Agri Reviewer PDF

AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION LEANGIE L.
MORA
Atty. Mercano SSCRM College of Law
Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016
I. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF AGRARIAN and other terms and conditions of transfer of

REFORM ownership from landowners to farmworkers,
tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries,
whether the disputants stand in the proximate
A. DEFINITION OF ESSENTIAL TERMS relation of farm operator and beneficiary,
landowner and tenant, or lessor and lessee.
Agrarian Reform redistribution of lands,
regardless of crops or fruits produced to farmers Farmer refers to a natural person whose
and regular farmworkers who are landless, primary livelihood is cultivation of land or the
irrespective of tenurial arrangement, to include production of agricultural crops, either by
the totality of factors and support services himself, or primarily with the assistance of his
designed to lift the economic status of the immediate farm household, whether the land is
beneficiaries and all other arrangements owned by him, or by another person under a
alternative to the physical redistribution of leasehold or share tenancy agreement or
lands, such as production or profit-sharing, labor arrangement with the owner thereof
administration, and the distribution of shares of
Farmworker natural person who renders
stocks, which will allow beneficiaries to receive a
service for value as an employee or laborer in an
just share of the fruits of the lands they work
agricultural enterprise or farm regardless of
Agriculture, Agricultural Enterprise or whether his compensation is paid on a daily,
Agricultural Activity cultivation of the soil, weekly, monthly or "pakyaw" basis. The term
planting of crops, growing of fruit trees, raising includes an individual whose work has ceased as
of livestock, poultry or fish, including the a consequence of, or in connection with, a
harvesting of such farm products, and other farm pending agrarian dispute and who has not
activities and practices performed by a farmer in obtained a substantially equivalent and regular
conjunction with such farming operations done farm employment
by person whether natural or juridical
Regular Farmworker natural person who is
Agricultural Land land devoted to agricultural employed on a permanent basis by an
activity as defined in this Act and not classified as agricultural enterprise or farm
mineral, forest, residential, commercial or
Seasonal Farmworker natural person who is
industrial land
employed on a recurrent, periodic or
Agrarian Dispute refers to any controversy intermittent basis by an agricultural enterprise
relating to tenurial arrangements, whether or farm, whether as a permanent or a non-
leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, permanent laborer, such as "dumaan", "sacada",
over lands devoted to agriculture, including and the like
disputes concerning farmworkers' associations
Other Farmworker farmworker who does not
or representation of persons in negotiating,
fall under paragraphs
fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to
arrange terms or conditions of such tenurial
Is Agrarian Reform confined to distribution of lands to
arrangements
landless?
It includes any controversy relating to No. There are other alternative modes mentioned in
compensation of lands acquired under this Act the CARL.
Page 1 of 31
AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION LEANGIE L. MORA
the Congress may prescribe, taking into account

What are the alternative modes of Agrarian Reform ecological, developmental, or equity
mentioned in the CARL aside from land distribution? considerations, and subject to the payment of
(LPS) just compensation. In determining retention
a) Labor Administration limits, the State shall respect the right of small
b) Profit sharing landowners. The State shall further provide
c) Stock distribution incentives for voluntary land-sharing.
Who are the qualified beneficiaries of the CARL? Section 5. The State shall recognize the right of
a) Landless farmers farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, as well
b) Landless farmworkers as cooperatives, and other independent
farmers' organizations to participate in the
Does CARL applicable to all lands in the Philippines? planning, organization, and management of the
No. The CARL applies only to Agricultural lands. It does program, and shall provide support to
not apply to lands classified as residential, commercial, agriculture through appropriate technology and
research, and adequate financial, production,
industrial, mineral or forest land.
marketing, and other support services.
What are those disputes classified as Agrarian
Section 6. The State shall apply the principles of
Dispute under the CARL? (TACT) agrarian reform or stewardship, whenever
a) Controversy relating to Tenurial arrangements applicable in accordance with law, in the
b) Disputes concerning farmworkers disposition or utilization of other natural
Associations or representation of persons resources, including lands of the public domain
c) Controversy relating to Compensation of under lease or concession suitable to
agricultural lands agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead
d) Conditions of Transfer of ownership under the rights of small settlers, and the rights of
agrarian law indigenous communities to their ancestral
lands. The State may resettle landless farmers
B. CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS and farmworkers in its own agricultural estates
which shall be distributed to them in the
Article XII, Section 4-6, 1987 constitution manner provided by law.
Section 4. The State shall, by law, undertake
an agrarian reform program founded on the
Section 2, CARL, as amended under RA no. 9700
right of farmers and regular farmworkers who
are landless, to own directly or collectively the
lands they till or, in the case of other "SEC. 2. Declaration of Principles and Policies.
farmworkers, to receive a just share of the It is the policy of the State to pursue a
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall
(CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and
encourage and undertake the just distribution
farmworkers will receive the highest
of all agricultural lands, subject to such
consideration to promote social justice and to
priorities and reasonable retention limits as
move the nation toward sound rural
development and industrialization, and the
establishment of owner cultivatorship of
Page 2 of 31
of economic-size farms as the basis of case of other farmworkers, to receive a just

