CHAPTER 4: THE QUASI LEGISLATIVE POWER

A. Powers of Administrative Bodies.

a. Quasi-legislative or rule-making power;

b. Quasi-judicial or adjudicatory power; and
c. Determinative powers

B. Quasi-legislative power.

Kinds of Administrative Regulations

Administrative issuances may be distinguished according to their nature and substance:

legislative and interpretative.

Legislative rules or regulations are accorded by the courts or by express provision of statute
the force and effect of law immediately upon going into effect. In such instances, the administrative
agency is acting in a legislative capacity, supplementing the statute, filling in the details, or “making the
law”, and usually acting pursuant to a specific delegation of legislative power.

Interpretative regulations are those which purport to do no more than interpret the statute being
administered, to say what it means. They constitute the administrator’s construction of statute.

Legislative regulation is further classified into the supplementary and contingent.

a. Supplementary regulation is intended to fill in the details of the law and to make explicit what is only
general. Its purpose is to enlarge upon a statute, subject only to the standards fixed therein, to ensure
its effective enforcement in accordance with the legislative will.
b. Contingent regulation is so called because it is issued upon the happening of certain contingency
which the administrative body is given the discretion to determine or to ascertain, under and pursuant to
the law, such circumstances on which the law, by its own terms, makes its own action to depend or to
find the facts or conditions properly prescribed under which a law as passed will or will not operate, that
is, for putting in effect, applying or suspending the law.

A. Requisites

To be valid, the administrative regulation must comply with the following requisites: (63)
1. Its promulgation must be authorized by the legislature.
2. It must be within the scope of the authority given by the legislature.
3. It must be promulgated in accordance with the prescribed procedure.
4. It must be reasonable.

B. Penal Regulations

The power to define and punish crime is exclusively legislative and may not be delegated to the
administrative authorities. While administrative regulations may have the force and effect of law, their
violation cannot give rise to a criminal prosecution unless the legislature makes such violation punishable
and imposes the corresponding sanctions. The administrative authorities themselves cannot prescribe
such penalties.

Special requisites of a valid administrative regulation with a penal sanction are:

1. The law itself must make a violation of the administrative regulation punishable.
2. The law itself must impose and specify the penalty for the violation of the regulation.
3. The regulation must be published.

C. Construction and Interpretation

The principle is well entrenched that statutes, including administrative rules and regulations, operate
prospectively only, unless the legislative intent to the contrary manifest by express terms or by necessary
implication.

The administrative regulation that contravenes the statute is invalid. The intention of the authors must be
sought and given effect, and this intention may usually be discovered in the measure of itself or through the
use of extrinsic aids, like the interpretation given by the body itself, the problem sought to be corrected by
the rule, the conditions obtaining at the time of its promulgation, and the like.

The basic guidelines in resolving disputes concerning the interpretation by an agency of its own
rules and regulations are: (113)
1. Whether the delegation of power was valid;
2. Whether the regulation was within that delegation;
3. Whether it was reasonable regulation under a due process test.

D. Enforcement (115)

The power to promulgate administrative regulations carries with it the power to enforce them. This may be
effected through judicial action, as in petitions for mandamus and injunction, or through sanctions that the
statute itself may allow the administrative body to impose.

The power to impose administrative regulations likewise includes the power to issue opinions and rulings to
enable the administrative agency to properly execute said regulations.

E. Amendment or Repeal

Like the statute, the administrative regulation made thereunder is subject to amendment or repeal by the
authorities that promulgated them in the first place.

CHAPTER V: THE QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER

The QUASI-JUDICIAL POWER is the power of the administrative agency to determine questions of fact to
which the legislative policy is to apply, in accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself. The
administrative body exercises the quasi-judicial power when it performs in a judicial manner an act which is
essentially of an executive or administrative in nature, where the power to act in such manner is incidental
to or reasonably necessary for the performance of the executive or administrative duty entrusted to it.

