Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
XXX XXX XXX IEI filed for rescission of the memorandum plus damages against
the MMIC and the Ministry of Energy Geronimo Velasco before
Here, petitioners appeal does not only involve a question of law.
the RTC of Makati, alleging that MMIC started operating in the
Aside from the trial courts ruling that it has no jurisdiction over
coal blocks prior to finalization of the memorandum. IEI prayed
the complaint, petitioner likewise questioned the other basis for
for that the rights for the operation be granted back.
the trial courts ruling, which refers to previously decided cases
allegedly upholding with finality the ownership of
the Philippine National Bank (PNB) pleaded as co-defendant
Malabanans over the disputed property. As correctly argued by because they have mortgages in favor of MMIC. It was dismissed
petitioner, the question of whether the ownership of the
Malabanans has in fact been sustained with finality is factual in Oddly enough, Mr. Jesus Cabarrus is President of both IEI and
nature as it requires the presentation of evidence. Since the MMIC.
appeal raised mixed questions of fact and law, no error can be
RTC ordered the rescission of the memorandum and for the
imputed on petitioner for invoking the appellate jurisdiction of
reinstatement of the contract in favor of IEI.
the CA through an ordinary appeal under Rule 41.
In 1974 or twenty four (24) years had passed, when petitioner, As to the prohibition that xxxx corporation or association may
questioned and made several collateral and extraneous claims not hold alienable land of public domain except for lease not to
against the respondent. However, the Bureau of Lands dismissed exceed one thousand hectares, that court declared that xxx
the claim, arguing that petitioner no longer has any substantial where the applicant had, before the Constitution took effect, fully
rights to question the validity of acquisition of the respondent complied with all this obligations under the Public Land Act in
and the subsequent issuance of free patent by the Bureau of order to entitle him to a Sales patent, there would be no legal or
Lands. equitable justification for refusing to issue or release the sales
patent. The requirements for a sales application under the Public
Unperturbed, petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration at the Land Act for a corporation to acquire ownership of public
Ministry of Natural Resources which likewise dismissed the domain, was essentially complied upon by the respondent, hence
petition. On July 6, 1978, petitioner filed a complaint in the trial no disqualification exist not to extend and validly issued the
court for "Declaration of Nullity of Contract (Deed of confirmation of title over the land in question to the respondent
Relinquishment of Rights), Recovery of Possession (of two corporation.
parcels of land subject of the contract), and Damages" at about
the same time that he appealed the decision of the Minister of All told, the only disqualification that can be imputed to private
Natural Resources to the Office of the President. respondent is the prohibition in the 1973 Constitution against
the holding of alienable lands of the public domain by
On January 28, 1983, petitioner died. Petitioners heir substituted corporations. However, this Court settled the matter, declaring
in his behalf to pursue the claim. The trial court in Butuan City
that said constitutional prohibition had no retroactive effect and
who initially take cognizance of the case ordered the case
could not prevail over a vested right to the land. Application for
dismissed, on the grounds that: (1) petitioner admitted the due
execution and genuineness of the contract and was estopped patent for and in behalf of Nasipit has clearly no impediment, for
from proving its nullity, (2) the verbal lease agreements were they have proven satisfactory compliance of the requirements of
unenforceable under Article 1403 (2) (e) of the Civil Code, and (3) the law. Petition is DISMISSED.
his causes of action were barred by extinctive prescription and/or
laches. The heirs appealed to the CA which likewise rendered #9 Machete V CA
judgment of dismissal by uphelding the lower courts ruling.
Facts:
Not satisfied, petitioner's heirs filed the instant petition for
review which the court granted, hence this petition. Private respondent filed a complaint for collection of back
rentals and damages before the RTC of Tagbilaran City
Issues against herein petitioners. The alleged facts are:
Whether or not the private respondent corporation is 3) That petitioner moved to the dismissal of the case on the
qualified to acquire ownership over the land of public ground, of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter,
domain. arguing that the instance case is an agrarian dispute and
therefore within the jurisdiction of Department of Agrarian
Ruling and Reform Adjudication Board.
