Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Administrative Law
By Asst. Ombudsman Rodolfo M. Elman, CESO lll
Ateneo de Davao Law School
Quasi-Judicial Power
express empowerment by law; merely
incidental and in aid of main function
the action or discretion to investigate
facts and draw conclusions from them as
basis for their official action
involves: a) taking and evaluating evidence;
b) determining facts based upon the
evidence presented; and c) rendering an
order or decision supported by the facts
proved.
Cases
Sanado vs. CA, 356 SCRA 546 (Action of POEA to grant,
deny, suspend,or revoke license of any private placement
agency)
Eastern Telecom vs. Intl Communication Corp., 435
SCRA 55 (power of NTC to issue CPCN)
Balangauan vs. CA, 562 CRA 186 (A PI is not a quasijudicial proceeding, and DOJ is not a quasi-judicial
agency when it reviews findings of the prosecutor re
presence of probable cause)
UP Board of Regents vs. CA, 313 SCRA 404 (Board
empowered to withdraw conferment of degree founded on
fraud).
Carino vs. CHR, 204 SCRA 483 (Fact-finding is not
adjudication) 2001 BQ
Cases
General rule: certificate must be signed by all
plaintiffs in a case; exception (HLC Construction
vs. Emily Homes Homeowners Assn., 411 SCRA
504)
Appellate court finds merit or compelling reason
for non-compliance with the rule (Ombudsman
vs. Valera, 471 SCRA 719)
Rule not applicable to agency not exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial function (Cabarrus vs.
Bernas, 279 SCRA 388) or the cases do not
raise identical causes of action (Velasquez vs.
Hernandez, 437 SCRA 358)
Quasi-Legislative Power
A relaxation of principle of separation
Requirements for validity of rules
If issued in excess of rule making authority, no binding effect
upon the courts; treated as mere administrative
interpretations of the law
Mere absence of implementing rules cannot effectively
invalidate provisions of law, where a reasonable construction
may be given
Statute authorizing Pres. to suspend operation of law upon
happening of act
Cases
Phil. Bank of Communications vs. Commissioner
of Internal Revenue, 302 SCRA 241 (Rev. Memo
Circular 7-85 inconsistent with the NIRC)
Ople vs. Torres, 293 SCRA 141 (AO 308
providing for adoption of a national
computerized identification reference system)
Dadole vs. COA, 393 SCRA 272 (LBC of DBM
setting a maximum limit to additional allowances
to be given by LGU to national govt officials)
Fiscal Autonomy
entails freedom from outside control ad
limitations, other than those provided by law;
recognizes the power to levy, assess and collect
fees, fix compensation rates not exceeding the
highest rates authorized by law and allocate and
disburse such sums as may be provided by law
or prescribe by them in the discharge of their
functions; formulate and implement their
organizational structure and compensation of
their personnel.
Cases
CHREA vs. CHR, 444 SCRA 300
(upgrading/creation of FMO and PAO in CHR)
CHREA vs. CHR, 496 SCRA 227 (privilege of
having its approved annual appropriations released
automatically and regularly, but not fiscal autonomy
in its extensive sense)
CSC vs. DBM, 22 July 2005 (no report, no release
DBM policy; P5.8M withheld amount)
Re: Clarifying 481 SCRA 1 (DBM has no
authority to downgrade SC positions/salary grades)
Implementing Rules or
Interpretative Policies
authority to interpet
Not binding upon courts but have force/
effect of law and entitled to great respect.
general policy to sustain decision of
administrative bodies on basis of
separation of powers and their
knowledgeability and expertise.
abrogation of previous acts or rulings of
predecessor in office.
Cases
Phil. International Trading vs. COA, 309 SCRA
177 (DBM Circular disallowing payment of
allowances)
Philsa International Placement Corp. vs. Labor
Secretary, 356 SCRA 174 (POEA Circular not
filed with the National Administrative Register
cannot be basis for imposition of administrative
sanctions; a requisite under Secs. 3 & 4, Bk Vll,
EO 292)
Honasan vs. DOJ Panel, 13 April 2004 (OMBDOJ Joint Circular 95-01 an internal circular)
Doctrine of Exhaustion of
Administrative Remedies
Reasons for the doctrine
Effect of failure to observe doctrine
Applicable only to acts in the performance of a
quasi-judicial, not rule-making, function (Holy
Spirit Homeowners Assn. vs.Defensor, 497
SCRA 582).
MR must first be filed under NLRC Rules before
special civil action for certiorari
Action to recover forestry products under DENR
custody (Task Force Sagip Kalikasan vs. Judge
Paderanga, 19 June 2008)
Cases
Precepts to remember!
