ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

References
- Agpalo
- Cruz
- Atty. Bendijo

QUASI JUDICIAL POWER

- Actions or discretions of public administrative officers or bodies required to
- Investigate facts
- Ascertain existence of facts
- Hold hearing
- Draw conclusions from hearing
- Use them as basis for official action
- Exercise discretion of a judicial nature

Cojuangco jr vs. PCGG 1997

“Public prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer”

Although such a preliminary investigation is not a trial and is not intended to usurp the function of the
trial court, it is not a casual affair. The officer conducting the same investigates or inquires into the facts
concerning the commission of the crime with the end in view of determining whether or not an
information may be prepared against the accused. Indeed, a preliminary investigation is in effect a
realistic judicial appraisal of the merits of the case. Sufficient proof of the guilt of the accused must be
adduced so that when the case is tried, the trial court may not be bound as a matter of law to order an
acquittal. A preliminary investigation has then been called a judicial inquiry. It is a judicial proceeding. An
act becomes judicial when there is opportunity to be heard and for, the production and weighing of
evidence, and a decision is rendered thereon.

The authority of a prosecutor or investigating officer duly empowered to preside or to conduct a

preliminary investigation is no less than that of a municipal judge or even a regional trial court judge.
While the investigating officer, strictly speaking is not a "judge," by the nature of his functions he is and
must be considered to be a quasi judicial officer.

(Labo niya cyst, Cojuangco jr prosecutor is quasi judicial pero in carino and Presidential anti dollar salting
task force vs. CA, executive parin yung duties niya. Its a case to case basis parin. Refer to Santiago v.
Bautista)

Carino vs. CHR 1991

“Public prosecutor’s duty of conducting preliminary investigation to determine the existence of
probable cause, to file an information in court and to prosecute the accused is executive in nature and
NOT QUASI JUDICIAL”

The threshold question is whether or not the Commission on Human Rights has the power under the
Constitution to do so; whether or not, like a court of justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency, it has
jurisdiction or adjudicatory powers over, or the power to try and decide, or hear and determine, certain
specific type of cases, like alleged human rights violations involving civil or political rights.
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

The Court declares the Commission on Human Rights to have no such power; and that it was not meant
by the fundamental law to be another court or quasi-judicial agency in this country, or duplicate much
less take over the functions of the latter.

The most that may be conceded to the Commission in the way of adjudicative power is that it may
investigate, i.e., receive evidence and make findings of fact as regards claimed human rights violations
involving civil and political rights. But fact finding is not adjudication, and cannot be likened to the
judicial function of a court of justice, or even a quasi-judicial agency or official. The function of receiving
evidence and ascertaining therefrom the facts of a controversy is not a judicial function, properly
speaking. To be considered such, the faculty of receiving evidence and making factual conclusions in a
controversy must be accompanied by the authority of applying the law to those factual conclusions to
the end that the controversy may be decided or determined authoritatively, finally and definitively,
subject to such appeals or modes of review as may be provided by law. This function, to repeat, the
Commission does not have.

Santiago Jr. v. Bautista 1970

ISSE: WON the the determination by a committee as who should be ranked first, second and third
honors among graduating pupils is a quasi judicial power as to be subject to judicial review by petition
for certiorari under Rule 65 of the Rules of Court

HELD: NO. judicial action is an adjudication upon the rights of parties who in general appear or are
brought before the tribunal by notice or process and upon whose claims some decision or judgment is
rendered. It implies impartiality, disinterestedness, a weighing of adverse claims and is inconsistent with
discretion on the one hand - for the tribunal must decide according to law and the rights of the parties -
or with dictation on the other, for in the first instance it must exercise its own judgment under the law,
and not act under a mandate from another power.

Requisite for the exercise of Quasi Judicial power

- A LAW
- Enabling act
- Strictissimi juris

Requisites for Quasi Judicial Adjudication

1. Previously established rules and principles
2. Concrete facts affecting individuals
3. Decision as to whether facts are governed by Rules and Principles

Adjudication
- An agency process for the formulation of a final order, which presupposes compliance with such
requirements before such final order is issued

Quasi Adjudication
- Refers to a determination of rights, privileges and duties by an administrative agency resulting in
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

- a decision or order affecting a NAMED person and becoming final and executory after the lapse
of certain period.

Filipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. v. Oil Industry Commision 1986

It is a well-settled principle of administrative law that unless expressly empowered, administrative
agencies like respondent Oil Industry Commission are bereft of quasi-judicial powers. As we declared in
Miller v. Mardo, Et. Al. (2 SCRA 898): ". . . It may be conceded that the legislature may confer on
administrative boards or bodies quasi-judicial powers involving the exercise of judgment and discretion,
as incident to the performance of administrative functions, but in so doing, the legislature must state its
intention in express terms that would leave no doubt, as even such quasi-judicial prerogatives must be
limited, if they are to be valid, only to those incidental to, or in connection with, the performance of
administrative duties which do not amount to conferment of jurisdiction over a matter exclusively
vested in the courts."