Philippine agriculture. "The State shall share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the
promote industrialization and full State shall encourage and undertake the just
employment based on sound agricultural distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to
development and agrarian reform, through the priorities and retention limits set forth in
industries that make full and efficient use of this Act, taking into account ecological,
human and natural resources, and which are developmental, and equity considerations,
competitive in both domestic and foreign and subject to the payment of just
markets: Provided, That the conversion of compensation. The State shall respect the
agricultural lands into industrial, commercial right of small landowners, and shall provide
or residential lands shall take into account, incentive for voluntary land-sharing. "As
tillers' rights and national food security. much as practicable, the implementation of
Further, the State shall protect Filipino the program shall be community-based to
enterprises against unfair foreign competition assure, among others, that the farmers shall
and trade practices. have greater control of farmgate prices, and
easier access to credit.
"The State recognizes that there is not enough
agricultural land to be divided and distributed "The State shall recognize the right of farmers,
to each farmer and regular farmworker so farmworkers and landowners, as well as
that each one can own his/her economic-size cooperatives and other independent farmers'
family farm. This being the case, a meaningful organizations, to participate in the planning,
agrarian reform program to uplift the lives organization, and management of the
and economic status of the farmer and his/her program, and shall provide support to
children can only be achieved through agriculture through appropriate technology
simultaneous industrialization aimed at and research, and adequate financial,
developing a self-reliant and independent production, marketing and other support
national economy effectively controlled by services. "The State shall recognize and
Filipinos. "To this end, the State may, in the enforce, consistent with existing laws, the
interest of national welfare or defense, rights of rural women to own and control
establish and operate vital industries. "A more land, taking into consideration the
equitable distribution and ownership of land, substantive equality between men and
with due regard to the rights of landowners to women as qualified beneficiaries, to receive a
just compensation, retention rights under just share of the fruits thereof, and to be
Section 6 of Republic Act No. 6657, as represented in advisory or appropriate
amended, and to the ecological needs of the decision-making bodies. These rights shall be
nation, shall be undertaken to provide independent of their male relatives and of
farmers and farmworkers with the their civil status. "The State shall apply the
opportunity to enhance their dignity and principles of agrarian reform, or stewardship,
improve the quality of their lives through whenever applicable, in accordance with law,
greater productivity of agricultural lands. "The in the disposition or utilization of other
agrarian reform program is founded on the natural resources, including lands of the
right of farmers and regular farmworkers, public domain, under lease or concession,
who are landless, to own directly or, in the suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights,
Page 3 of 31
homestead rights of small settlers and the the public domain to qualified entities for the
rights of indigenous communities to their development of capital-intensive farms, and
ancestral lands. "The State may resettle traditional and pioneering crops especially
landless farmers and farmworkers in its own those for exports subject to the prior rights of
agricultural estates, which shall be distributed the beneficiaries under this Act."
to them in the manner provided by law.
What are the rights of landless farmers and
"By means of appropriate incentives, the
farmworkers?
State shall encourage the formation and
a) to own directly or collectively the lands they till
maintenance of economic-size family farms to
(for famers and regular farmworkers only)
be constituted by individual beneficiaries and
b) to receive a just share of the fruits of the lands
small landowners. "The State shall protect the
they work (for farmers and all kinds of
rights of subsistence fishermen, especially of
farmworkers)
local communities, to the preferential use of
communal marine and fishing resources, both
What are the limitations of taking in the land
inland and offshore. It shall provide support to
mentioned in the constitution?
such fishermen through appropriate
a) Priorities and reasonable retention limits to be
technology and research, adequate financial,
prescribed by the Congress
production and marketing assistance and
b) Payment of just compensation
other services. The State shall also protect,
develop and conserve such resources. The
Who are the persons whose rights shall be respected
protection shall extend to offshore fishing
by the state in the determination of retention limits?
grounds of subsistence fishermen against
Small landowners
foreign intrusion. Fishworkers shall receive a
just share from their labor in the utilization of
What right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners,
marine and fishing resources. "The State shall
as well as cooperatives, and other independent
be guided by the principles that land has a
farmers' organizations shall be recognized in the
social function and land ownership has a
agrarian reform as provided by the constitution?
social responsibility. Owners of agricultural
Right to participate in the planning, organization, and
land have the obligation to cultivate directly
management of the program
or through labor administration the lands
they own and thereby make the land
How can the state provide support to the agriculture?
productive. "The State shall provide
Through appropriate technology and research, and
incentives to landowners to invest the
adequate financial, production, marketing, and other
proceeds of the agrarian reform program to
support service.
promote industrialization, employment and
privatization of public sector enterprises.
Financial instruments used as payment for C. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CARL
lands shall contain features that shall enhance
negotiability and acceptability in the Association of Small Landowners v. DAR, 175 SCRA
marketplace. 343
"The State may lease undeveloped lands of What are the inherent powers of the state?
a) Police Power
Page 4 of 31
b) Power of Eminent Domain such owners of whatever lands they may own in excess
c) Power of Taxation of the maximum area allowed, there is definitely taking
under the power of eminent domain for which payment
Power of Eminent Domain of just compensation is imperative.
Inherent power of the state that enables it to forcibly
acquire private lands intended for public use upon Since the power to determine just compensation is
payment of just compensation vested in courts, was the just compensation
determined under the CARL a violation of the
What are the requirements for the proper exercise of constitution?
the power of eminent domain? No. It is true that the determination of just
a) Public use compensation is a power lodged in the courts.
b) Just compensation However, there is no law which prohibits
administrative bodies like the DAR from determining
What are the elements of Police Power? just compensation. In fact, just compensation can be
a) Lawful means that amount agreed upon by the landowner and the
b) Lawful subject government even without judicial intervention so
long as both parties agree. The DAR can determine just
Can the state exercise two inherent powers at the compensation through appraisers and if the landowner
same time? agrees, then judicial intervention is not needed. What
Yes by mingling the two inherent powers. In the is contemplated by law however is that, the just
mingling of the police power and the power of eminent compensation determined by an administrative body is
domain, the latter is being used as an implement of the merely preliminary. If the landowner does not agree
former. with the finding of just compensation by an
administrative body, then it can go to court and the
Distinctions between the police power and the power determination of the latter shall be the final
of eminent domain determination. This is even so provided by RA 6657
a) The property condemned under the police
power is noxious or intended for noxious In the implementation of the agrarian reform, what
purpose while in the power of eminent domain, are the modes of compensation provided under the
the property is wholesome and intended for a CARL?
public use. a) Cash payment
b) The confiscation of property in the exercise of Lands above 50 hectares 25% cash,
police power is not compensable, unlike the 75% govt financial instruments
taking of property under the power of eminent negotiable at any time
domain, which requires the payment of just Lands above 24 hectares & up to 50
compensation to the owner. hectares 30% cash, 70% govt
financial instruments negotiable at
What inherent power did the state exercised in the any time
CARL? Power of eminent domain or police power? Lands 24 hectares & below 35% cash,
Both. The measures under challenge merely prescribe 65% govt financial instruments
retention limits for landowners, there is an exercise of negotiable at any time
the police power for the regulation of private property b) Shares of stock in GOCC, LBP preferred shares,
in accordance with the constitution. But where, to carry physical assets or other qualified investments
out such regulation, it becomes necessary to deprive in accordance with guidelines set by the PARC
Page 5 of 31
c) Tax credits which can be used against any tax

liability
d) LBP bonds
Were the modes of compensation provided under the

CARL unconstitutional?
No. It cannot be denied that the traditional medium for
the payment of just compensation is money and no
other. However agrarian reform is not a traditional
exercise of the power of eminent domain. It is not an
ordinary expropriation where only a specific property
of relatively limited area is sought to be taken by the
State from its owner for a specific and perhaps local
purpose but a revolutionary kind of expropriation. It
includes all agricultural lands nationwide and it will
involve not mere millions of pesos. The cost will be
tremendous and it may bankrupt the government. For
this reason, the framers of the CARL only chose the
more practical method.
Page 6 of 31
II. SCOPE OF THE CARL A. AS TO COVERED LANDS
Section 4, CARL, as amended by RA No. 9700 What are the lands covered by the CARP
a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public
SEC. 4. Scope. The Comprehensive Agrarian domain devoted to or suitable for agriculture.
Reform Law of 1988 shall cover, regardless of b) All lands of the public domain in excess of the
tenurial arrangement and commodity specific limits as determined by Congress
produced, all public and private agricultural c) All other lands owned by the Government
lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and devoted to or suitable for agriculture
Executive Order No. 229, including other lands d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for
of the public domain suitable for agriculture: agriculture regardless of the agricultural
Provided, That landholdings of landowners with products raised or that can be raised thereon
a total area of five (5) hectares and below shall
not be covered for acquisition and distribution What are the lands not covered by the CARP
to qualified beneficiaries. IHAcCS "More a) Ancestral lands of each indigenous cultural
specifically, the following lands are covered by community
the CARP: "(a) All alienable and disposable lands b) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for
of the public domain devoted to or suitable for parks, wildlife, forest reserves, reforestation, fish
agriculture. No reclassification of forest or sanctuaries and breeding grounds, watersheds
mineral lands to agricultural lands shall be
and mangroves
undertaken after the approval of this Act until
c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for
Congress, taking into account ecological,
prawn farms and fishponds
developmental and equity considerations, shall
have determined by law, the specific limits of
d) Lands with at least 18% slope
the public domain; "(b) All lands of the public e) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used an
domain in excess of the specific limits as found to be necessary for
determined by Congress in the preceding national defense
paragraph; "(c) All other lands owned by the school sites and campuses
Government devoted to or suitable for experimental farm stations operated for
agriculture; and "(d) All private lands devoted to educational purposes
or suitable for agriculture regardless of the seeds and seedling research and pilot
agricultural products raised or that can be raised production center
thereon. "A comprehensive inventory system in church sites and convents
consonance with the national land use plan shall mosque sites and Islamic centers
be instituted by the Department of Agrarian communal burial grounds and
Reform (DAR), in accordance with the Local cemeteries
Government Code, for the purpose of properly penal colonies and penal farms
identifying and classifying farmlands within one govt and private research and
(1) year from effectivity of this Act, without quarantine centers
prejudice to the implementation of the land f) landholdings of landowners with a total area of
acquisition and distribution." five (5) hectares and below
g) lands devoted to the raising of livestock, poultry
and swine [Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR]
h) lands obtained through homestead patent [Alita
v. CA]
Page 7 of 31
EXCEPTION: lands obtained through

homestead patent that are not being 3. Paris v. Alfeche
personally cultivated by original As an exception to the rule laid down in the case of
homestead grantees or their direct Alita vs. CA, homestead grantees or their direct
compulsory heirs [Paris v. Alfeche] compulsory heir can own and retain the original
homesteads only for as long as they continue to
CASES: personally cultivate them. That parcels of land are
covered by homestead patents will not automatically
1. Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR exempt them from the operation of land reform. It is
Section 2 of RA 6657 which includes private the fact of continued personally cultivation by the
agricultural lands devoted to commercial livestock, original grantees or their direct compulsory heir that
poultry and swine raising in the definition of shall exempt their lands from land reform coverage.
commercial farms is invalid. Transcripts of the In the case at bar, the petitioner herself admitted that
deliberations of the Constitutional Commission of the subject parcels are fully tenanted, thus she is
1986 on the meaning of the word agricultural, clearly not cultivating them, nor will she personally
clearly show that it was never the intention of the cultivate any part thereof. Therefore, she has no right
framers of the Constitution to include livestock and to retain any portion of her landholdings.
poultry industry in the coverage of the
constitutionally-mandated agrarian reform program B. AS TO CONTROVERSY
of the Government.
What are the matters that fall under the jurisdiction
2. Alita vs. CA of the DAR/DARAB?
The Philippine constitution respects the superiority a) Adjudication of all matters involving
of the homesteaders right over the rights of the implementation of agrarian reform [Stanfilco
tenants guaranteed by the Agrarian Reform statute. Employees v. Dole Phil.]
In point is Section 6 of Article XIII of the 1987 b) Resolution of agrarian disputes and disputes
Constitution which provides that the state shall apply arising from tenurial arrangements [Stanfilco
the principles of Agrarian Reform or stewardship, Employees v. Dole Phil.]
whenever applicable in accordance with law, in the c) Approval and disapproval of the conversion,
disposition or utilization of other natural resources, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural
including lands of public domain under lease or lands into residential, commercial, industrial
concession suitable to agriculture, subject to prior and other non-agricultural uses. [Stanfilco
rights, homestead rights of small settlers, and the Employees v. Dole Phil.]
rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral d) Disputes arising from joint venture agreements
lands. Additionally, it is worthy of note that the newly [Cubero v. Laguna West]
promulgated Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of e) Disputes relating to the rights and obligations
1998 or RA 6657 likewise contains a proviso of two juridical persons engaged in the
supporting the inapplicability of PD 27 to lands management, cultivation and use of
covered by homestead patents. Section 6 of RA 6657 agricultural lands acquired through CARP
provides that original homestead grantees or their [Islanders CARP-Farmers v. Lapanday]
direct compulsory heirs who still own the original
homestead at the time of the approval of this Act shall
retain the same areas as long as they continue to
cultivate said homestead.
Page 8 of 31
What are the matters not falling under the