The petition is bereft of merit. The court ruled that the petitioner Issue:
no longer has a cause of action to demand declaration of nullity
over the rights conferred to respondents since his claimed
THE FACTS:
On March 2, 1988, Teotico issued another Memorandum to
Agda, informing him that although Special Order No. 219
On January 2, 1984, Honorable Cesar Lanuza, then Administrator
instructed him to report to the Office of the Administrator, he
of the Fiber Development Authority (FIDA), an agency of the
has neither been seen nor officially heard from during the past
Department of Agriculture, appointed private respondent
several weeks. Agda was directed to submit an official
Democrito Agda as Chief Fiber Development Officer of the FIDA
clarification on his whereabouts and accomplishments for the
effective upon assumption of office. However, this appointment
past three weeks.
did not indicate any specific station or place of assignment.
The case is a petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the CGH again filed its claims representing services rendered to its
Rules of Court assailing the decision of the Court of Appeals. patients from 1998 to 1999, amounting to P7,554,342.93.
THE RULING OF THE SUPREME COURT: REGARDING THE THIRD ISSUE: Whether respondent Chinese
General Hospital (CGH) failed to exhaust administrative
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of
remedies before resorting to judicial intervention.
Appeals. It ordered petitioner PHILHEALTH to pay
respondent Chinese General Hospitals claims representing HELD: No. Respondent Chinese General Hospital (CGH) did
services rendered to its members from 1989 to 1992. not fail to exhaust administrative remedies before resorting
to judicial intervention.
THE BASIS OF THE SUPREME COURT RULING:
1) Under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative
REGARDING THE FIRST ISSUE: Whether or not the law itself
remedies, an administrative decision must first be
provides for any specific period within which to file
appealed to the administrative superiors at the highest
PHILHEALTH claims.
level before it may be elevated to a court of justice for
review.
1) The private respondents contended that due to the Petitioner Hazel Antolin took the 1997 CPA Board Exams but
adverse effects of logging, they are exempted from failed, receiving failing grades from four out of seven subjects.
complying with the said doctrine. They also submit that Convinced that she deserved to pass, she wrote to respondent
forestry laws do not required observance of the
Abelardo Domondon, Acting Chairman of the Board of
doctrine as a condition precedent to judicial action
Accountancy, and requested that her answer sheets be re-
since the issue involves public interest. However, even
corrected. Her answer sheets were shown but these consisted
it be assumed that the forestry laws do not expressly
merely of shaded marks. She requested for copies of the
require prior resort to administrative remedies, the
questionnaire, their respective answer keys, and an explanation
reasons would suffice to still require its observance.
2) It is in the explicit language of the laws vesting in the of the grading system used in each subject. Respondent denied
DENR the power and function to regulate the the request.
development, disposition, extraction, exploration and
Issue:
use of the countrys forests and to exercise exclusive
jurisdiction in the management and disposition of all
WON Antolin has a right to obtain copies of the examination
lands of the public domain, and in the Forest
papers.
Management Bureau for the enforcement of the
forestry laws and regulations. This clearly implies that
Petitioner:
the DENR should be allowed to rule in the first instance
on any controversy coming under its express powers Primarily, petitioner filed a petition for mandamus with damages
before the courts of justice may intervene. against the Board of Accountancy and its members before the
3) The administrative case against petitioner before the Manila RTC, praying that the court would order the board to
DENR involves factual issues calling for the presentation
furnish her with copies of the examination papers and other
of supporting evidence. Such evidence is best
documents and materials.
evaluated first by the administrative authorities by
employing their specialized knowledge of the TLA and She later amended her petition, pleading a cause of action for
the rues allegedly violated, before the courts may step
the access of the documents requested for. However, the RTC
in to exercise their powers of review.
dismissed the petition on the ground that the petition had
4) The necessity for judicial action cannot be supported
already become moot and academic since she already passed
since petitioner has already stopped its logging
the 1998 CPA Board Exams.
operations since 1988 by reason of the order
suspension of such operations by the DENR.
