Administrative Law Case Digests Florendo vs Enrile, 239 SCRA 22 Case Digest A.M. No. P-92-695 December 7, 1994
Full description
Full description
Administrative Law Case Digests Masangcay vs Comelec, 6 SCRA 27 Case Digest G.R. No. L-13827 September 28, 1962
Administrative Law Case Digests Lovina vs Moreno, 9 SCRA 557 Case Digest G.R. No. L-17821 November 29, 1963Full description
Administrative Law Case Digests Edu vs Ericta, 35 SCRA 481 Case Digest G.R. No. L-32096 October 24, 1970Full description
Administrative Law Case Digests Blaquera vs Alcala, 295 SCRA 411 Case Digest G.R. No. 109406 September 11, 1998
Administrative Law Case Digests Lumiqued vs Exevea, 282 SCRA 125 Case Digest G.R. No. 117565 November 18, 1997
Administrative Law Case Digests Padua vs Ranada, 390 SCRA 663 Case Digest G.R. No. 141949 October 14, 2002
Administrative Law Case Digests Dario vs Mison, 176 SCRA 84 Case Digest G.R. No. 81954 August 8, 1989
digests
Administrative Law Case Digests People vs Rosenthal, 68 Phil 328 Case Digest G.R. Nos. L-46076 and L-46077 June 12, 1939
Administrative Law Case Digests US vs Barrias, 11 Phil 327 Case Digest G.R. No. 4349 September 24, 1908
WEEK 7 LABOR LAW REVIEW CASE DIGEST
aef
Full description
Administrative Law Case Digests Echegaray vs Secretary of Justice, 297 SCRA 754 Case Digest G.R. No. 132601 October 12, 1998
Administrative Law Case Digests Radio Communications of the Philippines vs National Telecommunications Commission, 184 SCRA 517 Case Digest G.R. No. L-68729 May 29, 1987
Administrative Law Case Digests Eugenio vs Civil Service Commission, 242 SCRA 196 Case Digest G.R. No. 115863 March 31, 1995
Administrative Law Case Digests Cervantes vs Auditor General, 91 SCRA 359 Case Digest G.R. No. L-4043 May 26, 1952
Administrative Law Case Digests Pelaez vs Auditor General, 15 SCRA 569 Case Digest G.R. No. L-23825 December 24, 1965
Administrative Law Case Digests National Housing Authority vs Almeida, 525 SCRA 383 Case Digest G.R. No. 162784 June 22, 2007Full description
Adminstrative Law Arellano Univeristy School of Law aiza ebina/2015
KILUSANG MAYO UNO LABOR CENTER vs GARCIA, JR. 239 SCRA 386 Doctrine of Non-Delegation of Powers Basis of Doctrine of Non-Delegation of Powers FACTS: The instant petition for certiorari assails the constitutionality and validity of certain memoranda, circulars and/or orders of the Department of Transportation and Communications and the Land Transportation Franchising and Regulatory Board which, among others, authorize provincial bus and jeepney operators to increase or decrease the prescribed transportation fares without application therefor with the LTFRB and without hearing and approval thereof by said agency in violation of Sec. 16 (c) of Commonwealth Act No. 146, as amended, otherwise known as the Public Service Act, and in derogation of LTFRB's duty to fix and determine just and reasonable fares by delegating that function to bus operators. ISSUE: Whether or not the authority given by the LTFRB to provincial bus operators to set a fare range over and above the existing authorized fare without having to file a petition for the purpose, is unconstitutional, invalid and illegal as it constitutes an undue delegation of legislative power RULING: Yes. In the case at bench, the authority given by the LTFRB to the provincial bus operators to set a fare range over and above the authorized existing fare, is illegal and invalid as it is tantamount to an undue delegation of legislative authority. Potestas delegata non delegari potest. What has been delegated cannot be delegated. This doctrine is based on the ethical principle that such a delegated power constitutes not only a right but a duty to be performed by the delegate through the instrumentality of his own judgment and not through the intervening mind of another. A further delegation of such power would indeed constitute a negation of the duty in violation of the trust reposed in the delegate mandated to discharge it directly. The policy of allowing the provincial bus operators to change and increase their fares at will would result not only to a chaotic situation but to an anarchic state of affairs. This would leave the riding public at the mercy of transport operators who may increase fares every hour, every day, every month or every year, whenever it pleases them or whenever they deem it "necessary" to do so. RATIO: Basis of Doctrine of Non-Delegation of Powers. - A further delegation of such power would indeed constitute a negation of the duty in violation of the trust reposed in the delegate mandated to discharge it directly. ---
