Finals Flashcards
Quasi-legislative power/Rule-making power
Power to make rules and regulations that have the force and effect of law; jurisdiction of courts on the first instance
Quasi-judicial/administrative adjudicatory power
Power to hear and determine questions of fact to which legislative policy will apply and to decide in accordance with standards laid down by law; may be jurisdiction of quasi-judicial agencies first before court
2-step test
0) Can the agency issue rules in the first place?
1) Has Congress directly spoken on the question?
2) If not, is the agency’s answer within permissible construction?
When is judicial review available?
When they
1) exceed their authority or
2) the act is palpably wrong (Uy v. Palomar)
3) Exercised unconstitutional powers
4) Clearly acted arbitrarily and without regard to their duty
5) Grave abuse of discretion
6) Decision is vitiated by fraud, imposition or mistake (Manuel v. VIllena)
What to do when judicial review is not expressly authorized?
Look at:
1) Type of problem
2) History of the statute
Factors that are responsible for the emergence of agencies
1) Growing complexity of modern life
2) Multiplication of subjects
3) Increased difficulty of administering laws
Separation of powers
No delegated powers can be further delegated; meant to prevent undue concentration of powers
Admin agency
An agency that exercises a combo of executive, legislative and judicial power
Authorized to make rules, issue licenses, grant rights/privileges and adjudicate cases
Administrative functions
- Regulation and control over conduct and affairs of individuals
- Promulgation of rules and regulations to carry out legislative policu
Valid rules and regulations (Genuino v. De Lima)
1) Within the scope of the statutory authority
2) Germane to the object and purpose of the law
3) Conform to and be consistent with the enabling statute
Doctrine of qualified political agency
Heads are the alter egos of the President; acts by then are deemed acts of the President (unless the President disapproves such acts)
Kinds of congressional oversight
1) Congressional scrutiny
2) Congressional investigation
3) Legislative supervision
Congressional scrutiny
Looking at facts that are readily available by:
1) requesting info and reports
2) Power of appropriation & power of confirmation
To determine economy and efficiency of gov’t obligations
Congressional investigation
Inquiries in aid of legislation over:
1) Everything concerning administration of existing laws as well as proposed/possibly needed statutes
Limitations to congressional investigation
1) Must be in aid of legislative functions
2) In accordance with duly published rules of procedure
3) Person appearing is afforded their constitutional rights
Legislative supervision
NOT ALLOWED
Limitations on congress (Abakada)
1) Must not vest itself with executive/judicial power
2) Must follow the procedure for enactment of laws and presentment
Limits of congressional oversight
1) Scrutiny
2) Investigation
Legislative veto (ILLEGAL)
Any provision requiring the President.agency to present the proposed IRRs of a law to Congress who then has the power to dis/approve the regulation
Options to Congress
1) Formulate the details themselves
2) Assign to the executive branch the responsibility of making the rules
Non-delegation doctrine (Santiago v. COMELEC)
GEN: Congress can’t delegate its lawmaking function
EXC: It can when it:
1) Declares the policy
2) Fixes a standard
Purpose of judicial review
1) Keep agencies within its jurisdiction
2) Protect substantial rights of parties affected by its decisions
Essential characteristics of an Ombudsman
1) Political independence
2) Accessibility and expedition
3) Investigatory power
4) Absence of revisory jurisdiction
Ombudsman power
1) To prosecute on his own initiative or upon complaint by any person, any act or omission of any public officer or employee, office or agency, when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient
2) Direct the officer to take appropriate action and recommend their punishment and ensure compliance to it
Who can assist Ombudsman
Can use
- his own personnel
- any fiscal
- state prosecutor
- lawyer in gov’t service;
to act as special investigator/prosecutor
Authority of ombudsman can be over
- private deals
- over complaints of a technical matter IF there is a suspicion of even just a tinge of impropriety in the grant of the determination of a technical matter
- complaints that don’t have a pending action
- complaints outside Sandigan jurisdiction
No ombudsman authority over:
- criminal/admin complaints against a Judge
Recommendatory power of ombudsman
- Means he’s allowed to determine the administrative liability and compel the head of office to implement said penalty
Exceptions to non-delegation doctrine
1) Tariff powers
2) Emergency powers
3) People at large
4) Local governments
5) Administrative bodies
Valid regulation (Edu v. Ericta)
1) Germane to the object and purpose of the law
2) Not in contradiction to but in conformity with the standards prescribed by law
Valid delegation (Santiago v. COMELEC)
1) Law is complete in itself; setting forth the policy to be implemented
2) Fixes a standard
What is a sufficient standard? (Santiago v. Comelec)
1) Limits are sufficiently determinate and determinable
2) It defines legislative policy, marks its limits, maps boundaries, and specifies the agency to apply it
3) Indicates the circumstances under which the legislative command will be effected
Test for validity of legislative delegation (Abakada v. Purisima)
1) Completeness test – Did the law set forth the policy to be executed?