jurisdiction of the DAR/DARAB? What are the important requisites in order that a
a) Cases involving breaches of contract and the court may acquire criminal jurisdiction? [People v.
parties have no tenurial, leasehold, or any Vanzuela]
other agrarian relationship [Stanfilco a) Jurisdiction over subject matter
Employees v. Dole Phil.] b) Jurisdiction over territory where the offense
b) Criminal cases even if it involves agricultural was committed
land and the relation over this land [People v. c) Jurisdiction over the person of the accused
Vanzuela]
c) Cases involving action for recovery of
CASES:
possession and juridical tie of landownership
and tenancy are not present [DEARBC v. 1. Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Philippines
Sangunay] The controversy involved in this case does not fall
under the jurisdiction of DARAB. Under RA 6657 and
What is the basis in the determination of whether a its implementing rules, agricultural lands and the
matter falls under the jurisdiction of DARAB? relationship over this land serves as the basis in the
Agricultural land and the relationship over this land determination of whether a matter falls under the
jurisdiction of DARAB. The parties in this case have
What are those disputes classified as Agrarian no tenurial, leasehold, or any other agrarian
Dispute under the CARL? (TACT) relationship that could bring their controversy within
1) Controversy relating to Tenurial arrangements the ambit of agrarian reform laws and within the
2) Disputes concerning farmworkers jurisdiction of the DARAB. The resolution of this case
Associations or representation of persons would involve the application of civil law on breaches
3) Controversy relating to Compensation of of contract rather than agrarian reform principles.
agricultural lands
4) Conditions of Transfer of ownership under the 2. People v. Vanzuela
agrarian law The crime of stafa committed by a tenant or lessee
does not fall under the jurisdiction of DARAB.
What are the indispensable elements for tenancy Jurisdiction of a tribunal over the subject matter of
relationship to exist? [Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil. an action is conferred by law. It is determined by the
& Mendoza v. Germino] material allegations of the complaint or information
Parties are the landowner and the tenant or and the law at the time the action was commenced.
agricultural lessee EO 229 vested the DAR with quasi-judicial powers to
Subject matter of the relationship is an determine and adjudicate agrarian reform matters;
agricultural land and jurisdiction over matters involving the
There is consent between the parties to the implementation of agrarian reform, except those
relationship falling under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
The purpose of the relationship is to bring DA and DENR. Under RA 6657, the DAR retains
about agricultural production jurisdiction over all agrarian reform matters. Clearly
There is personal cultivation on the part of the the law is deafeningly silent on the conferment of
tenant or agricultural lessee any criminal jurisdiction in favor of the DARAB. No
The harvest is shared between the landowner law has conferred the DARAB of the jurisdiction to
and the tenant or the agricultural lessee try criminal cases even if it involves agricultural land
Page 9 of 31
and the relation over this land. Therefore the DARAB respondents from the respective portions of the
has no authority to try criminal cases at all. subject lands they allegedly entered and occupied
illegally. Clearly no agrarian dispute exist between
3. Mendoza vs. Germino the parties. The absence of tenurial arrangements
Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by whether leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or
the allegations in the complaint. It is determined otherwise cannot be overlooked. In this case, no
exclusively by the constitution and the law. It cannot juridical tie of landownership and tenancy was
be conferred by the voluntary act or agreement of alleged between the parties which would so
the parties or acquired through a waived, enlarged categorize the controversy as an agrarian dispute. It
or diminished by their act or omission, nor conferred is clearly an action for recovery of possession and not
by the acquiescence of the court. Under Section 50 an agrarian dispute.
of RA 6657, as well as Section 34 of EO 129-A, the
DARAB has primary and exclusive jurisdiction, both 5. Islanders CARP-Farmers v. Lapanday
original and appellate, to determine and adjudicate Controversy in this case falls under the jurisdiction of
all agrarian disputes involving the implementation of DARAB. Sec. 50 of RA 6657 and sec. 17 of EO 229 vest
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, and in the DAR the primary and exclusive jurisdiction,
other agrarian laws and their implementing rules and both original and appellate, to determine and
regulations. And under BP 129, as amended by RA adjudicate all matters involving the implementation
7691, the MTC shall have exclusive original of agrarian reform. Through EO 129-A, DARAB was
jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful created to assume the powers and functions of the
detainer. Therefore MTC has the jurisdiction since DAR pertaining to the adjudication of agrarian
the law exclusively conferred it the authority to try reform cases. Moreover Revised Rules of the DARAB
cases involving forcible entry. Furthermore, although provides that the DARAB shall have the primary and
respondent averred tenancy as an affirmative exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate to
defense in his answer, this did not automatically determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes
divest the MTC of jurisdiction to dispose of the involving the implementation of the CARP and its
ejectment suit on its merits because allegation of implementing rules and regulation. Citing the
tenancy does not divest the MTC of jurisdiction. definition of Agrarian dispute under Sec. 3 of RA
6657, it is clear that the definition is broad enough to
4. DEARBC v. Sangunay and Labunos include disputes arising from any tenurial
Controversy in this case does not fall under the arrangements beyond that in the traditional
jurisdiction of DARAB. Jurisdiction of tribunal, landowner-tenant or lessor-lessee relationship.
including a quasi-judicial office or government Therefore disputes relating to the rights and
agency, over the nature and subject matter of a obligations of two juridical persons engaged in the
petition or complaint is entitled to any or all such management, cultivation and use of agricultural
reliefs. Sec. 50 of RA 6657 provides that DARAB is lands acquired through CARP fall within the ambit of
vested with the primary jurisdiction to determine the phrase any controversy relating to tenurial
and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall arrangements.
have the exclusive jurisdiction over all matters
involving the implementation of the Agrarian Reform 6. Cubero v. Laguna West
Program. Only the DARAB can adjudicate all agrarian DARAB has jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate
disputes, cases, controversies and matters or all agrarian disputes involving implementation of the
incidents involving the implementation of the CARP. CARL. Included in the definition of agrarian disputes
All that DEARBC prayed for was the ejectment of the are those arising from tenurial arrangements beyond
Page 10 of 31
the traditional landowner-tenant or lessor-lessee

relationship such as disputes arising from joint
venture agreements. Thus, the DARAB has
jurisdiction over disputes arising from the instant
Joint Production Agreement entered into by the
parties in this case.
Page 11 of 31
III. ACQUISITION OF LANDS UNDER THE Section 5, CARL

