ADMINISTRATIVE LAW MIDTERM EXAM POINTERS

1. Cardinal Requirements of Administrative Due Process

“Cardinal Primary Requirements” of procedural due process in administrative
proceedings:
(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, and substantial evidence means such evidence as a
reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion;
(5) The decision must be based 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 own or his own independent
consideration of the law and the facts of the controversy, and not simply accept the views
of the subordinate;
(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;
(8) The officer or tribunal conducting the investigation must be vested with competent
jurisdiction and so constituted as to afford a person charged administratively a reasonable
guarantee of honesty and impartiality.

2. Distinction between Express and Implied powers

Express powers are those defined by law as granted to the administrative agency while
implied powers are those that are necessarily or by fair implication derived from the
express powers granted.

3. Distinction between Mandatory and Permissive duties

A mandatory duty is one imposed by a statute which commands either positively that
something be done, or performed in a particular way, or negatively that something be not
done, leaving the person concerned no choice on the matter except to obey. Acts executed
against the provisions of mandatory or prohibitory laws shall be void, except when the
law itself authorizes their validity (Article 5, New Civil Code)
A permissive or directory duty is one where the statute merely outlines the act to be done
in such a way that no injury can result from ignoring it or that its purpose can be
accomplished in a manner other that prescribed and substantially the same result
obtained. Considering the nature of a directory statute, the nonperformance of what it

1
prescribes, though constituting in some instances an irregularity or subjecting the official
concerned to disciplinary or administrative sanction, will not vitiate the proceedings
therein taken.

4. Qualified political agency -What is administrative function?

Administrative functions are those which involve the regulation and control over the
conduct and affair of individuals for their own welfare and the promulgation of rules and
regulations to better carry out the policy of the legislature or such as devolve upon the
administrative agencies by the laws creating them. [In re Rodolfo U. Manzano, 166
SCRA 247] This definition includes rule-making power.

5. Rule-making distinguished from quasi-judicial power

Rules and regulations issued pursuant to the rule-making power operate in the future;
while decisions promulgated through the exercise of quasi-judicial power affect past
transactions and circumstances. Rules and regulations apply to the general public while
decisions of quasi-judicial bodies apply to specific persons or entities. The issuance of
rules and regulations generally do not require notice and hearing; while notice and
hearing are necessary in making quasi-judicial decisions.

6. When do rules and regulations take effect?

Article 2 of the NCC. Laws shall take effect after fifteen days following the completion
of their publication in the Official Gazette, unless it is otherwise provided. This Code
shall take effect one year after such publication.
Laws take effect after 15 days following the completion of their publication in the
Official Gazette or in a newspaper of general circulation, unless it is other provided.
“Laws” includes rules and regulations issued pursuant to a delegation and designed to
enforce or implement an existing law. Such rules and regulations must be published to be
effective. (Phil. Association of Service Exporters, Inc. v. Torres, 212 SCRA 298 [1992]).
Apart from publication, it is also required that the rules and regulations be filed with the
U.P. Law Center pursuant to Chapter 2 of Book VII of the 1987 Administrative Code
which provides that in addition to the rulemaking requirement provided by law, each rule
shall become effective 15 days from the date of filing as above provided unless a different
date is fixed by law, or specified in the rule in cases of imminent danger to public health,
safety and welfare, the existence of which must be expressed in a statement
accompanying the rule.

7. When are rules and regulations considered valid?

2
In order to be valid, administrative rules and regulations must be germane to the objects
and purposes of the law, conform to the standards that the law prescribes, must be
reasonable and must be related solely to carrying into effect the general provisions of the
law.

8. Rule-making power of SC - Requirements in order that ruled and regulations to

be considered valid
Section 5(5) of Article VII of the Constitution vests in the Supreme Court the “power to
promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights,
pleadings, practice, and procedure in all courts, the admission to the practice of law, the
Integrated Bar, and legal assistance to the underprivileged. Such rules shall provide a
simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of cases, shall be uniform
in all courts of the same grade, and shall not diminish, increase, or modify substantive
rights. Rules of procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain
effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court.