2) Sufficient standard test – Did the law provide adequate guidelines/limitations? Did it specify the limits of the authority granted? Did it announce the legislative policy? Did it identify the conditions under which it was to be implemented
Delegation of legislation vs. Authority to its execution (Compañia General de Tabacos)
FIRST: Involves discretion as to what the law shall be; NOT ALLOWED
SECOND: Exercised under and in pursuance of law; ALLOWED
Power to fix boundaries (Pelaez)
1) Fixing common boundaries – admin
2) Creating municipal corporations – legislative
Delegation of rate-fixing power (PHILCOMSAT)
1) Reasonable
2) just
Rate-fixing – Legislative or QJ?
1) Legislative – meant to apply to all enterprises of a given kind nation-wide
2) Quasi-judicial – Applies to one entity; notice and hearing required
Permissible delegations
1) Ascertainment of fact
2) Filling in of details
Ascertainment of fact (Lovina v. Moreno)
Power to declare the existence of facts that call into operation its provisions and determine appropriate facts as a basis for procedure
Filling in of details (Alegre v. Collector)
Administrative functions to carry out the purpose of a statute
Filling in of details (Alegre v. Collector)
Administrative functions to carry out the purpose of a statute
Rule
Any agency statement of general applicability
Contested case
Any proceedings, wherein legal rights, duties or privileges asserted by specific parties are to be determined after hearing
Filing
File with UPLC 3 copies of every rule
Effectivity
Effective 15 days from filing UNLESS
1) A different date is fixed by law; or
2) Specified in the rule in case of imminent danger to public health, safety and welfare, existence of which must be expressed
Rule on public participation
1) Need to afford interested parties the opportunity to submit their views prior to adoption
2) IN rate-fixing, it needs publishing in a newspaper of general circulation at least 2 weeks before 1st hearing
Administrative power
Work of applying policies and enforcing orders
AO (Ople v. Torres)
Acts of Presidents regarding particular aspects of gov’t operation pursuant to his duty as admin head
Limitations on rule-making power
1) Can’t extend the law and amend it
2) Can’t be contrary to the spirit and letter of the law
3) Regulatory power already granted can’t be revoked
4) If regulatory system already set up, can’t dismantle it
Estoppel of state (PBC v. CIR)
State can’t be put in estoppel for mistakes made by its officials or agents
When is change of rules allowed (GMA v. COMELEC)
When it is properly explained with sufficient basis
Valid regulation (Lokin v. COMELEC)
1) Promulgation is authorized by legislature
2) Within scope of authority granted
3) In accordance with prescribed procedure
4) Reasonable
Not covered by the rule on publication
1) Interpretative regulations
2) LIs issued by admin superiors
3) Municipal ordinances
Interpretative regulations
Internal in nature; only for personnel of the admin agency, not the public
Covered by rule on publication
1) PDs
2) EOs
3) ARRs
4) City charters
5) MB Circulars
Art. 2, CC
Publication is allowed in Official Gazette, or in 2 newspapers of general circulation
Penal regulation (People v. Maceren)
Power to declare what acts are criminal belongs only to legislative. Agency can only have rule-making power over how to put it into effect.