CARL
Section 5. Schedule of Implementation. The
Section 4, CARL, as amended by RA No. 9700 distribution of all lands covered by this Act shall
be implemented immediately and completed
within ten (10) years from the effectivity
SEC. 4. Scope. The Comprehensive Agrarian
thereof.
Reform Law of 1988 shall cover, regardless of
tenurial arrangement and commodity *NOTE: Sec. 7 of RA 9700 extended the implementation of the
produced, all public and private agricultural CARL, particularly the acquisition and distribution of
agricultural lands to June 30, 2014
lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and
Executive Order No. 229, including other lands
of the public domain suitable for agriculture: Section 7, CARL, as amended
Provided, That landholdings of landowners with
a total area of five (5) hectares and below shall SEC. 7. Priorities. - The DAR, in coordination
not be covered for acquisition and distribution with the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council
to qualified beneficiaries. IHAcCS "More (PARC) shall plan and program the final
specifically, the following lands are covered by acquisition and distribution of all remaining
the CARP: "(a) All alienable and disposable lands unacquired and undistributed agricultural lands
of the public domain devoted to or suitable for from the effectivity of this Act until June 30,
agriculture. No reclassification of forest or 2014. Lands shall be acquired and distributed as
mineral lands to agricultural lands shall be follows:
undertaken after the approval of this Act until
Congress, taking into account ecological, Phase One: During the five (5)-year extension
developmental and equity considerations, shall period hereafter all remaining lands above fifty
have determined by law, the specific limits of (50) hectares shall be covered for purposes of
the public domain; "(b) All lands of the public agrarian reform upon the effectivity of this Act.
domain in excess of the specific limits as All private agricultural lands of landowners with
determined by Congress in the preceding aggregate landholdings in excess of fifty (50)
paragraph; "(c) All other lands owned by the hectares which have already been subjected to
Government devoted to or suitable for a notice of coverage issued on or before
agriculture; and "(d) All private lands devoted to December 10, 2008; rice and corn lands under
or suitable for agriculture regardless of the Presidential Decree No. 27; all idle or
agricultural products raised or that can be raised abandoned lands; all private lands voluntarily
thereon. "A comprehensive inventory system in offered by the owners for agrarian reform:
consonance with the national land use plan shall Provided, That with respect to voluntary land
be instituted by the Department of Agrarian transfer, only those submitted by June 30, 2009
Reform (DAR), in accordance with the Local shall be allowed Provided, further, That after
Government Code, for the purpose of properly June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition shall be
identifying and classifying farmlands within one limited to voluntary offer to sell and compulsory
(1) year from effectivity of this Act, without acquisition: Provided, furthermore, That all
prejudice to the implementation of the land previously acquired lands wherein valuation is
acquisition and distribution." subject to challenge by landowners shall be
completed and finally resolved pursuant to
Section 17 of Republic Act No. 6657, as
amended: Provided, finally, as mandated by the
lic Act No.
Page 12 of 31
Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, and "(b) All remaining private agricultural lands of
Republic Act No. 3844,as amended, only landowners with aggregate landholdings in
farmers (tenants or lessees) and regular excess of twenty-four (24) hectares, regardless
farmworkers actually tilling the lands, as as to whether these have been subjected to
certified under oath by the Barangay Agrarian notices of coverage or not, with the
Reform Council (BARC) and attested under oath implementation to begin on July 1, 2012 and to
by the landowners, are the qualified be completed by June 30, 2013;
beneficiaries. The intended beneficiary shall
state under oath before the judge of the city or Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands
municipal court that he/she is willing to work on commencing with large landholdings and
the land to make it productive and to assume proceeding to medium and small landholdings
the obligation of paying the amortization for the under the following schedule:
compensation of the land and the land taxes
thereon; all lands foreclosed by government "(a) Lands of landowners with aggregate
financial institutions; all lands acquired by the landholdings above ten (10) hectares up to
Presidential Commission on Good Government twenty- four (24)hectares, insofar as the excess
(PCGG); and all other lands owned by the hectarage above ten (10) hectares is concerned,
government devoted to or suitable for to begin on July 1,2012 and to be completed by
agriculture, which shall be acquired and June 30, 2013; and
distributed immediately upon the effectivity of
this Act, with the implementation to be "(b) Lands of landowners with aggregate
completed by June 30, 2012; landholdings from the retention limit up to ten
(10) hectares, to begin on July 1, 2013 and to be
Phase Two: (a) Lands twenty-four (24) hectares completed by June 30, 2014; to implement
up to fifty (50) hectares shall likewise be covered principally the right of farmers and regular
for purposes of agrarian reform upon the farmworkers who are landless, to own directly
effectivity of this Act. All alienable and or collectively the lands they till.
disposable public agricultural lands; all arable
public agricultural lands under agro-forest, The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of
pasture and agricultural leases already all agricultural lands covered by this program
cultivated and planted to crops in accordance shall be made in accordance with the above
with Section 6, Article XIII of the Constitution; all order o f priority, which shall be provided in the
public agricultural lands which are to be opened implementing rules to be prepared by the PARC,
for new development and resettlement: and all taking into consideration the following: the
private agricultural lands of landowners with landholdings wherein the farmers are organized
aggregate landholdings above twenty-four (24) and understand ,the meaning and obligations of
hectares up to fifty (50) hectares which have farmland ownership; the distribution of lands to
already been subjected to a notice of coverage the tillers at the earliest practicable time; the
issued on or before December 1O, 2008, to enhancement of agricultural productivity; and
implement principally the rights of farmers and the availability of funds and resources to
regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own implement and support the program: Provided,
directly or collectively the lands they till, which That the PARC shall design and conduct
shall be distributed immediately upon the seminars, symposia, information campaigns,
effectivity of this Act, with the implementation and other similar programs for farmers who are
to be completed by June 30, 2012; and not organized or not covered by any landholding
Page 13 of 31
Completion by these farmers of the That in no case should the agrarian reform
aforementioned seminars, symposia, and other beneficiaries' sex, economic, religious, social,
similar programs shall be encouraged in the cultural and political attributes adversely affect
implementation of this Act particularly the the distribution of lands.
provisions of this Section.
Order of Priorities of Coverage
"Land acquisition and distribution shall be
PHASE 1 public lands
completed by June 30, 2014 on a province-by-
PHASE 2 public lands
province basis. In any case, the PARC or the
PARC Executive Committee (PARC EXCOM), PHASE 3 private agricultural lands
upon recommendation by the Provincial
Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee
(PARCCOM), may declare certain provinces as Section 16, CARL
priority land reform areas, in which case the
acquisition and distribution of private SECTION 16. Procedure for Acquisition of
agricultural lands therein under advanced Private Lands. For purposes of acquisition of
phases may be implemented ahead of the above private lands, the following procedures shall be
schedules on the condition that prior phases in followed:
these provinces have been completed:
Provided, That notwithstanding the above (a) After having identified the land, the
schedules, phase three (b) shall not be landowners and the beneficiaries, the DAR shall
implemented in a particular province until at send its notice to acquire the land to the owners
least ninety percent (90%) of the provincial thereof, by personal delivery or registered mail,
balance of that particular province as of January and post the same in a conspicuous place in the
1, 2009 under Phase One, Phase Two (a), Phase municipal building and barangay hall of the
Two (b),,and Phase Three (a), excluding lands place where the property is located. Said notice
under the jurisdiction of the Department of shall contain the offer of the DAR to pay a
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR), corresponding value in accordance with the
have been successfully completed. valuation set forth in Sections 17, 18, and other
pertinent provisions hereof.
The PARC shall establish guidelines to
implement the above priorities and distribution (b) Within thirty (30) days from the date of
scheme, including the determination of who are receipt of written notice by personal delivery or
qualified beneficiaries: Provided, That an registered mail, the landowner, his
owner-tiller may be a beneficiary of the land administrator or representative shall inform the
he/she does not own but is actually cultivating DAR of his acceptance or rejection of the offer.
to the extent of the difference between the area
of the land he/she owns and the award ceiling (c) If the landowner accepts the offer of the
of three (3) hectares: Provided, further, That DAR, the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) shall
collective ownership by the farmer beneficiaries pay the landowner the purchase price of the
shall be subject to Section 25 of Republic Act No. land within thirty (30) days after he executes
6657, as amended: Provided, furthermore, That and delivers a deed of transfer in favor of the
rural women shall be given the opportunity to government and surrenders the Certificate of
participate in the development planning and Title and other muniments of title.
implementation of this Act: Provided, finally,
Page 14 of 31
(d) In case of rejection or failure to reply, the a) Landowner accepts Landbank will
DAR shall conduct summary administrative pay the landowner within 30 days from
proceedings to determine the compensation for execution & delivery of Deed of
the land requiring the landowner, the LBP and Transfer
other interested parties to submit evidence as b) Landowner rejects DAR will
to the just compensation for the land, within determine the just compensation thru
fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the notice. the summary administrative
After the expiration of the above period, the proceedings
matter is deemed submitted for decision. The c) Landowner disagrees with the DAR
DAR shall decide the case within thirty (30) days decision landowner may bring the
after it is submitted for decision. matter to the regular courts of justice
for final determination of just
(e) Upon receipt by the landowner of the compensation
corresponding payment or, in case of rejection 4) Taking of immediate possession of the land by
or no response from the landowner, upon the the DAR
deposit with an accessible bank designated by
a) If the landowner receives the
the DAR of the compensation in cash or in LBP
corresponding payment; or
bonds in accordance with this Act, the DAR shall
b) if the landowner does not respond to
take immediate possession of the land and shall
request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a
the Notice of Acquisition
Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of 5) Request by the DAR to Register of Deeds to
the Republic of the Philippines. The DAR shall issue a Transfer Certificate of Title to the
thereafter proceed with the redistribution of Republic of the Phil.
the land to the qualified beneficiaries. 6) Distribution of lands to then qualified
beneficiaries
(f) Any party who disagrees with the decision
may bring the matter to the court of proper What are the 2 notices required for the validity of
jurisdiction for final determination of just implementation?
compensation. a) Notice of coverage [DAR AO no. 12]
b) Notice of acquisition [Sec. 16, CARL]
What are the procedures in compulsory land
When no notice of coverage has been issued or if
acquisition
notice of coverage has been issued but did not
1) Identification by the DAR of the land,
particularly state the portions of land that will be
landowner & beneficiary
included, what would be the effect?
2) Notice by the DAR to the landowner about the
It should be treated as violation of constitutional due
compulsory acquisition and the price offer
process and should be deemed arbitrary, capricious,
thru:
whimsical and tainted with grave abuse of discretion
a) Personal notice or by registered mail
b) Posting of notice in a conspicuous
When does the title or ownership of the land transfer
place in the brgy hall & municipal hall
to the state?
where the land is located
Only upon full payment of the just compensation. Until
3) Reply by the landowner about his acceptance
the just compensation is finally determined and fully
or rejection of the offered price
paid, the title and ownership remains with the
landowners even if the DAR has deposited the offered
Page 15 of 31
price with the Landbank. The mere fact that the DAR (b) The terms and conditions of such transfer
has deposited the offered price does not warrant the shall not be less favorable to the transferee than
cancellation of the owners title. those of the government's standing offer to
purchase from the landowner and to resell to
Does opening of trust account constitute payment? the beneficiaries, if such offers have been made
No because the law requires just compensation to be and are fully known to both parties.
paid in cash and Landbank bonds and not by trust
account. (c) The voluntary agreement shall include
sanctions for non-compliance by either party
Section 19, CARL and shall be duly recorded and its
implementation monitored by the DAR.
SECTION 19. Incentives for Voluntary Offers for *NOTE: Sec. 7 of CARL, as amended by RA 9700, allowed
Sales. Landowners, other than banks and voluntary land transfer up to June 30, 2009 only. After the said
other financial institutions, who voluntarily date, modes of acquisition are limited to voluntary offer to sell
offer their lands for sale shall be entitled to an and compulsory acquisition
additional five percent (5%) cash payment.
What are the modes of land acquisition?
What are the documentary requirements for a) Voluntary offer to sell
voluntary offer to sell? b) Compulsory acquisition
a) Title or proof of ownership, if untitled c) Voluntary land transfer
b) Tax declaration
c) Approved survey plan CASE:
*NOTE: if the landowner fails to submit the documentary
requirements the land will be subjected to compulsory Roxas & Co., Inc. v. CA
acquisition. The acquisition Proceedings over the haciendas in this
Section 20, CARL case were not valid. For a valid implementation of the
CAR Program, two notices are required first the Notice of
ECTION 20. Voluntary Land Transfer. Coverage and letter of invitation to a preliminary
Landowners of agricultural lands subject to conference sent to the landowner, the representatives of
acquisition under this Act may enter into a the BARC, LBP, farmer beneficiaries and other interested
voluntary arrangement for direct transfer of parties and second, the Notice of Acquisition sent to the
their lands to qualified beneficiaries subject to landowner under Section 16 of the CARL. The importance
the following guidelines: of the first notice, the Notice of Coverage and the letter
(a) All notices for voluntary land transfer must of invitation to the conference, and its actual conduct
be submitted to the DAR within the first year of cannot be understated. They are steps designed to
the implementation of the CARP. Negotiations comply with the requirements of administrative due
between the landowners and qualified process. The implementation of the CARL is an exercise
beneficiaries covering any voluntary land of the States police power and the power of eminent
transfer which remain unresolved after one (1)
domain. To the extent that the CARL prescribes
year shall not be recognized and such land shall
instead be acquired by the government and retention limits to the landowners, there is an exercise of
transferred pursuant to this Act. police power for the regulation of private property in
accordance with the Constitution. But where, to carry
Page 16 of 31
out such regulation, the owners are deprived of lands of the corporation that the agricultural land,
they own in excess of the maximum area allowed, there actually devoted to agricultural activities,
is also a taking under the power of eminent domain. In bears in relation to the company's total
this case, respondent DAR claims that it sent a letter of assets, under such terms and conditions as
invitation to petitioner corporation, through Jaime may be agreed upon by them. In no case shall
Pimentel, the administrator of Hacienda Palico but he the compensation received by the workers at
was not authorized as such by the corporation. The SC the time the shares of stocks are distributed
stressed that the failure of respondent DAR to comply be reduced. The same principle shall be
with the requisites of due process in the acquisition applied to associations, with respect to their
equity or participation. Corporations or
proceedings does not give the SC the power to nullify the
associations which voluntarily divest a
CLOAs already issued to the farmer beneficiaries. The
proportion of their capital stock, equity or
Court said, to assume the power is to short-circuit the
participation in favor of their workers or other
administrative process, which has yet to run its regular qualified beneficiaries under this section shall
course. Respondent DAR must be given the chance to be deemed to have complied with the
correct its procedural lapses in the acquisition provisions of the Act: Provided, That the
proceedings. In Hacienda Palico alone, CLOA's were following conditions are complied with: a) In
issued to 177 farmer beneficiaries in 1993. Since then order to safeguard the right of beneficiaries
until the present, these farmers have been cultivating who own shares of stocks to dividends and
their lands. It goes against the basic precepts of justice, other financial benefits, the books of the
fairness and equity to deprive these people, through no corporation or association shall be subject to
fault of their own, of the land they till. The petition is periodic audit by certified public accountants
granted in part and the acquisition proceedings over the chosen by the beneficiaries; b) Irrespective of
the value of their equity in the corporation or
three haciendas are nullified for respondent DAR's
association, the beneficiaries shall be assured
failure to observe due process.
of at least one (1) representative in the board
IV. ALTERNATIVES TO LAND ACQUISITION of directors, or in a management or executive
committee, if one exists, of the corporation or
Section 31, CARL association; and c) Any shares acquired by
such workers and beneficiaries shall have the
SECTION 31. Corporate Landowners. same rights and features as all other shares.
Corporate landowners may voluntarily d) Any transfer of shares of stocks by the
transfer ownership over their agricultural original beneficiaries shall be void ab initio
landholdings to the Republic of the unless said transaction is in favor of a qualified
Philippines pursuant to Section 20 hereof or and registered beneficiary within the same
to qualified beneficiaries, under such terms corporation. If within two (2) years from the
and conditions, consistent with this Act, as approval of this Act, the land or stock transfer
they may agree upon, subject to confirmation envisioned above is not made or realized or
by the DAR. Upon certification by the DAR, the plan for such stock distribution approved
corporations owning agricultural lands may by the PARC within the same period, the
give their qualified beneficiaries the right to agricultural land of the corporate owners or
purchase such proportion of the capital stock corporation shall be subject to the
compulsory coverage of this Act.
Page 17 of 31
CASE: and effectively deprived the beneficiaries