The phrase "to set the conditions" under sub-paragraph "a" refers to the right to prescribe rules of
conduct. It appertains to rule-making functions and cannot include quasi-judicial powers.

WHY IS IT IMPORTANT TO DIFFERENTIATE QUASI JUDICIAL FUNCTION FROM ADMINISTRATIVE

FUNCTION?
1. Because notice and hearing is required in Quasi Judicial Function ONLY
2. A decision of a quasi judicial agency in the exercise of its quasi judicial power is filed
with the CA
3. An action to challenge rules and regulations issued by an administrative agency to
implement the law is filed with the RTC.

WHY ARE THERE QUASI JUDICIAL AGENCIES?

- Because theres the need for active intervention of administrative agencies in matters calling for
technical knowledge and speed in countless controversies which cannot possibly be handled by
regular courts subject to judicial review.

Voluntary Arbitration
- Referral of a dispute by the parties pursuant to a voluntary arbitration clause or agreement to
an impartial third person or panel for final resolution.
- Quasi Judicial Agency - arbitrator acts as quasi judicial officer who determines the rights of the
parties and renders decision, which is appealable by petition for review to the CA.

Jurisdiction
- The power or capacity conferred by the Constitution or law to a court or tribunal to entertain,
hear and determine certain controversies and render judgment thereon.
a. Jurisdiction over the subject matter
- Nature of the cause of action and of the relief sought, which is vested by law
- Cannot be conferred by agreement of the parties
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

- Cannot be waived
- May be raised at any stage of the proceeding as a defense
Except:
ESTOPPEL to deny jurisdiction
A Party cannot take inconsistent positions.
Ex. GSIS vs. CIR 1961
An aggrieved party appeals an adverse decision to a higher administrative body such as the Office of the
President, he cannot thereafter challenge the jurisdiction of the appellate body to decide the appealed
case. It is not the privilege of a party who, to acocmplish his purpose, has affirmed and invoked the
jurisdiction of an agency to afterwards deny such jurisdiction to escape penalty or liability imposed by
the appellate agency.

Garments and Textile Export Board v. CA

Having already invoked the jurisdiction of the GTEB in the earlier actions, AIFC cannot now be heard to
question that same jurisdiction simply because it was unable to obtain the reliefs prayed for by it from
the GTEB.

b. Jurisdiction over the person of the petitioner or plaintiff

- Acquired by the latter’s filing the initiatory pleading and paying the required docket or
filing fees
- Acquired by service of summons (involuntary)
- Voluntary submission to the authority of the court or tribunal.

Strictissimi Juris
- Administrative agency or officer can exercise only such powers as are expressly granted as well
as those which are necessarily implied therefrom.

Substantive Law Remedial Law

Part of the law which creates, defines and Prescribes the method of enforcing rights or
regulates rightsor which regulates rights and obtaining redress for their invasion
duties which give rise to a cause of action

ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
- Constitution empowers quasi judicial agencies to issue their own rules of procedure
- Their rules of procedure shall remain effective unless disapproved by the Supreme Court
- Rules of Court are suppletory to rules of procedure of quasi administrative agencies
- Technical rules of procedure and of evidence in courts of law are not controlling
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

- Substantive Due PROCESS

- Construed liberally in order to promote their object and assist parties to a just, speedy and
inexpensive determination of their claims and defenses

First Lepanto Ceramics Inc vs. CA 1994

ISSUE: WON the appeal from a decision of the Board of Investment should be directly taken to the SC
pursuant to Sec. 78 of the Omnibus Investment Code or Art 82 of EO No. 226 which provides “all appeals
shall be filed directly with the SC”

HELD: NO. The appeal should be taken to the CA.

1. In matters of procedure, the SC has the power to regulate in the exercise of its constitutional
rule making power.
2. Art VI, Sec 30 of the Consti provides that No law shall be passed increasing the appellate
jurisdiction of the SC without its advice and concurrence

Procedure prescribed by BOOK VII OF 1987 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE

Do not apply to:
1. Congress
2. Judiciary
3. Constitutional commissions
4. AFP
5. Board of pardons and parole
6. State Universities

Justiciable Controversy
- An exercise of an administrative agency’s exclusive jurisdiction as vested by law to it would
require an assertion of a right by a proper party against another who, in turn, contests it.
- Must be raised by party entitled to maintain the action

Contested Case
- any proceeding, including licensing, in which the legal rights, duties, or privileges asserted by
specific parties as required by the Constitution or law are to be determined after hearing.

