

attendant peculiar problems, the national legislature

has found it more and more necessary to entrust to
administrative agencies the authority to issue rules to
carry out the general provisions of the statute. This is
called the power of subordinate legislation.
With this power, administrative bodies may implement
the broad policies laid down in statute by filling in the
details which the Congress may not have the
opportunity or competence to provide. Memorandum
Circular No. 2 is one such administrative regulation.

Solid Homes, Inc. vs. Payawal, 177 SCRA 72, 79

(1989)

FACTS:
Payawal is a buyer of a certain subdivision lot who is
suing Solid Homes for failure to deliver the certificate
of title. The complaint was filed with the RTC. Solid
Homes contended that jurisdiction is with the National
Housing Authority (NHA) pursuant to PD 957, as
amended by PD 1344 granting exclusive jurisdiction to
NHA.
ISSUE:
W/N NHA has jurisdiction to try the case and the
competence to award damages

HELD:
SC held that NHA (now HLURB) has jurisdiction.

the legislative purpose.

Sources of Administrative Law
Constitution
Statute
Jurisprudence
Rules and regulations by the
administrative agencies (quasi-legislative)
5.
Orders and decisions by the
administrative agencies (quasi-judicial)

1.
In case of conflict between a general law and a
2.
special law, the latter must prevail regardless of the 3.
dates of their enactment. It is obvious that the general 4.
law in this case is BP 129 and PD 1344 the special
law.
On the competence of the Board to award damages,
we find that this is part of the exclusive power
conferred upon it by PD 1344 to hear and decide
claims involving refund and any other claims filed by
subdivision lot or condominium unit buyers against the
project owner, developer, dealer, broker or salesman.
As a result of the growing complexity of the modern
society, it has become necessary to create more and
more administrative bodies to help in the regulation of
its ramified activities. Specialized in the particular
fields assigned to them, they can deal with the
problems thereof with more expertise and dispatch
than can be expected from the legislature or the
courts of justice. This is the reason for the increasing
vesture of quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers
in what is now not unreasonably called the fourth
department of the government.
Statues conferring powers on their administrative
agencies must be liberally construed to enable them
to discharge their assigned duties in accordance with

Mecano vs. COA, 216 SCRA 500 (1992)

FACTS:
Mecano, an NBI Director, was hospitalized for
cholecystitis, for which he incurred medical and
hospitalization expenses, the total amount of which he
is claiming from the COA, based on sec. 699 of the
RAC. COA contended that the RAC has been
repealed by the Administrative Code of 1987,
specifically sec. 699 was not restated nor re-enacted
in the Code.
ISSUE:
W/N the Administrative Code of 1987 repealed or
abrogated sec. 699 of the RAC
HELD:

The question of whether or not a particular law has

been repealed or not by a subsequent law is a matter
of legislative intent. The lawmakers may expressly
repeal a law by incorporating therein a repealing
provision which expressly and specifically cites the
particular law or laws, and portions thereof, that are
intended to be repealed. A declaration in a statute,
usually in its repealing clause, that a particular and
specific law, identified by its number or title, is
repealed is an express repeal; all others are implied
repeals.
Under sec. 27, Bk. VII (Final Provisions) of the
Administrative Code of 1987, the repealing clause
states that all laws, decrees, orders, rules and
regulations, or portions thereof, inconsistent with this
Code are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.
The question that should be asked is: What is the
nature of this repealing clause? It is certainly not an
express repealing clause because it fails to identify or
designate the act or acts that are intended to be
repealed. Rather, it is an example of a general
repealing provision. It is a clause which predicates the
intended repeal under the condition that a substantial
conflict must be found in existing and prior acts. The
failure to add a specific repealing clause indicates the
intent was not to repeal any existing law, unless an
irreconcilable inconsistency and repugnancy exist in
the terms of the new and old laws. The latter situation
falls under the category of an implied repeal.

(NOTA BENE: This means that the RAC, despite the

passage of the Administrative Code of 1987, may still
be a source of administrative law)

ISSUE:
W/N Contract C was validly entered into
HELD:

Leveriza vs. IAC, 157 SCRA 282 (1988)

FACTS:
This case involves three contracts of lease:
1) Contract A: executed between Civil Aeronautics
Administration (lessor) and Rosario Leveriza (lessee)
2) Contract B: executed between Leveriza (lessor)
and Mobil Oil (lessee)
3) Contract C: executed between CAA (lessor) and
Mobil Oil (lessee)
When Leveriza subleased the property to Mobil Oil
(Contract B) without permission from the lessor, CAA
cancelled Contract A and executed Contract C with
Mobil Oil. Leveriza contended that Contract C was
invalid not only because it was entered into by CAA
without approval by the Department Secretary but
also because it was not executed by the President of
the Philippines or officer duly designated. According
to Leveriza, the officer duly designated to cancel the
contract is not the Airport General Manager but the
Secretary of Public Works and Communication or the
Director of the CAA.

SC held that the Airport General Manager had

authority to enter into contracts of lease. In executing
Contract C, the Airport General Manager signed for
the Director of the CAA, who subsequently ratified the
same.
Under sec. 567 of the RAC, a contract of lease may
be executed by: (1) President; (2) officer duly
designated by him; and (3) officer expressly vested by
law. Under sec. 32 (24) of RA 776, the Director of the
CAA is one such officer vested by law.

Meaning of Administration

AS AN INSTITUTION: aggregate of individuals

running the government for the period of their term of
office
AS A FUNCTION: actual running of the government
**Q: Is administration and government the same?
A: No. While the two concepts are intricately related,
there are fundamental differences between them.
Government is that institution or aggregate of

institutions by which an independent society makes or

carries out those rules of actions which are necessary
to enable men to live in a social state or which are
imposed upon the people forming that society by
those who possess the power or authority of
prescribing them. Administration, on the other hand,
refers to that aggregate of individuals holding the

o
Internal Administration rules within the
reins of government for the time being. Thus,
particular agency
compared to administration, government has a more
o
External Administration rules governing
permanent character.
the relationship between the agency and the
public
TWO KINDS OF ADMINISTRATION:

NOTA BENE: Administrative Law deals with both

although its central focus is External Administration.