of equal shares of stock in the
Hacienda Luisita v. PARC corporation, for, in net effect, these
6,296 qualified beneficiaries, who
Guide Questions: theoretically had given up their rights to
the land that could have been distributed
1) Who can approve and revoke Stock Distribution to them, suffered a dilution of their due
Plans under the CARL? With respect to share entitlement.
revocation, what according to the court, was Watering down of the shares of stock.
the basis of this authority? HLI has chosen to use the shares
The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) earmarked for farmworkers as reward
has jurisdiction, power and authority to approve system chips to water down the shares of
and nullify or revoke Stock Distribution Plans. RA the original 6,296 beneficiaries. It is clear
6657 explicitly vested the PARC with the power that the original 6,296 beneficiaries, who
to approve stock distribution plans however it is were qualified at the time of the
silent when it comes to revoking or recalling an approval of the SDP, suffered from
approved SDP. According to the court, such watering down of shares. Each original
power or authority is deemed possessed under beneficiary is entitled to 18,804.32 HLI
the doctrine of necessary implication, a basic shares. The original beneficiaries got less
postulate that what is implied in a statute is as than the guaranteed no. of share.
much a part of it as that which is expressed. Time frame of the implementation of
Applying the said doctrine, the conferment of the SDP. Par. 3 of the SDOA expressly
express power to approve a SDP necessarily providing for 30-year timeframe for HLI-
includes the power to revoke the approval of the to-beneficiaries stock transfers an
plan. arrangement contrary to what Sec. 11 of
DAO10 prescribes. Said sec. 11 provides
2) In the case, did the supreme court declare Sec. for the implementation of the approved
31 of the CARL unconstitutional? SDP within 3 months from receipt by the
No, SC did not declare Sec. 31 unconstitutional corporate landowner of the approval of
because of the following reasons: the plan by PARC.
Constitutional question was not raised at
the earliest possible opportunity. 4) Does the non-impairment clause bar the court
The resolution of the constitutional issue from reviewing the validity of a partially
is not the lis mota of the case implemented SDP?
Sec. 31 simply implements sec. 4 of art. No because the non-impairment protection is
XIII of the constitution that land can be applicable only to laws that derogate prior acts
owned collectively by farmers. or contracts by enlarging, abridging or in any
manner changing the intention of the parties and
3) Did the SC uphold the revocation of the SDP? SDOA is not a law.
Yes, SC upheld the revocation because of the 3
objectionable features of the SDP:
Man days. In using man days as the
basis for the acquisition of shares, HLI
violated the rule on stock distribution
Page 18 of 31
IV. RETENTION RIGHTS, EXEMPTIONS, a leaseholder and shall lose his right to be a
EXCLUSIONS beneficiary under this Act. In case the tenant
chooses to be a beneficiary in another
agricultural land, he loses his right as a
Section 6, of RA 6657 as amended by RA 9700 leaseholder to the land retained by the
landowner. The tenant must exercise this option
within a period of one (1) year from the time the
SECTION 6. Retention Limits. Except as
landowner manifests his choice of the area for
otherwise provided in this Act, no person may
retention. In all cases, the security of tenure of
own or retain, directly or indirectly, any public
the farmers or farmworkers on the land prior to
or private agricultural land, the size of which
the approval of this Act shall be respected.
shall vary according to factors governing a viable
family-size farm, such as commodity produced,
Upon the effectivity of this Act, any sale,
terrain, infrastructure, and soil fertility as
disposition, lease, management, contract or
determined by the Presidential Agrarian Reform
transfer of possession of private lands executed
Council (PARC) created hereunder, but in no
by the original landowner in violation of the Act
case shall retention by the landowner exceed
shall be null and void: Provided, however, That
five (5) hectares.
those executed prior to this Act shall be valid
only when registered with the Register of Deeds
Three (3) hectares may be awarded to each child
within a period of three (3) months after the
of the landowner, subject to the following
effectivity of this Act. Thereafter, all Registers of
qualifications: (1) that he is at least fifteen (15)
Deeds shall inform the Department of Agrarian
years of age; and (2) that he is actually tilling the
Reform (DAR) within thirty (30) days of any
land or directly managing the farm: Provided,
transaction involving agricultural lands in excess
That landowners whose lands have been
of five (5) hectares.
covered by Presidential Decree No. 27 shall be
allowed to keep the areas originally retained by
SEC. 6-A. Exception to Retention Limits.
them thereunder: Provided, further, That
Provincial, city and municipal government units
original homestead grantees or their direct
acquiring private agricultural lands by
compulsory heirs who still own the original
expropriation or other modes of acquisition to
homestead at the time of the approval of this
be used for actual, direct and exclusive public
Act shall retain the same areas as long as they
purposes, such as roads and bridges, public
continue to cultivate said homestead.
markets, school sites, resettlement sites, local
government facilities, public parks and barangay
The right to choose the area to be retained,
plazas or squares, consistent with the approved
which shall be compact or contiguous, shall
local comprehensive land use plan, shall not be
pertain to the landowner: Provided, however,
subject to the five (5)-hectare retention limit
That in case the area selected for retention by
under this Section and Sections 70 and 73(a) of
the landowner is tenanted, the tenant shall have
Republic Act No. 6657, as amended: Provided,
the option to choose whether to remain therein
That lands subject to CARP shall first undergo
or be a beneficiary in the same or another
the land acquisition and distribution process of
agricultural land with similar or comparable
the program: Provided, further, That when
features. In case the tenant chooses to remain
these lands have been subjected to
in the retained area, he shall be considered
expropriation, the agrarian reform beneficiaries
therein shall be paid just compensation.
Page 19 of 31
SEC. 6-B. Review of Limits of Land Size. Exceptions:

