ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Course Outline
By: Atty. Ernesto C. Salao
ecsalao@blogspot.com

I. GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Definitions
a. Administrative Law
b. Government of the Republic of the Philippines (see Administrative Code of 1987,
Section 2)
c. National Government (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
d. Local Government (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
e. Agency of the Government (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
f. Department (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
g. Bureau (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
h. Office (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
i. Instrumentality (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
j. Regulatory agency (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
k. Chartered institution (see Administrative Code of 1987, Section 2)
l. Government-owned or controlled corporation (see Administrative Code of 1987,
Section 2)
Kinds of Administrative Law
Scope of Administrative Law
Sources of Administrative Law
Cases:
1. Mecano v. COA, 216 SCRA 500
2. Leveriza v. IAC 157 SCRA 282
3. Luzon Development Bank v. Association of Luzon Dev. Bank Employees, 64 SCAD
918 or 249 SCRA 162
4. Iron and Steel Authority v. Court of Appeals, 65 SCAD 261 or 249 SCRA 538
5. Ignacia Balicas v. Fact-Finding & Intelligence Bureau (FFIB), Office of the
Ombudsman, G.R. No. 145972, March 23, 2004
6. Malaga v. Panachos, Jr., 213 SCRA 516
7. Preclaro v. Sandiganbayan, 247 SCRA 454
II. ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

Creation, Establishment and Abolition of Administrative Agencies

2003 Bar Exams: Validity of abolition of long-standing Bureau
under DILG by the President.
Cases:
1. Crisostomo v. Court of Appeals, 258 SCRA 134
2. Viola v. Alunan, III, 277 SCRA 409 (1997)
3. Biraogo v. The Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, G.R. No. 192935, Dec. 7, 2010
4. Kapisanan ng mga Kawani ng Energy Regulatory Board v. Commissioner Fe Barin,
G.R. No. 150974, June 29, 2007
5. Commission on Human Rights Employees Association v. Commission on Human
Rights, G.r. No. 155336, November 25, 2004
Reorganization of Administrative Agencies
a. Definition of Reorganization
b. Presidents power to reorganize; basis
c. Power of other agencies to reorganize; limitations

Cases:

1. Anak Mindanao Party-List Group v. The Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 166052,
August 29, 2007
2. Bagaoisan v. National Tobacco Administration, G.R. No. 152845, August 5, 2003
3. National Land Titles and Deeds Registration Administration v. Civil Service
Commission, 221 SCRA 145
4. Sinon v. Civil Service Commission, 215 SCRA 410
5. Domingo v. DBP, 207 SCRA 766
6. Eugenio v. Civil Service Commission, 60 SCAD 262 or 242 SCRA 196 (1995)
7. Larin v. Executive Secretary, G.R. No. 112745, October 16, 1007


Reasons/purposes for creating administrative agencies
Common types of administrative agencies


III. POWER OF ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

General Principles
Cases:

1. Makati Stock Exchange, Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 16 SCRA 623
(1965)
2. Kilusang Bayan, etc. v. Dominguez, 205 SCRA 92 (1992)
3. Senator Robert S. Jaworksi v. PAGCOR, G.R. No. 144463, January 14, 2004
4. Radio Communications of the Phils., v. National Telecommunications Commission,
215 SCRA 455 (1992)
5. Matienzo v. Abellera, 162 SCRA 11 (1988)
6. Cooperative Development Authority v. Dolefil Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries
Cooperative, Inc., 382 SCRA 552 (2002)
7. Laguna Lake Development Authority v. Court of Appeals, 49 SCAD 649 or 231 SCRA
292 (1994)

Quasi-Legislative Power (Rule-Making)

a. Legislative power
b. Doctrine of Separation of Powers
c. Non-delegation of legislative power

d. Exceptions to the doctrine of non-delegation of legislative power

Cases:

1. US v. Barrias, 11 Phil. 327 (1908)
2. People v. Vera, 65 Phil 327 (1937)
3. Maceda v. Macaraig, 197 SCRA 771 (1991)
4. Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. POEA, 166 SCRA 533 (1988)
5. Rabor v. CSC, 61 SCAD 569 or 244 SCRA 614 (1995)
6. Araneta v. Gatmaitan, 101 Phil. 328 (1956)
7. Edu v. Ericta, 35 SCRA 481 (1970)


a. Kinds of Administrative Rules and Regulations

o Supplementary or detailed legislation
o Interpretative legislation
o Contingent legislation

Cases:

1. ABAKADA Guro Party List v. Purisima, G.R. No. 166715, August 14, 2008
2. Gutierrez v. DBM, G.R. No. 153266, March 18, 2010 (and other allied cases)
3. BPI Leasing v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 127624, Nov. 18, 2003
4. Board of Trustees v. Velasco, G.R. No. 170436, February 2, 2011
b. Requisites for Validity of Administrative Rules and Regulations

Cases:

1. Dagan v. Philippine Racing Commission, G.R. No. 175220, February 12, 2009
2. Smart Communications Inc., v. NTC, G.R. No. 151908, August 12, 2003
3. Conte v. Commission on Audit, 76 SCAD 16 or 264 SCRA 19 (1996)
c. Penal Rules and Regulations


2002 Bar Exams: Validity of rules and regulations issued by a
Department Secretary providing penalties.
Cases:

1. People v. Santos, 63 Phil. 300 (1936)
2. People v. Que Po Lya, 94 Phil. (1954)
3. People v. Maceren, 79 SCRA 450 (1977)

d. Force and effect of administrative rules and regulations

Cases:

1. Peralta v. Civil Service Commission, 212 SCRA 425 (1992)
2. Javellana v. DILG, 212 SCRA 475 (1992)

e. Requirements of notice and hearing or publication








Case:

1. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Court of Appeals, 261 SCRA 236 (1996)


2000 Bar Exam: Requirement of notice and hearing of
proposed administrative rules.

f. Construction of administrative rules and regulations
Case:

1. Victorias Milling Co v. Social Security Commission, 4 SCRA 627
2. National Food Authority v. MASADA Security Agency, G.R. No. 163448, March 8,
2005
3. SGMC Realty Corporation v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 126999, August 30,
2000

g. Prospective or retroactive operation of rules and regulation
Case:

1. Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Azucena T. Reyes, G.R. No. 159694, January
27, 2006
2. Rosario Dadulo v. Honorable Court of Appeals, Office of the Ombudsman, et al, G.R.
No. 175451, Sept. 28, 2007

h. Amendment or repeal of administrative rules and regulations
Case:

1. Republic of the Philippines v. Express Telecommunications Company, Inc., G.R. No.
147096, January 15, 2002

i. Administrative rule and interpretation distinguished

o. Kinds of executive interpretations of the law

Case:

1. San Miguel Corp. v. Inciong, 103 SCRA 139 (1981)

p. Weight accorded to contemporaneous construction

Case:

1. Asturias Sugar Central Inc. v. Commissioner of Customs, 29 SCRA 617 (1967)

r. When contemporaneous construction disregarded

s. Erroneous construction creates no right; exception