However, an omnibus order of the trial court reconsidered her
case. The CA, however, ruled that
REGARDING THE SECOND ISSUE: Whether or not the (i) the PRC regulation preventing her from gaining access
declaration by the RTC of Section 1 of P.D. 605 as to said documents were valid limitations on petitioners right
unconstitutional, was improper. to information and access to government documents; (ii) that the
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the petitions are GRANTED. September 3, 2002: Merida implemented a water rate increase of
The December 11, 2006 and February 16, 2004 Decisions of the P90 for the first ten cubic meters of water consumption.
Court of Appeals in CA-GR SP No. 76546 and CA-GR SP No.
76498, respectively, are hereby SET ASIDE. The November February 13, 2003: consumers of Merida Water District, filed a
11, 2002 and January 30, 2003 Orders of the Regional Trial Petition for Injunction, etc. because the rates are contrary to the
Court of Manila, Branch 33, in Civil Case No. 98-86881 rate increase agreed upon during the public hearing
are AFFIRMED. The case is remanded to the Regional Trial Court
Merida filed a motion to dismiss (then later motion for
for further proceedings.
reconsideration) with the RTC due to failure to exhaust
Court: administrative remedies under Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. 198,
the Provincial Water Utilities Act of 1973, as amended by P.D.
The Court rules in favor of the petitioner. Section 28, Article 2 of Nos. 768 and 1479 - denied
the Constitution provides that the State may adopt policies in the
disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest while Petition for Review on Certiorari with the CA (then later motion
Section 7, Article 3 provides the right of the people to for reconsideration) - denied
ADMIN DIGESTs 1st SET Page 13 of 27
Petition for Review on Certiorari with the SC illegality; and (2) a denial of due process. However, respondents
fail to show that the instant case merits the application of these
ISSUE: W/N there is lack of jurisdiction with the RTC since the exceptions.
primary jurisdiction should belong to the NWRB under P.D. No.
1067. (The NWRB does not exercise exclusive jurisdiction) Jurisprudence affirming the failure to observe the doctrine of
exhaustion due to a denial of due process involves instances
HELD: YES. petition is GRANTED when the party seeking outright judicial intervention was denied
the opportunity to be heard. Here, respondents admit that
Merida Water District conducted a public hearing. . The existence
petitioners failed to cite any law which impliedly grants the of a hearing for this purpose renders the allegation of a denial of
NWRB original and exclusive jurisdiction to resolve a dispute due process without merit. The failure of the respondents to
regarding the increase of water rates. A grant of exclusive show that the instant case falls within the exceptions to the
jurisdiction cannot be implied from the language of a statute in doctrine of exhaustion necessitates in the due observance of
the absence of a clear legislative intent to that effect. An exhausting the proper administrative remedies before seeking
administrative agency with quasi-judicial power is a tribunal of judicial intervention.
limited jurisdiction, and its jurisdiction should be interpreted in
strictissimi juris." #15 SOUTHERN CROSS CEMENT CORP v CEMENT
MANUFACTURERS
The doctrine of exhaustion does not apply when jurisdiction is
exclusive. An administrative agencys exclusive jurisdiction over a Facts: The DTI sought the opinion of the Secretary of Justice
certain dispute renders the courts without jurisdiction to whether it could still impose a definitive safeguard measure
adjudicate the same at that stage. The doctrine of exhaustion notwithstanding the negative finding of the Tariff Commission.