Within six (6) months from the effectivity of this 1. Through hereditary succession
Act, the DAR shall submit a comprehensive 2. To the government
study on the land size appropriate for each type 3. To the LBP
of crop to Congress for a possible review of 4. To other qualified beneficiaries
limits of land sizes provided in this Act
What are the condition imposed by RA 6657 to

What are the factors governing a viable family size original homestead grantees or their compulsory
farms? heirs in order to retain their land?
a) Commodity produced a) They are still the original owner of the original
b) Terrain homestead at the time of the approval of RA
c) Infrastructure 6657
d) Soil fertility b) They still continue to cultivate the said
homestead
What are the lands covered by the retention limit
under section 6 of RA 6657?
a) Public agricultural lands What is the right vested by RA 6657 to the landowners
b) Private agricultural lands with respect to the retention limit?
Right to choose the area to be retained
What is the maximum size of the land can a
landowner retain? What is the period should the landowner exercise his
5 hectares right to choose the area to be retained?
Within 60 days from receipt of the Notice of Coverage
What is the size of the land that can be awarded to
each child of the landowner? What is the effect if the landowner failed to exercise
3 hectares his right to choose within the specified period?
The Municipal Agrarian Reform Officer will designate
What are the qualifications should a child of a the retained area for the landowner. If the landowner
landowner met in order to be awarded with a land disagrees he may file a protest with the MARO
under section 6 of RA 6657?
a) At least 15 years of age What is the condition imposed by RA 6657 with
b) He is actually tilling the land or directly regards to the right of a landowner to choose the area
managing the farm to be retained?
The land should be compact or contiguous
Does the child need to directly or personally till the
land? Will a mere occupation or cultivation of an
No. it is enough the he directly manages the farm. agricultural land make a tiller an agricultural tenant?
No
Can lands awarded to qualified children of What are the options given to the tenants of the
landowners be sold, transferred, or conveyed? retained area?
No. it cannot be sold, transferred or conveyed within 10 a) To remain in the said land
years
Page 20 of 31
b) be a beneficiary in the same or another

agricultural land with similar or comparable Under section 6, what shall be respected in the
features implementation of the retention limit?
Security of tenure of the farmers or farmworkers on the
What are the effects if a tenant chooses to remain in land prior to the approval of RA 6657
the retained area?
a) He shall be considered a leaseholder or a lessee Under section 6, should the retained area be
b) He shall lose his rights to be a beneficiary under personally cultivated by the landowner?
RA 6657 No, the retained area need not be personally cultivated
by the landowner. Cultivation can be done indirectly
What are the rights entitled to a lessee? through labor administration
a) Peaceful possession & enjoyment of the land
b) Manage and work on the land in a manner and Can a landowner who has already exercised his
method of cultivation and harvest which retention rights under PD 27 be entitled to the
conform to proven farm practices retention rights under RA 6657?
c) Mechanize all or any phase of his farm work No. He can no longer exercise the retention right under
d) Deal with millers and processors and attend to RA 6657. However if the landowner chooses to retain 5
the issuance quedans and warehouse receipts hectares under RA 6657, the 7 hectares previously
for the produce due him retained by him under PD 27 shall be immediately
e) Be afforded a homelot placed under the coverage of the RA 6657
f) Be indemnified for the cost and expenses
incurred in the cultivation, planting or Can spouses retain 5 hectares each under RA 6657?
harvesting and other expenses incidental to It depends on the property regime of the spouses:
the improvement of his crop in case he a) Conjugal or absolute community the spouses
surrenders or abandons his landholding for just can retain only 5 hectares
cause or ejected therefrom b) Separation of property spouses can retain 5
g) Buy the agricultural landholding under hectares each
reasonable terms and conditions in case the
agricultural lessor decides to sell the same What are the lands included in the exception to
h) Redeem the landholding at a reasonable price retention limits?
and consideration in case the agricultural Private agricultural lands acquired by provincial, city
lessor sold the same to a third person without and municipal govt units through expropriation or
his knowledge other modes of acquisition used for actual, direct and
exclusive public purposes such as:
a) Roads and bridges
What is the effect if a tenant chooses to be a b) Public markets
beneficiary in the same or another agricultural land? c) School sites
He shall lose his rights as a leaseholder to the land d) Resettlement sites
retained by the owner e) Local govt facilities
f) Public parks
What is the period given to the tenants to exercise g) Barangay plazas or squares
their option?
Within 1 year from the time the landowner manifests
his choice of the area for retention
Page 21 of 31
Section 28 of RA 6657 c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for