IRR vs. Admin interpretation (Victorias v. SSC)
FIRST makes a new law w/ the force and effect of a valid law.
- Partakes of the nature of a statute.
- Statutes are usually couched in general terms
SECOND merely interprets a pre-existing law.
- Is at best merely advisory
Operative fact doctrine (Peralta v. CSC)
Actual existence of a statute prior to the determination of its unconstitutionality is an operative fact that may have consequences that can’t always be ignored
Rule on licenses
Can’t be changed without notice and hearing
Non-expiration of licenses rule
When renewal application is timely and sufficient, license won’t expire until application has been finally determined by the agency
Rule on revocation of licenses
GEN: Always revocable
EXC: When there’s an explicit contract upon good consideration to that effect
Notice and hearing in contested cases
- Notice at least 5 days before hearing
- Opportunity to present evidence and arguments
- Official record of its proceedings must be kept by the agency
Rules on evidence in contested cases
- Probative value given to evidence commonly accepted by reasonably prudent men in the conduct of their affairs
- Documentary evidence accepted
- Right to cross-examine witnesses
- Agency may take notice of judicially cognizable facts and of generally cognizable technical/scientific facts
Rule on subpoena
Agency can require:
1) Attendance of witnesses (subpoena ad testificandum)
2) Production of books, papers, documents and other pertinent data (subpoena duces tecum)
Powers of agency in contested cases
1) Invoke aid of RTC
2) Contempt (but GEN: with aid of court)
Rule on the decision
- In writing
- Stating clearly and distinctly the facts and law on which it is based
- Done within 30 days from submission
Finality of Order
Attained 15 days after receipt of a copy.
*1 MR can be filed
When is an agency exercising judicial function?
- Has the power to determine what the law is and what are the legal rights of the parties; and then
- Undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicates on the rights of the parties
Power of inquisition (Evangelista v. Jarencio)
A power not dependent on a case/controversy; agency can investigate merely on suspicion that the law is being violated/just wants assurance that it’s not
Scope of power of inquisition (Evangelista v. Jarencio)
1) Proceedings meant to obtain information
2) General inquiries
Admin subpoena powers vs. Judicial powers (Evangelista v. Jarencio)
Needs no:
- pending case in court
- probable cause
- complaint
Requisites for valid enforcement of subpoena (Evangelista v. Jarencio)
1) Inquiry is within authority of agency
2) Demand not too indefinite
3) Information sought is reasonably relevant
Guidelines to subpoena powers (Evangelista v. Jarencio)
1) Consti rights remain protected
2) Can’t be unreasonable/oppressive
3) Must be relevant to the investigation
4) For a lawfully authorized purpose
5) Witness might shed some helpful light
When is power of contempt illegal
1) No power was granted
2) Exercise of power was improper
Power to issue warrants
GEN: Only judge acn issue
EXC: Only allowed in order to carry out a final decision of deportation; Before that, President can effect arrest and expulsion
How to deport
1) Immigration law through BID
2) AC through the President
Jurisdiction over deportation cases
Belongs to Immigration agency; to try and hear deportation cases
When may courts intervene in citizenship claims cases?
When the claim to citizenship is substantial
Requisites for valid imposition of fines and penalties
1) Subject is within congress’ control
2) Penalty is admin in nature
3) Agency is expressly authorized by law to impose it
Examples of sufficient standards
1) Interest of law and order
2) Public interest
3) Justice, equity and substantial merits of the case
4) Adequate and efficient instruction
5) Promote simplicity, economy, or efficiency
6) Maintain monetary stability, promote rising levels of production and real income
7) Sense and experience of men
*Reasonableness
When is a standard vague
1) Does not sufficiently apprise them of what may reasonably be foreseen to be illicit
2) Judicial review is rendered inoperative
Appeal
- Taken to department head
- Done within 15 days after receipt of decision
Cardinal primary rights (Ang Tibay)
1) A hearing
2) Tribunal must consider the evidence presented
3) Decision must be supported by evidence
4) Evidence is substantial
5) Decision rendered on the evidence presented or at least contained in record and disclosed to the parties
6) Court acts on its own independent consideration
7) Parties can know issues involved, and the reasons for the decisions rendered
Nature of admin proceedings
Technical rules of court are not to be applied rigidly
Due process
Opportunity to explain one’s side or a chance to seek reconsideration
Substantive due process
Intrinsic validity of law that interferes with the rights of a person to her property;
Asks: Does the gov’t have sufficient justification for the deprivation of a right?
