Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Issue:
WON Tee Hook Chun, for being charged with a
criminal case, may no longer be punished with
exclusion which is the necessary penalty of the
first case since he has to wait for the rendition of
a judgment in the first case and completion of
the service of penalty imposed on him if found
guilty of the criminal charge.
Held:
NO. Compliance with the period provided by
law for the perfection of an appeal is not merely
mandatory by also a jurisdictional requirement.
Such failure has the effect of rendering final the
judgment of the court, and the certification of
the record on appeal thereafter cannot restore the
jurisdiction which has been lost. A regulation
adopted pursuant to law has the force and effect
of law. Administrative regulations be given the
same force as rules of court in order to maintain
the regularity of administrative proceedings.
Proceedings already terminated should not be
altered at every step. Judgment of courts should
become final at some definite date fixed by law.
The very object for which courts were instituted
was to put an end to controversy.
FACTOR AFFECTING FINALITY OF
ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS: If an
administrative decision has already becomes
final and executory, judicial review is
impossible no longer available
Corpuz v Cuaderno
Facts:
Petitioner was holding the position of Special
Assistant to the Governor of the Central Bank of
the Philippines and was charged with an
administrative case, for alleged dishonesty,
incompetence, neglect of duty and/or abuse of
authority, oppression, misconduct, etc. preferred
Ruling:
The rule was not applied.
XPN: In cases involving rule-making or quasilegislative powers of an administrative agency
- In questioning the validity or constitutionality
of a rule or regulation issued by an
administrative agency, a party need not exhaust
administrative remedies before going to court.
This principle applies only where the act of the
administrative agency concerned was performed
pursuant to its quasi-judicial function, and not
when the assailed act pertained to its rulemaking or quasi-legislative power.
- But see Paredes v. CA (which involved ratefixing subject to approval of the Cabinet or
quasi-legislative power), where the doctrine was
applied. But Sir said the settled rule is here in
Kilosbayan v Guingona
Facts:
1.
2.
3.
4.