After the Secretary of Justice opined that the DTI could not do so
applies "where a claim is cognizable in the first instance by an
under the SMA, the DTI Secretary then promulgated a Decision
administrative agency alone; judicial intervention is withheld until
wherein he expressed the DTIs disagreement with the
the administrative process has run its course. To cite Abe-Abe v. conclusions of the Tariff Commission, but at the same time,
Manta as the authority to support the allegation that the NWRB ultimately denying Philcemcors application for safeguard
has original and exclusive jurisdiction over a dispute regarding a measures on the ground that the he was bound to do so in light
water rate increase is a strained construction of this Courts of the Tariff Commissions negative findings. Philcemcor
pronouncements. Thus, petitioners contention that the RTC has challenged this Decision of the DTI Secretary by filing with the
Court of Appeals a Petition for Certiorari, Prohibition and
no jurisdiction because the NWRB has original and exclusive
Mandamus seeking to set aside the DTI Decision, as well as the
jurisdiction over a dispute concerning the increase of water rates Tariff Commissions Report. It prayed that the Court of Appeals
is clearly without merit. direct the DTI Secretary to disregard the Report and to render
judgment independently of the Report. Philcemcor argued that
One of the reasons for the doctrine of exhaustion is the the DTI Secretary, vested as he is under the law with the power of
separation of powers, which enjoins upon the Judiciary a review, is not bound to adopt the recommendations of the Tariff
becoming policy of non-interference with matters coming Commission; and, that the Report is void, as it is predicated on a
primarily (albeit not exclusively) within the competence of the flawed framework, inconsistent inferences and erroneous
methodology. The Court of Appeals Twelfth Division, in
other departments. The theory is that the administrative
a Decision penned by Court of Appeals Associate Justice Elvi
authorities are in a better position to resolve questions
John Asuncion, partially granted Philcemcors petition. The
addressed to their particular expertise and that errors committed appellate court ruled that it had jurisdiction over the petition for
by subordinates in their resolution may be rectified by their certiorari since it alleged grave abuse of discretion. While it
superiors if given a chance to do so It may be added that strict refused to annul the findings of the Tariff Commission, it also
enforcement of the rule could also relieve the courts of a held that the DTI Secretary was not bound by the factual findings
considerable number of avoidable cases which otherwise would of the Tariff Commission since such findings are merely
recommendatory and they fall within the ambit of the Secretarys
burden their heavily loaded dockets.
discretionary review. It determined that the legislative intent is
to grant the DTI Secretary the power to make a final decision on
Although the doctrine of exhaustion does not preclude in all
the Tariff Commissions recommendation. On 23 June 2003,
cases a party from seeking judicial relief, cases where its
Southern Cross filed the present petition, arguing that the Court
observance has been disregarded require a strong showing of of Appeals has no jurisdiction over Philcemcors petition, as the
the inadequacy of the prescribed procedure and of impending proper remedy is a petition for review with the CTA conformably
harm. Respondents justify their failure to observe the with the SMA, and; that the factual findings of the Tariff
administrative process on the following exceptions to the Commission on the existence or non-existence of conditions
doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies: (1) patent warranting the imposition of general safeguard measures are
binding upon the DTI Secretary. Despite the fact that the Court
ADMIN DIGESTs 1st SET Page 14 of 27
of Appeals Decision had not yet become final, its binding force regulation issued by the administrative agency in the
was cited by the DTI Secretary when he issued a new Decision on performance of its quasi-legislative function, the regular courts
25 June 2003, wherein he ruled that that in light of the appellate have jurisdiction to pass upon the same.
courts Decision, there was no longer any legal impediment to his
deciding Philcemcors application for definitive safeguard
The determination of whether a specific rule or set of rules issued
measures. He made a determination that, contrary to the
findings of the Tariff Commission, the local cement industry had by an administrative agency contravenes the law or the
suffered serious injury as a result of the import constitution is within the jurisdiction of the regular courts.
surges. Accordingly, he imposed a definitive safeguard measure Indeed, the Constitution vests the power of judicial review or the
on the importation of gray Portland cement, in the form of a power to declare a law, treaty, international or executive
definitive safeguard duty in the amount ofP20.60/40 kg. bag for agreement, presidential decree, order, instruction, ordinance, or
three years on imported gray Portland Cement.
regulation in the courts, including the regional trial courts.