Instances where a prior MR is
unnecessary
Similarity/Distinction between doctrine of
exhaustion of admin remedies and
doctrine of primary jurisdiction
Commonality/Distinction between
exhaustion of admin remedies and due
process concept
Cases
Presidents directive for development of
housing project w/o DENR authorization
(Chavez vs. NHA, 530 SCRA 241)
Distinguishing power of control from power
of supervision (Bito-onon vs. Fernandez,
350 SCRA 732)
Findings of Facts
General rule and exceptions
Bautista vs. Araneta, 326 SCRA 234
(tenancy issue)
Fabian vs. Agustin, 14 February 2003
(conflicting factual findings)
Matuguina Wood Products vs. CA, 263
SCRA 508
Immunities
Admin bodies cannot grant criminal and
civil immunities to persons unless the law
explicitly confers such power
PCGG under EO 14A
Apply Art 2028, Civil Code: amicable
settlement in civil cases applicable to
PCGG cases
OMB under Sec. 17 of RA 6770
Three-fold Responsibility
Remedies may be invoked separately,
alternately, simultaneously or successively
Rule: Admin cases are independent from
criminal cases
Exception: Law expressly provides for
prior final admin determination
(Chua vs. Ang, 598 SCRA 232)
PNP
Sec. 6, Art. XVl of 1987 Constitution
Power of PLEB to dismiss PNP members
upon citizens complaint under Sec. 42 of RA
6975 concurrent with PNP Chief/regional
directors under Sec. 45
Appellate jurisdiction of NAPOLCOM thru
NAB and RAB
Appeals from decision of NAPOLCOM
should be with DILG and then with CSC
AFP
An Act Strengthening Civilian Supremacy over
the Military by Returning to Civil Courts the
Jurisdiction over Certain Offenses involving AFP
Members, Other Persons Subject to Military Law
(RA 7055)
General Rule: AFP members who commit
crimes penalized under RPC, other special
penal laws, or local ordinances shall be tried by
the proper civil court.
Cases
Telcom Dir. Pascual vs. Judge Beltran, 505
SCRA 559
Urbano vs. Chavez & Co vs. Chavez, 183 SCRA
347
NPC vs. NLRC, 272 SCRA 706 (proper basis for
computing the reglementary period to file an
appeal)
Republic vs. Desierto, 389 SCRA 452 (petition
under Rule 65 by RP thru PCGG w/o OSG
participation re OMB dismissal of graft case vs.
Cojuangco et al.)
Ombudsman Constitutional
Mandate
As protector of the people, OMB has the
power, function and duty to act promptly
on complaints filed in any form or manner
against public officials and to investigate
any act or omission of any public official
when such act or omission appears to be
illegal, unjust, improper or inefficient.
Cases on Preventive
Suspension
Garcia vs. Mojica, 314 SCRA 207
Yabut vs. Office of the Ombudsman, 233
SCRA 311
Buenaseda vs. Flavier, 226 SCRA 646
OMB vs. Valera, 471 SCRA 718
Penalty
The penalty of dismissal from the service
carries with it cancellation of eligibility,
forfeiture of retirement benefits, and the
perpetual disqualification for
reemployment in the government service.
Exception: entitled to leave credits earned
Immediate Execution of
Administrative Decisions
The decision of the Ombudsman imposing six
months suspension without pay upon Mayor
Buencamino for abuse of authority is
immediately executory under AO No. 17 of the
Ombudsman (Buencamino vs. CA, 12 April
2007)
Stay of execution (OMB vs. City Treasurer
Samaniego, 564 SCRA 570)
Preliminary Investigation
DOJ prosecutors may investigate cases against
public officials in their capacity as either
Deputized Ombudsman Prosecutors or regular
prosecutors. However, the choice has been
made in favor of the former capacity (as
Deputized OMB Prosecutor) in the OMB-DOJ
Joint Circular No. 95-01, which together with AO
No. 08, provides for automatic deputization.
OMB retains control and supervision if charge is
related to office. DOJ Prosecutors rule with
finality if charge is not related to office.
Preventive Suspension
Section 13, RA 3019
Nature: mandatory after determination of
validity of information
COA
Constitutional mandate
Coverage of COAs jurisdiction
COA and Central Bank have concurrent
jurisdiction to examine and audit govt banks, but
COA audit prevails for 2 reasons xxx
Entitlement of informers reward as determined
by BIR and DOF, although conclusive on the
executive agencies, is not binding on COA
(Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. COA, 218
SCRA 204)
PCGG
Empowered to bring proceedings for forfeiture of
property allegedly acquired unlawfully before
Feb. 25, 1986; those acquired after that date is
vested in OMB.
Ramas position as Commanding General of the
Phil. Army not sufficient (Republic vs.
Sandiganbayan, 407 SCRA 13)
Sec. 4(b) of EO 1 declared unconstitutional
(Sabio vs. Chair Gordon, 504 SCRA 704)
Central Bank
Actions of the MB in proceedings on insolvency
are final and executory and may not be set aside
except upon convincing proof the action is
plainly arbitrary and made in bad faith.
Close now and hear later policy
~no prior notice and hearing required
~prerequisites to MB action to close down
a bank and appoint receiver
~rationale
end