prawn farms and fishponds
SECTION 28. Standing Crops at the Time of d) Lands with at least 18% slope
Acquisition. The landowner shall retain his e) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used an
share of any standing crops unharvested at the found to be necessary for
time the DAR shall take possession of the land national defense
under Section 16 of the Act, and shall be given a school sites and campuses
reasonable time to harvest the same. experimental farm stations operated for
educational purposes
What will happen to the crops at the time the DAR seeds and seedling research and pilot
took possession of the land? production center
The landowner retains his rights over crops not yet church sites and convents
harvested mosque sites and Islamic centers
communal burial grounds and
Section 10 of RA 6657 cemeteries
penal colonies and penal farms
govt and private research and
SECTION 10. Exemptions and Exclusions. quarantine centers
Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and
f) landholdings of landowners with a total area of
found to be necessary for parks, wildlife, forest
five (5) hectares and below
reserves, reforestation, fish sanctuaries and
g) lands devoted to the raising of livestock, poultry
breeding grounds, watersheds, and mangroves,
national defense, school sites and campuses
and swine [Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR]
including experimental farm stations operated h) lands obtained through homestead patent [Alita
by public or private schools for educational v. CA]
purposes, seeds and seedlings research and EXCEPTION: lands obtained through
pilot production centers, church sites and homestead patent that are not being
convents appurtenant thereto, mosque sites personally cultivated by original
and Islamic centers appurtenant thereto, homestead grantees or their direct
communal burial grounds and cemeteries, penal compulsory heirs [Paris v. Alfeche]
colonies and penal farms actually worked by the
inmates, government and private research and CASES:
quarantine centers and all lands with eighteen
percent (18%) slope and over, except those 1. Roman Catholic Archbishop of Caceres v DAR
already developed shall be exempt from the Secretary
coverage of the Act.
Facts:
Archbishop is the registered owner of several
What are the lands not subject to retention limit
properties in Camarines Sur, with a total area of
a) Ancestral lands of each indigenous cultural
268.5668 hectares. Of that land, 249.0236 hectares are
community
planted with rice and corn, while the remaining 19.5432
b) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for
hectares are planted with coconut trees. In 1985,
parks, wildlife, forest reserves, reforestation, fish
Archbishop several petitions for exemption of certain
sanctuaries and breeding grounds, watersheds
properties located in various towns of Camarines Sur
and mangroves
from the coverage of Operation Land Transfer under
Page 22 of 31
Presidential Decree No. 27. Two of these petitions were Are lands already classified for residential,
denied in an Order dated November 6, 1986, issued by commercial or industrial use, as approved by the Housing
the Regional Director of DAR, Region V, Juanito L. Lorena. and Land Use Regulatory Board and its precursor
Archbishop appealed from the order of the Regional agencies 1 prior to 15 June 1988, 2 covered by R.A. 6657,
Director contending, inter alia, that they are used for otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
charitable and religious purposes. The appeal was denied Law of 1988?
by the DAR Secretary. On appeal to the CA, the same was
dismissed. RULING:
NO
Issue:
Whether or not the subject lands are exempt Section 4 of R.A. 6657 provides that the CARL
from the coverage of CARP shall "cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and
commodity produced, all public and private agricultural
Held: lands." As to what constitutes "agricultural land," it is
Archbishop cannot claim exemption in behalf of referred to as "land devoted to agricultural activity as
the millions of Filipino faithful, as the lands are clearly defined in this Act and not classified as mineral, forest,
not exempt under the law. The laws simply speak of the residential, commercial or industrial land." 16 The
landowner without qualification as to under what title deliberations of the Constitutional Commission confirm
the land is held or what rights to the land the landowner this limitation. "Agricultural lands" are only those lands
may exercise. There is no distinction made whether the which are "arable and suitable agricultural lands" and
landowner holds naked title only or can exercise all the "do not include commercial, industrial and residential
rights of ownership. Archbishop would have the Court lands." 17
read deeper into the law, to create exceptions that are
not stated in PD 27 and RA 6657, and to do so would be Based on the foregoing, it is clear that the
to frustrate the revolutionary intent of the law, which is undeveloped portions of the Antipolo Hills Subdivision
the redistribution of agricultural land for the benefit of cannot in any language be considered as "agricultural
landless farmers and farmworkers. lands." These lots were intended for residential use. They
ceased to be agricultural lands upon approval of their
2. Natalia Realty vs. DAR inclusion in the Lungsod Silangan Reservation. Even
today, the areas in question continued to be developed
FACTS: as a low-cost housing subdivision, albeit at a snail's pace.
Petitioner NATALIA is the owner of three (3) This can readily be gleaned from the fact that SAMBA
contiguous parcels of land with a total of 125.0078 members even instituted an action to restrain
hectares and embraced in a TCT of the ROD. petitioners from continuing with such development. The
enormity of the resources needed for developing a
Presidential Proclamation No. 1637 set aside subdivision may have delayed its completion but this
20,312 hectares of land located in the Municipalities of does not detract from the fact that these lands are still
Antipolo, San Mateo and Montalban as townsite areas to residential lands and outside the ambit of the CARL.
absorb the population overspill in the metropolis which
were designated as the Lungsod Silangan Townsite. The Indeed, lands not devoted to agricultural activity
NATALIA properties are situated within the areas are outside the coverage of CARL. These include lands
proclaimed as townsite reservation. previously converted to non-agricultural uses prior to the
effectivity of CARL by government agencies other than
ISSUE: respondent DAR. In its Revised Rules and Regulations
Page 23 of 31
Governing Conversion of Private Agricultural Lands to

Non-Agricultural Uses, 18 DAR itself defined "agricultural 4. DAR vs. Delia Sutton
land" thus
FACTS:
. . . Agricultural lands refers to those devoted to Respondents herein inherited a land which has
agricultural activity as defined in R.A. 6657 and not been devoted exclusively to cow and calf breeding.
classified as mineral or forest by the Department of Pursuant to the then existing agrarian reform program of
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) and its the government, respondents made a voluntary offer to
predecessor agencies, and not classified in town plans sell (VOS) their landholdings to petitioner DAR to avail of
and zoning ordinances as approved by the Housing and certain incentives under the law. a new agrarian law,
Land Use Regulatory Board (HLURB) and its preceding Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657, also known as the
competent authorities prior to 15 June 1988 for Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988,
residential, commercial or industrial use. took effect. It included in its coverage farms used for
raising livestock, poultry and swine. Thereafter, in an en
Since the NATALIA lands were converted prior to banc decision in the case of Luz Farms v. Secretary of DAR
15 June 1988, respondent DAR is bound by such this Court ruled that lands devoted to livestock and
conversion. It was therefore error to include the poultry-raising are not included in the definition of
undeveloped portions of the Antipolo Hills Subdivision agricultural land. Hence, we declared as
within the coverage of CARL. unconstitutional certain provisions of the CARL insofar as
they included livestock farms in the coverage of agrarian
3. LUZ FARMS vs. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM reform. Thus, respondents filed with petitioner DAR a
formal request to withdraw their VOS as their
FACTS: landholding was devoted exclusively to cattle-raising and
On June 10, 1988, the President of the thus exempted from the coverage of the CARL. However,
Philippines approved R.A. No. 6657, which includes the DAR issued A.O. No. 9, series of 1993 which provided that
raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage only portions of private agricultural lands used for the
raising of livestock, poultry and swine as of June 15, 1988
ISSUE: shall be excluded from the coverage of the CARL. The
Whether or not Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of DAR Secretary issued an Order partially granting the
R.A. No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law application of respondents for exemption from the
of 1988) unconstitutional, insofar as the said law includes coverage of CARL but applying the retention limits
the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage outlined in the DAR A.O. No. 9. Respondents moved for
as well as the Implementing Rules and Guidelines reconsideration. They contend that their entire
promulgated in accordance therewith. landholding should be exempted as it is devoted
exclusively to cattle-raising and appealing that the DAR
RULING: A.O. No. 9 be declared unconstitutional.
Section II of R.A. 6657 which includes "private
agricultural lands devoted to commercial livestock, ISSUE:
poultry and swine raising" in the definition of Whether or not DAR Administrative Order No.
"commercial farms" is invalid, to the extent that the 09, Series of 1993 which prescribes a maximum retention
aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be for owners of lands devoted to livestock raising is
covered by the agrarian reform program of the State. constitutional?
There is simply no reason to include livestock and poultry
lands in the coverage of agrarian reform. HELD:
Page 24 of 31
The A.O. sought to regulate livestock farms by of the Department of Agrarian Reform that agricultural
including them in the coverage of agrarian reform and lands devoted to livestock, poultry, and/or swine raising
prescribing a maximum retention limit for their are excluded from the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
ownership is invalid as it contravenes the Constitution. . Program (CARP).
The Court clarified in the Luz Farms case that livestock,
swine and poultry-raising are industrial activities and do Meanwhile, on December 27, 1993, the
not fall within the definition of agriculture or Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) issued
agricultural activity. The raising of livestock, swine and Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993 (DAR A.O. No.
poultry is different from crop or tree farming. It is an 9), setting forth rules and regulations to govern the
industrial, not an agricultural activity. DAR has no power exclusion of agricultural lands used for livestock, poultry,
to regulate livestock farms which have been exempted and swine raising from CARP coverage.
by the Constitution from the coverage of agrarian
reform. It has exceeded its power in issuing the assailed The LUCEC, thus, recommended the exemption
A.O. The assailed A.O. of petitioner DAR was properly of petitioners 316.0422-hectare property from the
stricken down as unconstitutional as it enlarges the coverage of CARP. he Southern Pinugay Farmers Multi-
coverage of agrarian reform beyond the scope intended Purpose Cooperative, Inc. (Pinugay Farmers),
by the 1987 Constitution represented by Timiano Balajadia, Sr. (Balajadia), moved
for the reconsideration of the said Order, but the same
5. Milestone Farms Inc. v. Office of the President was denied by Director Dalugdug in his Order. In the
meantime, R.A. No. 6657 was amended by R.A. No. 7881,
FACTS: which was approved on February 20, 1995. Private
Petitioner Milestone Farms, Inc. (petitioner) was agricultural lands devoted to livestock, poultry, and
incorporated with the Securities and Exchange swine raising were excluded from the coverage of the
Commission on January 8, 1960. Among its pertinent CARL.
secondary purposes are: (1) to engage in the raising of
cattle, pigs, and other livestock; to acquire lands by On April 29, 2005, the CA found that, based on
purchase or lease, which may be needed for this the documentary evidence presented, the property
purpose; and to sell and otherwise dispose of said cattle, subject of the application for exclusion had more than
pigs, and other livestock and their produce when satisfied the animal-land and infrastructure-animal ratios
advisable and beneficial to the corporation; (2) to breed, under DAR A.O. No. 9. The CA also found that petitioner
raise, and sell poultry; to purchase or acquire and sell, or applied for exclusion long before the effectivity of DAR
otherwise dispose of the supplies, stocks, equipment, A.O. No. 9, thus, negating the claim that petitioner
accessories, appurtenances, products, and by-products merely converted the property for livestock, poultry, and
of said business; and (3) to import cattle, pigs, and other swine raising in order to exclude it from CARP coverage.
livestock, and animal food necessary for the raising of Petitioner was held to have actually engaged in the said
said cattle, pigs, and other livestock as may be authorized business on the property even before June 15, 1988.
by law.
ISSUE:
On June 10, 1988, a new agrarian reform law, WON the DAR has the power to regulate
Republic Act (R.A.) No. 6657, otherwise known as the livestock farms which have been exempted by the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), took effect, Constitution from the coverage of agrarian reform.
which included the raising of livestock, poultry, and
swine in its coverage. However, on December 4, 1990, HELD:
this Court, sitting en banc, ruled in Luz Farms v. Secretary No.
Page 25 of 31
from CARP coverage because it was allegedly devoted to

