Practice question
A claimant demonstrates that official inaction will irretrievably prejudice her before the nominal administrative remedy can provide relief. The record also establishes an urgent need for judicial intervention and no other plain, speedy, adequate remedy. Officials argue that exhaustion is absolute regardless of those findings. Which analysis is correct?
- The doctrine forbids consideration of urgency.
- The stipulated circumstances support recognized exceptions, so an absolute-exhaustion argument is incorrect.
- Judicial intervention automatically proves the claimant's entire substantive case.
- The claimant must petition every unrelated agency.
- Official inaction is always immune from review.
Legal references
- Executive Order No. 292, Book VII, section 23, https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/5/53270/1000
- Pimentel III v. House of Representatives, G.R. Nos. 274778, 275405 and 276233, December 3, 2025, exhaustion of administrative remedies discussion, https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/dec2025/gr_274778_2025.html
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.