Replevin cannot be issued to recover a property lawfully taken by The truck of private respondent Victoria de Guzman was
virtue of legal process and considered in the custody of the law. seized by the DENR personnel while on its way to Bulacan
A replevin case against the State, without its consent, cannot because the driver could not produce the required documents
prosper. for the forest product found concealed in the truck. Petitioner
Jovito Layugan, CENRO ordered the confiscation of the truck and
FACTS: required the owner to explain. Private respondents failed to
submit required explanation. The DENR Regional Executive
Petitioner from DENR apprehended two vehicles carrying illegally
Director Rogelio Baggayan sustained Layugans action for
sourced lumber and thereafter confiscated them. The owners of
confiscation and ordered the forfeiture of the truck. Private
the vehicles filed an action for replevin to recover the vehicles.
respondents brought the case to the DENR Secretary. Pending
They won in the trial court on the ground that petitioner did not
appeal, private respondents filed a replevin case before the RTC
act in accordance with the law. So petitioner appeals on the
against petitioner Layugan and Baggayan. RTC granted the same.
ground that the replevin in this case is a suit against the State
Petitioners moved to dismiss the case contending, inter alia, that
and is therefore valid.
private respondents had no cause of action for their failure to
RULING: ISSUE- Whether or not the instant case falls within the
exception of the doctrine.
1) No! Replevin cannot be issued to recover a property lawfully
taken by virtue of legal process and considered in the custody of HELD
the law.
The Court held in the negative. The Court has consistently
2) Yes! This suit is not valid because the State may not be sued held that before a party is allowed to seek the intervention of the
without its consent or when the public official acted in bad faith court, it is a pre-condition that he should have availed of all the
in the discharge of his duties. It has been established that the means of administrative processed afforded him. Hence, if a
DENR acted within its authority. Hence, its action is the action of remedy within the administrative machinery can still be resorted
the State. to by giving the administrative officer concerned every
opportunity to decide on a matter that comes within his
Calub v. CA jurisdiction then such remedy should be exhausted first before
courts judicial power can be sought. The premature invocation
G.R. No. 115634 (April 27, 2000)
of court intervention is fatal to ones cause of action.
FACTS: Petitioners, who were officers of the Department of
The doctrine is a relative one and its flexibility is called
Environment and Natural Resources seized two motor vehicles
upon by the peculiarity and uniqueness of the factual and
for transporting illegally cut lumber. The owner and the driver
circumstantial settings of a case. Hence, it is disregarded (1)
filed a case against them for the recovery of the possession of
when there is violation of due process, (2) when the issue
the motor vehicle.
involved is purely a legal question, (3) when the administrative
HELD: The acts for which petitioners are being called to account action is patently illegal amounting to lack or excess of
were performed by them in the discharge of their official jurisdiction, (4) when there is estoppels on the part of the
duties. A suit against them is a suit against the state. It cannot administrative agency concerned, (5) when there is irreparable
prosper without the consent of the state. injury, (6) when the respondent is a department secretary whose
acts as an alter ego of the President bears the implied and
assumed approval of the latter, (7) when to require exhaustion of
administrative remedies would be unreasonable, (8) when it
would amount to nullification of a claim, (9) when the subject
ADMIN DIGESTs 1st SET Page 17 of 27
matter is a private land in land case proceedings, (10) when the Commission that the petitioner should have first exhausted her
rule does not provide a plain, speedy and adequate remedy, and administrative remedies by appealing to the President of the
(11) when there are circumstances indicating the urgency of Philippines, and that her failure to do so is a bar to her action in
judicial intervention. court.
A suit for replevin cannot be sustained against the petitioners for ISSUE: WON petitioners failure to exhaust her administrative
the subject truck taken and retained by them for administrative remedies bars subsequent action in courts
forfeiture proceedings in pursuant to Sections 68-A of OD 705,
as amended. Dismissal of the replevin suit for lack of cause of HELD: ADMINISTRATIVE REMEDIES; RULE OF EXHAUSTION NOT
action in view of the private respondents failure to exhaust TO BE INVOKED IF PARTY IS IN ESTOPPEL. The respondent
administrative remedies should have been the proper course of Commission is in estoppel to invoke the rule on the exhaustion
action by the lower court instead of assuming jurisdiction over of administrative remedies, considering that in its resolution, it
the case and consequently issuing the writ ordering the return of declared that the opinions of the Secretary of Justice were
the truck. advisory in nature, which may either be accepted or ignored by
the office seeking the opinion, and any aggrieved party has the
#21 Natividad vs. Veterans [G.R. No. L-12944. March 30, court for recourse, thereby leading the petitioner to conclude
1959.] that only a final judicial ruling in her favor would be accepted by
the Commission.