Procedural due process
Compliance with procedural steps; Involves procedures that the gov’t must follow before deprivation
Weight given to admin decisions
GEN: Given credence and are generally binding. Findings of fact are controlling if based on substantial evidence
EXC:
1) Facts are not supported by evidence
2) Initiated by fraud, imposition or collusion
3) Procedures are irregular
4) Palpable errors are committed
5) Grave abuse of discretion or capriciousness is manifest
3-fold liability rule (Domingo v. Rayala)
Wrongful acts/omissions may give rise to civil, criminal and administrative liability
When is notice and hearing not required
1) Discretion is exercised by an officer vested with it upon undisputed fact
2) In petitions for extension of stay of aliens
3) In order to yield to the necessities of protecting viral public interests thru police power
Valid memorandum decisions
1) Provide for direct access to the facts and law being adopted
2) Facts are accepted by both parties and easily determinable by the judge and there are no doctrinal complications that would require an extended discussion of laws involved
Jurisdiction
The authority to hear and determine a cause and right to act in a case.
How is jurisdiction determined
- By law in force at the time of the filing of the complaint
- By Consti
- NOT by voluntary act/agreement of the parties
- NOT acquired/waived/conferred by acquiescence of the court
Substantial evidence
That relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion
When is inspection proper
- Evidence is conflicting
- Courts need it to help in clearing doubt
Non quieta movere
What was already terminated should not be disturbed
Exceptions to the doctrine of exhaustion of admin remedies (Estrada v. CA)
1) Violation of due process
2) Issue involved is a purely legal question
3) Admin action is patently illegal; amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
4) Estoppel on the part of the admin agency
5) Irreparable injury
6) Respondent is a secretary– an alter ego of the President and therefore bears implied approval
7) To resort to the remedy would be unreasonable
8) Amount to a nullification of a claim
9) Subject matter is private land in land case proceedings
10) No plain, speedy and adequate remedy
11) Urgency of judicial intervention
12) No admin review is provided by law
13) Qualified political agency applies
14) Issue of non-exhaustion of admin remedies is rendered moot
- *Estoppel by laches
- Admin remedy is merely permissive (Corpuz v. Cuaderno)
Exhaustion of admin remedies
Where the law provides for remedies against the action of an admin body, relief to the courts can only be sought after exhausting such reliefs
Doctrine of primary jurisdiction
If the case is such that its determination requires the expertise, specialized skills and knowledge of the proper administrative bodies because technical matters or intricate questions of facts are involved, then relief must first be obtained in an administrative proceeding before a remedy will be supplied by the courts
Exception to doctrine of primary jurisdiction
Estoppel by laches
Rationale behind doctrine of exhaustion of admin remedies vs. doctrine of primary jurisdiction
FIRST gives the admin body the chance to correct its mistake or error and to prevent unnecessary and premature recourse to courts.
SECOND guides a court in determining whether it should refrain from exercising its jurisdiction until after an admin agency has ruled on it first
Appellate jurisdictions
Commissions
- To the SC
RTCs and quasi-judicial agencies
- To the CA
Jurisdiction of the CA
Original
- MPCHCQW
- Annulment of RTC judgements
- RTC judgements and quasi-judicial agencies
Certiorari
When any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions has acted w/o or in excess of their jurisdiction or with GADALEJ AND there is no appeal or any plain, speedy, and adequate remedy
When certiorari proper?
