7/27/2019 6.Summary of Significant CTA Cases (August 2009)
2/3
iv. Grant of particular power must be found in the law itself v.
General policy to uphold exercise
c. Nature of particular actsi. Licensing, enabling or
approving
ii. Fixing rates and chargesiii. Miscellaneous acts
2. Classification of adjudicatory powersa. enabling powers grant
or denial of permit or authorizationb. directing powers corrective
powers, reparations, awardsc. dispensing powers authority to exempt
from or relax a general prohibition,
or to relieve from an affirmative duty.d. Summary powers apply
compulsion or force against a person or property
to effectuate a legal purpose without a judicial warrant to
authorize suchaction
e. Equitable powers power to determine the law upon a particular
state of facts, the right to, an must, consider and make proper
application of therules of equity
E. Separation of Administrative and other powers
1. Doctrine of separation of powersa. Allocation of governmental
powersb. Blending of allocated powersc. Exclusive exercise of
assigned powers
2. Doctrine of non-delegation of powersa. Based on the maxim of
potestas delegate non potest delegari. What has
been delegated cannot be in turn delegated. The doctrine rests
on theethical principle that a delegated power constitutes not only
a right but aduty to be performed by the delegate by the
instrumentality of his own
judgment acting immediately upon the matter and not through
theintervening mind of another. (Sandoval v. PAGCOR)
3. Non-delegation of legislative power
Cases:
Specialized in the particular fields assigned to them,
administrative bodies can deal withthe problems thereof with more
expertise and dispatch that can be expected from thelegislature or
the courts of justice. In the case of the first, it would have
neither the timenor the knowledge to create detailed rules to suit
changing business needs that arebecoming more intricate, especially
with the globalization of trade and new discoveries intechnology
and electronics, and in the case of the second, already obliged to
handle agreat diversity of cases, it would have been hard pressed
to acquire the knowledge theyneeded to deal interlligently with all
the new types of controversy. Thus, the vesture of
quasi-legislative and quasi-judicial powers in such bodies, now not
unreasonably calledthe fourth department of the government, is held
not unconstitutional, unreasonable andoppressive. (Solid Homes,
Inc. v. Payawal)