The proper exercise of the quasi-judicial power requires compliance with two conditions, to wit:
1. Jurisdiction must be properly acquired by the administrative body.
2. Due process must be observed in the conduct of the proceedings.

A. Jurisdiction (125)
Jurisdiction is defined as the authority or competence of an office or body to act on the given matter
or decide on a certain question. Without jurisdiction, the determinations made by the administrative
body are absolutely null and without any legal effect.

1. Rules of Procedure (149)

Where an administrative body is expressly granted the power of adjudication, it is deemed also
vested with the implied power to prescribe the rules to be observed in the conduct of its
proceedings.

Where the statute does not require any particular method of procedure to be followed by an
administrative agency, the agency may adopt any reasonable method to carry out its functions.
Such rules however, shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights. The rules of
procedure of special courts and quasi-judicial bodies shall remain effective unless disapproved
 by the Supreme Court. To be valid, the rules must not violate fundamental rights or encroach
upon constitutional prerogatives, like the rule-making power of the Supreme Court.

2. The Subpoena Power (154)

The power to issue subpoena ad testificandum (tesfify only) and subpoena duces tecum (bring
documents) is not inherent in administrative bodies. It is settled that these bodies may summon
witnesses and require the production of evidence only when duly allowed by law, and always
only in connection with the matter they are authorized to investigate.

Adjudicate, investigate (156)

3. The Contempt Power (157)

The power to punish contempt is essentially judicial and cannot be claimed as an inherent right
by the administrative body. To be validly exercised, it must be expressly conferred upon the
body and must be used only in connection with its quasi-judicial as distinguished from its purely
administrative or routinary functions.

B. Notice and Hearing (161)

The right of notice and hearing is essential to due process and its non-observance or non-
compliance will invalidate the administrative proceedings. Persons are entitled to be notified of any
pending case effecting their interests so that, if they are minded, they may claim the right to appear
therein and present their side or refute the position of opposing parties.

The essence of due process in administrative proceedings is the opportunity to explain one’s side
or a chance to seek reconsideration of the action or ruling complained of.

1. Administrative Due Process (163)

In administrative proceedings, procedural due process has been recognized to include the
following: (170)
1. The right to actual or constructive notice of the institution of proceedings which
may affect a respondent’s legal rights;
2. A real opportunity to be heard personally or with the assistance of counsel, to
present witnesses and evidence in one’s favor, and to defend one’s rights;
3. A tribunal vested with competent jurisdiction and so constituted as to afford a
person charged administratively a reasonable guarantee of honesty as well as
impartiality; and
4. A finding by said tribunal which is supported by substantial evidence submitted
for consideration during the hearing or contained in the records or made known
to the parties affected.

Procedural due process refers to the method or manner by which the law is enforced. It
consists of the two basic rights of notice and hearing, as well as the guarantee of being
heard by an impartial and competent tribunal. Non-observance of these rights will
invalidate the proceedings.

A trial proceeding can be essential through where the findings are necessary to be
based on the credibility of witnesses or of the complainants.

Elements of due process: (188)

1. There must be a court or tribunal clothed with judicial power to hear and determine the matter before it;
2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired over the person of the defendant od=r property which is the
subject of the proceedings;
3. The defendant must be given an opportunity to be heard; and
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful hearing.

Cardinal rights of parties in administrative proceedings: (193)

 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;
5. The decision must be rendered 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 or his own independent consideration of the law
and facts of the controversy and not simply accept the views of the subordinate in arriving at a decision;
7. The board or body should, in all controversial questions, render its decision in such manner that the
parties of the proceeding can know the various issues involved, and the reason for the decision
rendered.

In administrative proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of guilt is only substantial evidence.
Substantial evidence means such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
support a conclusion. It means evidence which affords a substantial basis from which the fact in issue can be
reasonably inferred. (195)

C. Administrative Appeals and Review (197)

D. Enforcement of Decision (200)

Judicial power (210)

E. Res Judicata (212)

CHAPTER VI: JUDICIAL REVIEW (220)

General rule – An administrative decision is final.

