Sie sind auf Seite 1von 14
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW 2" Semester SY 2018-2019 DEAN SALVADOR T. CARLOTA A&B PROF, MICHAEL T. TIU, JR. I HISTORICAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Development of Administrative Law as a distinct field of public law. 1. Factors responsible for the emergence of administrative agencies. 2. The doctrine of separation of powers and the constitutional position of administrative agencies B. Definition of Terms - Administrative Law and Administrative Agency; Types of Agencies C. Cases: Pangasinan, Transportation Co., Inc., v. The Public Service Commission 70 Phil. 221 (1940) ~ Manila Electric Co., v. Pasay Transportation Co., 57 Phil. 600 (1932) - Noblejas v. Techankee, 23 SCRA 405 (1968) - Garcia v. Macaraig, 39 SCRA 106 (1972) - In Re: Rodolfo v. Manzano, 166 SCRA 246 (1988) - Puyat y. De Guzman Jr., 113 SCRA 31 (1982) - Chiongbian v. Orbos, 245 SCRA 253 (1995) - Funa v. Duque III, 766 SCRA 742 (2014) - Efraim C. Genuino, Erwin F, Genuino and Sheryl G. See v. Hon, Leila M. De Lima ~ G.R. No. 197930, April 17, 2018 nt CONTROL OF ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION ‘A. Administrative agencies and the executive power of the President - Art. VIL, Ses. 1, 17, Const. B. Congressional Oversight Power - Macalintal v. Comelee 405 SCRA 693-733 (concurring and dissenting opinion of Justice Puno) - Abakada Guro Party List, et. al. v. Purisima, et. al., G.R. No. 166715, August 14, 2008. C. Carlota, Legislative and Judicial Control of Administrative Decision-making. D. Carlota, The Ombudsman: Its effectivity and visibility amidst bureaucratic abuse and irregularity, 65 Phil. L. J. 12 (1990) E. Cases ~ Concerned-Officials of the MWSS v. Vasquez, 240 SCRA 502 (1995) ~ Lastimosa v. Vasquez, 243 SCRA 497 (1995) - BIR v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 115103, April 11, 2002 - Office of the Ombudsman v. ENOC, et. al., G.R. Nos. 145957-08, January 25, 2002 = Fuentes v. Office of the Ombudsman - Mindanao - G.R. No. 124295, October 23, 2001 - Ledesman y. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 161629, July 29, 2005 - Estarija v. Ranada, 492 SCRA 652 (2006) - Office of the Ombudsman vs. Masing - 452 SCRA 253 (2008) - Samson vs. Restrivera, 646 SCRA 481 (2011) mm POWERS AND FUNCTIONS OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCI ‘A. Legislative Function 1. Non delegation doctrine = Compania General de Tabacco v. Board of Public Utility Commission, 34 Phil. 136 (1916) ‘8. v. Ang Tang Ho 43 Phil. 1 (1922) - People v. Vera, 65 Phil 56 (1937) - Pelaez v. Auditor General G.R. No. 23825, Dec. 24, 1965, 15 SCRA 569 - Edu v. Bricta 35 SCRA 481 (1970) - Agustin v. Edu, No. L-49112, Feb. 2, 1979; 88 SCRA 195 - Free Telephone Workers Union v. Minister of Labor and Employment, 108 SCRA 757 (1981) - Philippine Communications Satellite Corporation, v. Alcuaz, 190 SCRA 218 (1989) - Santiago v. COMELEC - 270 SCRA 106 (1997) (Read only the part concerning the non- delegation issue.) - Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388 (1935) - Abakada Guro Party List, etc., et al. v. Exec. Sec. Ermita, et al. G.R. no. 168207, September 1, 2005. Read only the Part concerning the non-delegation issue. - Review Center Association of the Philippines vs. Etmita, 583 SCRA 428 (2009) - ALLA. Schecter Poultry Corp. v. U.S. 295 U.S. 495 (1935) - Federal Energy Administration v. Al Gonquin SNG, Inc., 426 U.S. 548, 49 L. Ed. 2d 49 94 96 SCT 2295 (1976) = White v. Roughton, 530 F2d 750 (CA 71976) 2, Permissible Delegation a. Ascertainment of Fact ~ Panama Refining Co. Ryan, supra - Lovina v. Moreno G.R. No. 1178221, Nov. 29, 1963; 9SCRA 557 (1963) b. Filing in of details - Alegre v. Collector of Customs, 53 Phil. 394 (1920) c. Administrative Rulemaking 1, Book VII, Administrative Procedure, Sees. 1-9, Administrative Code of 1987 1. Limits on Rule-Making Power = Olsen & Co., Inc. v. Aldanese, 43 Phil. 259 (1922) - Syman v. Jacinto, 93 Phil 1093 (1953) - People v. Maceren, No. L-32166, Oct. 18, 1977; 79 SCRA 450 - Toledo v. Civil Service Commission, 202 SCRA 507 (1991) - Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Appeals, 240 SCRA 368 (1995) - Land Bank of the Philippines v. Court of Appeals, 249 SCRA 149 (1995) - GMCR, Ine. v. Bell Telecommunications Phil., Inc.,-271 SCRA 790 (1997) - Association of Phil. Coconut Desiccators vs. Phil. Coconut Authority-286 SCRA 109 (1998) - Ople vs. Torres - 293 SCRA 141 (1998) ~ Phil. Bank of Communications v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue 302 SCRA 241 (1999) - China Banking Corp., v. Members of the Board of Trustees, Home Development Mutual fund - 307 SCRA 443 (1999) - GMA Network, Inc. v. COMELEC, G.R. No. 205357, September 2, 2014. - Maxima Realty Management and Development Corp. v, Parkway Real Estate Development Corp. - 442 SCRA 572 (2004) - Lokin, Jr. v. COMELEC, 621 SCRA 385 (2010) - Bartolome v. Social Security System, 78 SCRA 740 (2014) 2. Publication and affectivity - People v. Que Po Lay, 94, Phil. 640 - Philippine Blooming Mills v. SSS, G.R. No. 21223, August 31, 1966, 17 SCRA 1077 - Tafiada v. Tuvera 146 SCRA 446 - Phil. Association of Service Exporters, Inc. v. Torres, 212 SCRA 298 (1992) - De Jesus vs. Commission on Audit - 294 SCRA 152 (1998) - Republic of the Philippines v. EXPRESS Telecommunications Co., 373 SCRA 316 (2002) - National Association of Electricity Consumers for Reforms (NASECORE) vs. ERC, 481 SCRA 480 (2006) - GMA Network, Inc. vs. MTRCB - 514 SCRA 191 (2007) - Republic vs. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corporation - $50 SCRA 680 (2008) - The Board of Trustees of the GSIS v. Velasco, 641 SCRA 372 (2011) = Book VII, Secs. 3-8, Administrative Code of 1987

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen