Gerald A. Hindap Assignment No.

Forms of Adjudicatory powers of Administrative agencies.

Involving specific parties, these terms aim to describe powers and functions
which involve the decision or determination by administrative agencies of the rights,
duties, and obligations of specific individuals and persons, as contrasted with
powers, of administrative agencies which, while they may involve decisions or
determinations in the broadest sense, involve persons generally rather than specially,
and usually operate only prospectively.
Involving judicial function exercised by a person other than a judge, speaking
of the functions of an administrative agency, the terms "quasi-judicial" and
"adjudicatory" are synonymous or correlative, but not all determinations by an
administrative agency are judicial in nature or quasi-judicial. One or the other is used
to designate a power or function that partakes of the judicial but is exercised by a
person other than a judge. It is the power of an administrative agency to hear and
determine, or to ascertain facts and decide by the application of rules to the
ascertained facts. By this power, administrative authorities are enabled to interpret
and apply not only implementing rules and regulations promulgated by them but also
the laws entrusted to their administration.
Involving exercise of judicial power conveniently styled "quasi-judicial", the
fact remains that the function of any particular act must be either administrative or
judicial and there can in reality be no middle or halfway ground between them. The
use of such terms is simply a convenient way of approving the exercise of a judicial
power by an administrative agency or approving review by the courts of the exercise
of power by administrative agencies.
Distinguished from judicial power.
Where function primarily administrative the purpose of deciding questions as
to the powers with which an administrative agency may be vested, the true rule is
that where the function of the agency is primarily administrative and the power to
hear and determine controversies is granted as an incident to the administrative duty,
the power is administrative, or at least it is properly exercisable by administrative
agencies. Such a power is variously held to be judicial but validly conferred, or to
be quasi-judicial or administrative adjudicatory power
 Where the duty is primarily to decide questions of legal rights between private
parties with respect to the matter in controversy, such decision being the primary
object and not merely incidental to regulation or some other administrative function,
the question raised is judicial involving the exercise of judicial function.
Extent of judicial or quasi-judicial powers of administrative agencies.
Limited delegation of judicial or quasi-judicial authority to administrative
agencies is well- recognized in our jurisdiction, basically because the need for
special competence and experience has been recognized as essential in the resolution
of questions of complex or specialized character and because of the companion
recognition that the dockets of our regular courts have remained crowded and
clogged.
In general, the quantum of judicial or quasi-judicial powers which an
administrative agency may exercise is defined in the enabling act of such agency. In
other words, the extent to which an administrative agency may exercise such powers
depend largely, if not wholly, on the provisions of the statute creating or empowering
such agency. The grant of original jurisdiction on a quasi-judicial agency is not
implied.
The rule is that when an administrative body or agency is conferred quasi-
judicial functions, all controversies relating to the subject matter pertaining to its
specialization are deemed to be included within its jurisdiction. Split jurisdiction is
not favored.
Where there is nothing in the law that would suggest that a particular power
has been granted, such as the power to decide contractual disputes, the same cannot
be exercised.9 Except for constitutional officials who can trace their competence to
act to the fundamental law itself, a public official must locate in the statute relied
upon, a grant of power before he can exercise it.
It is the general policy of the courts to sustain the decision of administrative
authorities not only on the basis of the doctrine of separation of powers but also for
their presumed knowledgeability and even expertise in the laws they are entrusted
to enforce. A court cannot compel an agency to do a particular act or to enjoin such
act which is within the latter's prerogative, except when in the exercise of its
authority, it gravely abuses or exceeds its jurisdiction.
Distinguished from investigative power.
"Investigate" commonly understood, means to examine, explore, inquire or
delve or probe into, research on, study. The dictionary definition of "investigate" is
"to observe or study closely; inquire into systematically: "to search or inquire into"
xxx to subject to an official probe x x x: to conduct an official inquiry." The purpose
of an investigation, of course, is to discover, to find out, to learn, obtain information.
Nowhere included or intimated is the notion of settling, deciding or resolving a
controversy involved in the facts inquired into by application of the law to the facts
established by the inquiry.
"Adjudicate," commonly or popularly understood, means to adjudge,
arbitrate, judge, decide, determine, resolve, rule on, settle. The dictionary defines the
term as "to settle finally on the merits of issues raised: x x x to pass judgment on:
settle judicially: x x x act as judge." And "adjudge" means "to decide or rule upon
as a judge or with judicial or quasi-judicial powers."
In a legal sense, "adjudicate" means "To settle in the exercise of judicial
authority; To determine finally. Synonymous with adjudge in its strictest sense;" and
"adjudge" means "To pass on judicially, to decide, settle, or decree, or to sentence
or condemn, xxx implies a judicial determination of a fact, and the entry of a
judgment."