An administrative decision may be appealed to the court of justice only if the Constitution or the law permits it
or if the issues to be reviewed involve question of law. Outside of these exceptions, the administrative decision
is no more reviewable by the courts of justice than are judicial decisions reviewable by administrative bodies.

Distinction of Question of Law and Question of Fact (226)

A question of law exists when the doubt or difference centers on what the law is on a certain state of
facts. A question of fact exists if the doubt centers on the truth or falsity of the alleged facts. Though this
delineation seems simple, determining the true nature and extent of the distinction is sometimes
problematic. For example, it is incorrect to presume that all cases where the facts are not in dispute
automatically involve purely questions of law.

There is a question of law if the issue raised is capable of being resolved without need of reviewing the
probative value of the evidence. The resolution of the issue must rest solely on what the law provides
on the given set of circumstances. Once it is clear that the issue invites a review of the evidence
presented, the question posed is one of fact. If the query requires a re-evaluation of the credibility of
witnesses, or the existence or relevance of surrounding circumstances and their relation to each other,
the issue in that query is factual.

Methods of Review (229)

There are two doctrines that must be considered in connection with the judicial review of administrative
decisions. The first is the doctrine of primary jurisdiction or prior resort and the second is the doctrine of
exhaustion of administrative remedies.

1. Primary Jurisdiction or Prior Resort

 The doctrine of primary jurisdiction does not warrant a court to arrogate unto itself
authority to resolve a controversy the jurisdiction over which is initially lodged with an
administrative body of special competence. The doctrine of primary jurisdiction simply calls for
the determination of administrative questions, which are ordinarily questions of fact, by
administrative agencies rather than courts of justice.

2. Doctrine of Exhaustion of Administrative Remedies (263)

Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies, an administrative decision

must first be appealed to the administrative superiors up to the highest level before it may
elevate to a court of justice for review. (264)

A.Reasons (269)
Among the reasons for the doctrine are the following:
1. The administrative superiors, if given the opportunity, can correct the errors committed by their
subordinates.
2. Courts should as much as possible refrain from disturbing the findings of administrative bodies in
deference to the doctrine of separation of powers.
3. On practical grounds, it is best that the courts, which are burdened enough as they are with judicial
cases, should not be saddled with the review of administrative cases.
4. Judicial review of administrative cases is usually effected through the special civil actions of certiorari,
mandamus and prohibition which are available only if there is no other plain, speedy and adequate
remedy.

B.Exceptions (275)
1. When the question raised is purely legal.
2. When the administrative body is in estoppel
3. When the act complained of is patently illegal
4. When there is urgent need for judicial intervention
5. When the claimed involve is small
6. When irreparable damage will be suffered
7. When there is no plain, speedy and adequate remedy.
8. When strong public interest is involved.
9. When the subject of the controversy is private land
10. In quo warranto proceedings.

C. Appeal to the President (293-294)

D. Effect of Non-Compliance
Failure to observe the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not affect the jurisdiction
of the court. The only effect of non-compliance is that it will deprive the complainant of a cause of action
which is a ground for a motion to dismiss. If not invoked at the proper time, this ground is deemed
waived and the court can take cognizance of the case and try it.

Questions reviewable (296)

Question of Fact and Question of Law

A question of law exists when there is a doubt or controversy as to what the law is on a certain state of facts.
On the other hand, there is a question of fact when the doubt or difference arises as to the truth or the alleged
falsehood of the alleged facts. For a question to be one of law, it must involve no examination of the probative
value of the evidence presented by the litigants or any of them.

Question of Fact (300)

As a general rule, factual findings of administrative agencies, that are affirmed by the CA are conclusive upon
and generally not reviewable by this court. Exceptions: (310)
Question of Law (313)