This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2013-04-11 |
SERENO, C.J. |
||||
| In administrative law, a quasi-judicial proceeding involves (a) taking and evaluating evidence; (b) determining facts based upon the evidence presented; and (c) rendering an order or decision supported by the facts proved.[86] The exercise of quasi-judicial functions involves a determination, with respect to the matter in controversy, of what the law is; what the legal rights and obligations of the contending parties are; and based thereon and the facts obtaining, the adjudication of the respective rights and obligations of the parties.[87] In Bedol v. Commission on Elections,[88] this Court declared: Quasi-judicial or administrative adjudicatory power on the other hand is the power of the administrative agency to adjudicate the rights of persons before it. It is the power to hear and determine questions of fact to which the legislative policy is to apply and to decide in accordance with the standards laid down by the law itself in enforcing and administering the same law. The administrative body exercises its quasi-judicial power when it performs in a judicial manner an act which is essentially of an executive or administrative nature, where the power to act in such manner is incidental to or reasonably necessary for the performance of the executive or administrative duty entrusted to it. In carrying out their quasi-judicial functions the administrative officers or bodies are required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, weigh evidence, and draw conclusions from them as basis for their official action and exercise of discretion in a judicial nature. | |||||
|
2013-04-02 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Resolution dated 7 November 2012[16] 10 204402 12-061 (PP) Kalikasan Party-List (KALIKASAN) - The group reflects an advocacy for the environment, and is not representative of the marginalized and underrepresented; | |||||
|
2012-09-18 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| The text and intent of the constitutional provision granting the Comelec the authority to investigate and prosecute election offenses is to give the Comelec all the necessary and incidental powers for it to achieve the objective of holding free, orderly, honest, peaceful, and credible elections.[101] The Comelec should be allowed considerable latitude in devising means and methods that will insure the accomplishment of the great objective for which it was created.[102] We may not agree fully with its choice of means, but unless these are clearly illegal or constitute gross abuse of discretion, this Court should not interfere.[103] Thus, Comelec Resolution No. 9266, approving the creation of the Joint Committee and Fact-Finding Team, should be viewed not as an abdication of the constitutional body's independence but as a means to fulfill its duty of ensuring the prompt investigation and prosecution of election offenses as an adjunct of its mandate of ensuring a free, orderly, honest, peaceful and credible elections. | |||||
|
2012-09-18 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| On even date, pursuant to the above Resolution, the Comelec's Law Department filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasay City, an Information against petitioner GMA, Governor Andal Ampatuan, Sr., and Atty. Lintang H. Bedol, for violation of Section 42 (b)(3) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 9369, amending Section 27 (b) of R.A. No. 6646, docketed as Criminal Case No. RPSY-11-04432-CR.[34] The case was raffled to Branch 112 and the corresponding Warrant of Arrest was issued which was served on GMA on the same day.[35] | |||||
|
2010-12-07 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Indeed, legislators have a legal standing to see to it that the prerogative, powers and privileges vested by the Constitution in their office remain inviolate. Thus, they are allowed to question the validity of any official action which, to their mind, infringes on their prerogatives as legislators.[22] | |||||
|
2010-03-25 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Thus, in order for a ballot to be considered marked, it must clearly appear that the marks or words found on the ballot were deliberately placed thereon to serve as identification marks which therefore invalidate it.[11] | |||||