9. Nature of delegation in rate-fixing

The legislature usually delegates its rate-fixing power to administrative agencies for the
latter to fix the rates which public utility companies may charge the public. The
administrative agencies perform this function either by issuing rules and regulations in the
exercise of their quasi-legislative power or by issuing orders affecting a specified person
in the exercise of its quasi-judicial power. The delegation of this quasi-legislative power
may be sustained only upon the ground that same standards for its exercise is provided
and that the legislature in making the delegation has prescribed the manner of the exercise
of the delegated power. The statute making the delegation must be complete ang must fix
a sufficient standard. In case of a delegation of a rate-fixing power, the only standard
which the legislature is required to prescribe for the guidance of the administrative
authority is that the rate be reasonable and just. However, it has been held that even in the
absence of an express requirement as to reasonableness, this standard may be implied.
When the administrative agency concerned establishes a rate, its act must both be non-
confiscatory and must have been established in the manner prescribed by the legislature;
otherwise, in the absence of a fixed standard, the delegation of power becomes
unconstitutional. (American Tobacco Company v. Director of Patents, 67 SCRA 287
[1975]).

10. Substantial evidence

Substantial evidence means relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as
adequate to support a conclusion, and its absence is not shown by stressing that there is a
contrary evidence on record, direct or circumstantial. (Velasquez v. Nery, 211 SCRA 28
[1992]). It means more than a scintilla but may be somewhat less than preponderance,

3
even if other reasonable minds might conceivably opine otherwise, for the appellate court
cannot substitute its own judgment or criterion for that of the administrative or quasi-
judicial agency in determining wherein lies the weight of evidence or what evidence is
entitled to belief. (Reyes v. CA, 216 SCRA 25 [1992]).

11. Doctrines of Primary Jurisdiction and Exhaustion of Admin Remedies -Purpose

of judicial review
The doctrine of primary jurisdiction requires that a plaintiff should first seek relief in
an administrative proceeding before he seeks a remedy in court, even though the matter is
properly presented to the court, which is within its jurisdiction. The court cannot or will
not determine a controversy involving question within the jurisdiction of an
administrative tribunal prior to the decision of that question by the administrative
tribunal:(1) Where the question demands administrative determination requiring special
knowledge, experience, and services of the administrative tribunal; (2) Where the
question requires determination of technical and intricate issues of facts; and (3) Where
uniformity ruling is essential to comply with the purposes of the regulatory statute
administered. (Am. Jur. 2d 688-689). Examples: Identity of land and by the Director of
Lands – Villaflor v. Court of Appeals, 87 SCAD 778, 280 SCRA 297 [1997] Primary
jurisdiction of the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudicatory Board (DARAB) in an
agrarian dispute over the payment of back rentals under a leashold contract – Machete v.
Court of Appeals.
The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies calls for resort first to the
appropriate administrative authorities in the resolution of a controversy falling under their
jurisdiction before the same may be elevated to the courts of justice for review. (Sunville
Timber Products, Inc. v. Abad, 206 SCRA 482 [1992]).

Distinction of the two doctrines

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction differs from the doctrine of exhaustion of
administrative remedies in that the latter applies where a claim is cognizable in the first
instance by the administrative agency alone, judicial interference being withheld until the
administrative process has run its course and the agency action is ripe for review; while
the former applies where the claim is originally cognizable in courts, the judicial process
being suspended pending referral of certain issues to the administrative agency for its
views. (2 Am. Jur. 2d, pp. 691-692).

12. Purpose of judicial review

The purpose of judicial review is to keep the administrative agency within its jurisdiction
and protect substantive rights of parties affected by its acts, rule or decision. The review
is part of checks and balances which is a limitation on the separation of powers among the
three branches of government and which forestalls arbitrary and unjust adjudication.

4
(Meralco Securities Industrial Corp. v. Central Board of Assessment Appeals, 114 SCRA
260 [1992]).