Distinguished from legislative power or rule-making.
A rule is the product of rule-making and rule-making is a part of the
administrative process that resembles a legislature's enactment of statutes.
Adjudication’4 is the part of the administrative process that resembles a court's
decision of a case.
Judicial, quasi-judicial or adjudicatory action investigates, declares, and
enforces liabilities as they stand on present or past facts and under laws supposed to
exist, while legislation or quasi-legislation, or rule- making looks to the future and
changes existing conditions by making a new rule to be applied thereafter to all or
some part of those subject thereto.
The adjudicatory function applies to named persons or to specific situations,
while the second lays down general regulations that apply to or affect classes of
persons or situations.16 In other words, while adjudications are typically designed
to apply to named parties, usually only a few, rule-making involves the issuance of
rules or the making of determinations which are addressed to indicated but unnamed
and unspecified persons or situations.
In exercising its quasi-judicial function, an administrative agency adjudicates
the rights of persons before it. The determination of facts and the applicable law as
the basis for the exercise of judicial discretion are essential for the performance of
this function. On these considerations, it is elementary that the due process
requirements which include prior notice and hearing must be observed. As a general
rule, prior notice and hearing are not essential to the validity of rules and regulations
promulgated to govern future conduct since there is no determination of past events
or facts that have to be established or ascertained.
Nature of particular acts.
The action of an administrative agency in granting or denying, or in
suspending or revoking, a license, permit, franchise, or certificate of public
convenience and necessity, is not judicial but is administrative or quasi-judicial.
As previously pointed out, the function of prescribing rates by an
administrative agency may be either a legislative or an adjudicative function.
Adjudicatory powers have also been classified as administrative on the one
hand, or as judicial in nature or quasi-judicial, on the other hand. Among the acts
held, for various purposes, to be administrative or not judicial are: (a) auditing
accounts of a receiver of public moneys; (b) determinations of the Civil Service
Commission in respect of classification and grading of positions in the civil service;
(c) passing upon a petition to call an election; (d) the function of draft boards; (e)
investigation for the purpose of ascertaining the correctness of a tax return; (f) the
parole of prisoners, at least so long as the duration of the sentence is not affected,
and the revocation of parole; (g) the transfer of prisoners from one place of
imprisonment to another; (h) making a preliminary finding of probable cause for the
arrest of an accused; (i) the initial determination of whether certain things constitute
public nuisances; (j) closing and taking charge of banks found to be insolvent or
unsafe and assessment of their stockholders; (k) determination whether or not there
had been a violation of the terms of collective bargaining agreement; (I) the issuance
of a warrant of distraint or levy in tax cases and certain other administrative
enforcement devices; and (m) deportation of alien.
Classification of adjudicatory powers.
The adjudicatory powers of administrative agencies have been classified as follows:
Enabling powers, they are usually characterized by the grant or denial of
permit or authorization. The chief application of this power is, of course, in the
granting or denial of licenses to engage in a particular business or occupation, but it
is also exemplified by the powers of administrative agencies to permit the issuance
of securities, to grant certificates of public convenience or necessity, to grant
broadcasting licenses, and any other of similar nature. Of course, rule-making
authority is also exercised by licensing bodies.
Directing powers, they are illustrated by the corrective powers of public utility
commissions, powers of assessment under the revenue laws, reparations under
public utility laws, and awards under workmen's compensation laws, and powers of
abstract determination such as definition-valuation, classification, and fact finding.
Dispensing powers, they are exemplified by the authority to exempt from or
relax a general prohibition, or authority to relieve from an affirmative duty. In form
and as a matter of legislative terminology, dispensing power may be
indistinguishable from a licensing power, but it differs from it in purpose.
Summary powers, the term is used to designate administrative power to apply
compulsion or force against person or property to effectuate a legal purpose without
a judicial warrant to authorize such action. Often, such powers are summary in both
senses of the term, that is, they involve direct administrative action taken without
notice and hearing.
Equitable powers, an administrative tribunal having power to determine the
law upon a particular state of facts has the right to, and must, consider and make
proper application of the rules of equity. Sometimes, statutes expressly confer upon
administrative agencies certain powers equitable in their nature, such as power to
appoint a receiver or power to issue "injunctions" that is, orders to cease and desist
from conduct which is in violation of the law which they administer, or power to
take such affirmative action as will effectuate the policies of a statute.
In certain situations, particular administrative agencies are expressly given
power to determine what is "fair and equitable" and equitable principles are
necessarily applied in their decisions.