Institution of Proceedings
- Filing a complaint or petition
Pleading - verified by affidavit that the affiant has read the pleading and that the allegations therein are
true and correct of his knowledge and belief.
Certification under oath should contain that complainant
1. Has not commenced any action involving the same issues in any court, tribunal or quasi judicial
agency to the best of his knowledge and no other such action are pending
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

2. If there is such pending action or claim, a complete statement of the present status thereof
3. If he should thereafter learn that a similar action or claim is filed or pending, he shall report that
fact 5 days therefrom to the court wherein aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been
filed.

Forum Shopping
- Going from one court to another in the hope of securing a favorable relief
- Filing of repetitious suits or proceedings in different courts concerning substantially the same
subject matter
Tests to determine Forum Shopping
1. Elements of litis pendentia are present
2. A final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata
a. There be a decision on the merits by a court of competent jurisdiction
b. The decision is final
c. The two actions involve identical parties, subject matter and causes of action.

Pre-trial Conference
- Can be formal or informal
- Amicable settlement
- Simplification of the issues, obtain stipulations or admissions of facts to avoid unnecessary
proof, advisability of referring the case to arbitration, propriety of rendering judgment
- To expedite proceedings and avoid expensive litigation

Default
- Failure to file a responsive pleading, failure to appear in any hearing or failure to present
evidences in any of which instances the hearing may proceed in his absence without violating
the party’s right to due process.

Hearing
- Not necessarily trial-type presentation of evidence
- To be heard does not mean verbal arguments it can be written pleadings
- When facts upon which the resolution of the case will depend a trial type hearing ought to be
conducted
- Parties will have the right to cross examine witnesses and submit rebuttal evidence

GENERAL RULE:
When authority is conferred by law upon an admin officer or non judicial person, committee or body
to take evidence, such authority includes the power to issue subpoena and subpoena duces tecum
and to punish for contempt
Exercised by:
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

1. SEC
2. COMELEC

SUBPOENA
- Process directed to a person requiring him to attend and testify at the hearing or trial of the
action or at any investigation conducted under the laws of the country

SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

- Order to produce specified documents

Matters of judicial notice

1. The matter must be of common and general knowledge
2. It must be well and authoritatively settled and not doubtful or uncertain
3. Must be known to be within the limits of the jurisdiction of the tribunal

Hierarchy of evidence values

FIRST : Proof beyond reasonable doubt
SECOND: Clear and convincing evidence
THIRD: Preponderance of evidence
FOURTH: Substantial evidence

Substantial Evidence
- Relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion

Delegation of Quasi Judicial Function

- The power conferred on an administrative agency to issue rules and regulations is an adequate
source of authority to delegate a particular function, unless by express provision of the law or by
implication it has been withheld
- A quasi judicial body in the discharge of its adjudicatory function, may delegate the function to
receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary for the resolution of factual issues
falling within its jurisdiction.

Due Process in Quasi-Judicial Proceedings

Substantive due process
- Responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice
Procedural due process
- Notice and hearing as well as guarantee of being heard by an impartial and competent tribunal
- A law which hears before it condemns
1. Right to notice
2. Reasonable opportunity to appear and defend his rights
 ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021

3. Tribunal of competent jurisdiction

4. Decision supported by substantial evidence presented at the hearing

Cardinal Requirements of Due Process

1. Right to a hearing
2. The tribunal must consider the evidence presented
3. Decision must have something to support itself
4. The evidence must be substantial
5. The decision must be based on evidence presented
6. The tribunal or body of any of its judges must act on its own independent consideration of the
law not simply accept the views of subordinates
7. The board or body should render its decision in such manner that parties can know the various
issues involved and the reason behind the decision
8. The officer or tribunal conducting the investigation must have competent jurisdiction

Cold Neutrality of an Impartial Judge

- A hearing officer in a contested case cannot act as prosecutor in the same case
- An administrative officer who has rendered a decision in a contested case cannot review, after
he has been promoted to a higher position with review functions
- The law prescribing appeals from a subordinate officer to a higher officer contemplates that the
latter be not the former who rendered the appealed decision

When Prior notice is not required

GENERAL RULE:
If what is exercised is police power or what is sought to be prevented or achieved requires immediate
action for the public good or interest, prior notice or hearing is not necessary for the validity of the
action
EXAMPLES
1. NUISANCE PER SE - constitutes direct menace to public health or safety and may be abated
summarily
2. PREVENTIVE SUSPENSION of public servant facing administrative charges
3. PADLOCKING of filthy restaurants or theaters showing porn
4. CANCELLATION of passport
5. SUMMARY Distraint and LEVY of a property of a delinquent taxpayer and the REPLACEMENT of a
temporary appointee (notice and hearing can be enjoyed at a later time)
6. TWIN Rights have previously been offered but the right to exercise has not been claimed
7. POSSIBLE EXTRADITEE against whom no extradition case has been filed against him in court is
not entitled to notice and hearing during the evaluation stage of the extradition process in the
absence of any provision of law or treaty
ADMIN LAW AND LAW ON PUBLIC OFFICERS FINALS REVIEWER | FRANCISCO 2021