FACTS:
1. That the petitioner is of legal age, a widow and a #22 Republic vs Lacap GR. No. L-158253
resident of the Philippines and that the respondent is a
government instrumentality or agency, duly vested with authority FACTS:
to implement the provisions of Backpay Law, otherwise known as
The District Engineer of Pampanga issued and duly
Republic Act No. 897, further amending Republic Act No. 304; published an Invitation To Bid dated January 27,
2. That the petitioner is the widow of the late Lt. Tan Chiat 1992. Respondent, doing business under the name and
Bee alias Tan Lian Lay, a Chinese national, and bonafide member style CarwinConstruction and Construction Supply
the 1st Regiment, United State-Chinese Volunteers in the (Carwin Construction), was pre-qualified together with two other
Philippines; died in a battle at Rizal Province; and certified by the contractors. Since respondent submitted the lowest bid, he was
awarded the contract for the concreting of Sitio 5 Bahay Pare.On
Armed Forces of the Philippines as having rendered aritorious
November 4, 1992, a Contract Agreement was executed by
military services during the Japanese occupation;
respondent and petitioner. On September 25, 1992, District
3. That petitioner as widow of the said recognized Engineer Rafael S. Ponio issued a Notice to Proceed with the
deceased veteran, filed an application for back pay concreting of Sitio 5 Bahay Pare. Accordingly, respondent
4. The Secretary and Chief of Office Staff the Veterans undertook the works, made advances for the purchase of the
Back Pay Commission sent a letter to General Vicente Lopez of materials and payment for labor costs.
the United States-Chinese Volunteers in the Philippines apprising
On October 29, 1992, personnel of the Office of the
the latter that the Commission has reaffirmed its solution
District Engineer of San Fernando, Pampanga conducted a final
granting the back pay to alien members; the AFP certified
inspection of the project and found it 100% completed in
certified that deceased veteran has rendered service as a accordance with the approved plans and specifications.
recognized guerrilla Accordingly, the Office of the District Engineer issued Certificates
5. That after due deliberation respondent revoked its of Final Inspection and Final Acceptance.
previous stands and ruled that aliens are not entitled to back
pay; Thereafter, respondent sought to collect payment for
the completed project. The DPWH prepared the Disbursement
6. That on February 13, 1957, the respondent Veterans
Voucher in favor of petitioner. However, the DPWH withheld
Back Pay Commission, through its Secretary & Chief of Office payment from respondent after the District Auditor of the
Staff, made a formal reply to the aforesaid claim of the herein Commission on Audit (COA) disapproved the final release of
petitioner denying her request on the ground that aliens are not funds on the ground that the contractors license of respondent
entitled to backpay; had expired at the time of the execution of the contract. The
7. That upon refusal of the Veterans Back Pay Commission District Engineer sought the opinion of the DPWH Legal
the petitioner brought the case direct to this Honorable Court by Department on whether the contracts of Carwin Construction for
various Mount Pinatubo rehabilitation projects were valid and
way of mandamus;
effective although its contractors license had already expired
The trial court ordered respondent Commission to give due when the projects were contracted.
course to the claim of herein petitioner. Against the decision, the
respondent instituted this appeal and it further contended by the
Respondent files for a motion to dismiss: improper venue; lack of In the case at bar, we find no grave abuse of discretion in the
authority of the person instituting the action; and lack of cause RTC's denial of the Motion to Dismiss, as contained in the August
of action. 14, 1998 Order. The CA erred in ruling otherwise. The trial court
stated in its Decision that petitioner was an educational
Respondent judge denied the motion to dismiss and at the same institution, originally registered with the Securities and Exchange
time ordered a Writ of preliminary injunction in favor of Commission as the "Indiana School of Aeronautics, Inc." That
petitioner. In addition, respondent is ordered to answer within 15 name was subsequently changed to "Indiana Aerospace
days. However, respondent failed to answer within reasonable University" after the Department of Education, Culture and
time and hence declared in default. Sports had interposed no objection to such change.