1) When needed to prevent irreparable damage and injury
2_ Appeal would be slow, inadequate and insufficient
3) Urgency
4) GADALEJ
Grave abuse of discretion
1Power was exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility; or the judge, tribunal, or board evaded a positive duty, or virtually refused to perform the duty enjoined or to act in contemplation of law LIKE acting in a capricious/whimsical manner = lack of jurisdiction
When will strict adherence to rules be suspended?
1) Matters of life, liberty, honor or property
2) Compelling circumstances
3) Merits of the case
4) Cause not entirely attributable to the fault of the party favored by the suspension of the rules
5) Lack of showing that review is merely frivolous
6) Other party will not be unjustly prejudiced thereby
Question of law
- Doubt arises as to what the law is on a certain set of facts or circumstances.
- Conclusion based on a set of facts
Question of fact
- The issue raised on appeal pertains to the truth or falsity of the alleged facts
- Non-reviewable if supported by substantial evidence
Expanded certiorari jurisdiction
To determiner WON there has been GADALEJ by any branch/instrumentality of the Gov’t
Requisites for judicial review by SC
1) Actual case or controversy
2) Standing to challenge
3) Question of constitutionality raised at the earliest possible opportunity
4) issue of constitutionality is the very lis mota of the case
Prohibition
Proceedings of any tribunal, corporation, officer or person, whether exercising judicial, quasi-judicial or ministerial functions are (1) without or in excess of its or his jurisdiction or (2) with GADALEJ and there is no appeal or other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
Nature of prohibition
- preventive remedy
- not allowed when there are other available remedies
Mandamus
When any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person (1) unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically enjoins as a duty resulting from an office, trust, or station, or (2) unlawfully excludes another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled and there is no other plain, speedy and adequate remedy
Effect of mandamus
1) Commands the respondent to do the act required
2) Pay damages sustained by the petitioner
Mandamus
- Meant to compel performance, when refused, of a ministerial duty
- Person demanding must have a clear legal right
- Must be the imperative duty of the defendant to perform the act
Ministerial act
An act which an officer performs in a given state of facts, in a prescribed manner, in obedience to the mandate of a legal authority
Discretionary
The power or right conferred upon the office by law of acting officially under certain circumstances according to the dictates of his own judgement and conscience
Declaratory Relief
An action which any person interested under a deed, will, contract, or other written instrument, or whose rights are affected by a statute, EO or regulation, or ordinance, may, before breach or violation thereof, bring to determine any question of construction or validity arising under the instrument or statute and for a declaration of his rights or duties hereunder.
Requisites for declaratory relief
1) Must be a justiciable controversy
2) Controversy is between persons whose interests are adverse
3) Legal interest in the controversy
4) Ripe for judicial determination
Purpose of declaratory relief
Provide for adjudication of legal rights, duties or status of the respective parties
Habeas corpus
Writ directing the person who is detaining another to:
1) produce the body of the prisoner
2) at a designated time and place
3) with the day and cause of his capture and detention
4) to do, submit and receive whatsoever
Injunction
A party is ordered to do or refrain from doing a certain act. It may be filed as a main action or as a provisional remedy in the main action
Preliminary injunction
An order granted at any stage of an action or proceeding prior to the judgement or final order requiring a party or a court, agency or a person to refrain from a particular act or acts (prohibitory injunction). It may also require the performance of act or acts (mandatory injunction). This is an ancillary remedy, thus it cannot exist except only as part or an incident of an independent action or proceeding.
Requisites for injunction
1) Verified application
2) Applicant has a right to relief/right to be protected and the act complained violates such right
3) Applicant establishes a need to restrain the acts and if not enjoined, would work injustice to him
4) Bond unless otherwise exempted
5) Threatened injury is incapable of pecuniary estimation
Preliminary mandatory injunction
1) Right is clear
2) Willful invasion of petitioner’s right
3) injury is a continuing one
4) Effect is to re-establish a pre-existing relation arbitrarily interrupted by respondent
Discretion
The power/right conferred upon the office by law of acting officially under certain circumstances according to the dictates of his own judgement and conscious and not controlled by the judgement or conscience of others.