Respondent filed a Petition for Certiorari with the Court of Respondent issued a formal Cease and Desist Order directing
Appeals: in denying the former's Motion to Dismiss, in issuing a petitioner to stop using the word "university" in its corporate
Writ of Preliminary Injunction, and in declaring respondent in name. The former also published an announcement in the March
default despite its filing an Answer. 21, 1998 issue of Freeman, a local newspaper in Cebu City, that
there was no institution of learning by that name. The counsel of
CA: petitioner had no cause of action and failed to show any
respondent was quoted as saying in the March 28, 1998 issue of
evidence that it had been granted university status by
the newspaper Today that petitioner had been ordered closed by
respondent as required under existing law and CHED rules and
the respondent for illegal advertisement, fraud and
regulations.
misrepresentation of itself as a university. Such acts, according to
A certificate of incorporation under an unauthorized name does the RTC undermined the public's confidence in petitioner as an
not confer upon petitioner the right to use the word "university" educational institution. This was a clear statement of a sufficient
in its name. cause of action.
By: KeirCares
RULING:
Thereafter, he issued an Order directing Laguna CATV to pay the
The SC ruled that Laguna CATV failed to exhaust all
concerned employees the sum of
administrative remedies.
P261,009.19 representing their unpaid claims.
HELD: substance in Rochester Telephone Co. vs. U.S. (307 U.S. 125)
and Federal Power Commission vs. Metropolitan Edison
1. NO. Prohibition is not the proper remedy. The enabling law Co. (304 U.S. 375). The principle of exhaustion of administrative
itself, which is B.P. Blg. 325, has specifically tasked the remedies which mandates that relief should first be sought from
Cabinet to review and approve any proposed revisions of the highest or most superior administrative agency, the likes of
rates of fees and charges. Petitioners should have availed
the Cabinet, may prove that a resort to the courts would be
of this easy and accessible remedy instead of immediately
unnecessary (Wee Poco vs. Posadas, 65 Phil. 648), prevent the
resorting to the judicial process. Our legislature in
courts from being swamped by a resort to them in the first
ADMIN DIGESTs 1st SET Page 24 of 27
instance (U.S. vs. Sing Tuck, 194 U.S. 161), strengthened by the Upon motion of petitioners before the Supreme Court, the latter
rule on comity and convenience which requires Us to raise our issued a Temporary Restraining Order, ordering the respondent
hands until the administrative process has been finally COMELEC to cease and desist from implementing its questioned
completed (Matienzo vs. Abellera, supra; Railroad and Resolution No. 2879. It directed COMELEC to comment on the
Warehouse Commission vs. Duluth, St., R.. Co., 273 U.S. 625), and petition within a period of ten (10) days.
thus it is after judicial review is no longer premature that the
courts may ascertain, in proper cases, whether the administrative
action or findings are not in violation of law, whether they are
THE CONTENTION OF RESPONDENT COMELEC:
free from fraud or imposition and whether they find substantial
support from the evidence In its Comment, respondent COMELEC, through the Office of the
Solicitor General, contended that:
#28 JESUS A. JARIOL, ET. AL. (Petitioners)
1) According to the report of the Election Officer of
Vs. THE COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET. AL. (Respondents)
Basilisa, Surigao del Norte, the PRA meeting was
attended by 109 members, a number sufficient to
G.R. No. 127456, March 20, 1997
constitute a quorum since Basilisa is composed of 27
THE CASE: barangays with eight officers for each unit. All of the
109 members signed the minutes of the meeting and
The case is a special civil action for certiorari under Rule 65 of the affixed their signatures and thumb marks, which were
Rules of Court. It assails the resolution of the Commission on verified by the COMELEC.
Elections, which adversely ruled against petitioners.
ISSUE:
RULING:
Yes.