The instant case does not rest on facts parallel to livestock production.
those of Sutton because, in Sutton, the subject property
remained a livestock farm. 7. Department of Agrarian Reform vs. Department of
Education Culture and Sports
It is established that issues of Exclusion and/or
Exemption are characterized as Agrarian Law FACTS:
Implementation (ALI) cases which are well within the In controversy are Lot No. 2509 and Lot No. 817-
DAR Secretarys competence and jurisdiction. Section 3, D consisting of an aggregate area of 189.2462 hectares
Rule II of the 2003 Department of Agrarian Reform located at Hacienda Fe, Escalante, Negros Occidental and
Adjudication Board Rules of Procedure provides: Brgy. Gen. Luna, Sagay, Negros Occidental, respectively.
On October 21, 1921, these lands were donated by the
Section 3. Agrarian Law Implementation Cases. late Esteban Jalandoni to respondent DECS (formerly
The Adjudicator or the Board shall have no jurisdiction Bureau of Education).2 Consequently, titles thereto were
over matters involving the administrative transferred in the name of respondent DECS under
implementation of RA No. 6657, otherwise known as the Transfer Certificate of Title No. 167175.3
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988 and
other agrarian laws as enunciated by pertinent rules and On July 15, 1985, respondent DECS leased the
administrative orders, which shall be under the exclusive lands to Anglo Agricultural Corporation for 10
prerogative of and cognizable by the Office of the agricultural crop years, commencing from crop year
Secretary of the DAR in accordance with his issuances, to 1984-1985 to crop year 1993-1994. The contract of lease
wit: was subsequently renewed for another 10 agricultural
crop years, commencing from crop year 1995-1996 to
3.8 Exclusion from CARP coverage of crop year 2004-2005.4
agricultural land used for livestock, swine, and poultry
raising. On June 10, 1993, Eugenio Alpar and several others,
claiming to be permanent and regular farm workers of
Thus, we cannot, without going against the law, the subject lands, filed a petition for Compulsory
arbitrarily strip the DAR Secretary of his legal mandate to Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) coverage with the
exercise jurisdiction and authority over all ALI cases. To Municipal Agrarian Reform Office (MARO) of Escalante.
succumb to petitioners contention that when a land is
declared exempt from the CARP on the ground that it is After investigation, MARO Jacinto R. Piosa, sent
not agricultural as of the time the CARL took effect, the a "Notice of Coverage" to respondent DECS, stating that
use and disposition of that land is entirely and forever the subject lands are now covered by CARP and inviting
beyond DARs jurisdiction is dangerous, suggestive of its representatives for a conference with the farmer
self-regulation. Precisely, it is the DAR Secretary who is beneficiaries.6 Then, MARO Piosa submitted his report
vested with such jurisdiction and authority to exempt to OIC-PARO Stephen M. Leonidas, who recommended
and/or exclude a property from CARP coverage based on to the DAR Regional Director the approval of the
the factual circumstances of each case and in accordance coverage of the landholdings.
with law and applicable jurisprudence. In addition, albeit
parenthetically, Secretary Villa had already granted the On August 7, 1998, DAR Regional Director
conversion into residential and golf courses use of nearly Dominador B. Andres approved the recommendation,
one-half of the entire area originally claimed as exempt the dispositive portion of which reads:
Page 26 of 31
WHEREFORE, all the foregoing premises Clearly, a reading of the paragraph shows that, in
considered, the petition is granted. Order is hereby order to be exempt from the coverage: 1) the land must
issued: be "actually, directly, and exclusively used and found to
be necessary;" and 2) the purpose is "for school sites and
1. Placing under CARP coverage Lot 2509 with an campuses, including experimental farm stations
area of 111.4791 hectares situated at Had. Fe, Escalante, operated by public or private schools for educational
Negros Occidental and Lot 817-D with an area of 77.7671 purposes."
hectares situated at Brgy. Gen. Luna, Sagay, Negros
Occidental; The importance of the phrase "actually, directly,
and exclusively used and found to be necessary" cannot
Respondent DECS appealed the case to the be understated, as what respondent DECS would want us
Secretary of Agrarian Reform which affirmed the Order to do by not taking the words in their literal and technical
of the Regional Director. 8 definitions. The words of the law are clear and
unambiguous. Thus, the "plain meaning rule" or verba
Aggrieved, respondent DECS filed a petition for legis in statutory construction is applicable in this case.
certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which set aside the Where the words of a statute are clear, plain and free
decision of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform.9 from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and
applied without attempted interpretation.
Hence, the instant petition for review.
We are not unaware of our ruling in the case of
ISSUE: Central Mindanao University v. Department of Agrarian
Whether or not the subject properties are Reform Adjudication Board,15 wherein we declared the
exempt from the coverage of Republic Act No. 6657, land subject thereof exempt from CARP coverage.
otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform However, respondent DECS reliance thereon is
Law of 1998 (CARL). misplaced because the factual circumstances are
different in the case at bar.
RULING:
NO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE NOT EXEMPT Firstly, in the CMU case, the land involved was
FROM THE COVERAGE OF RA 6657 (CARL) not alienable and disposable land of the public domain
because it was reserved by the late President Carlos P.
Section 10 of R.A. No. 6657 enumerates the Garcia under Proclamation No. 476 for the use of
types of lands which are exempted from the coverage of Mindanao Agricultural College (now CMU).16 In this
CARP as well as the purposes of their exemption, viz: case, however, the lands fall under the category of
alienable and disposable lands of the public domain
xxxxxxxxx suitable for agriculture.
c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found
to be necessary for national defense, school sites and Secondly, in the CMU case, the land was actually,
campuses, including experimental farm stations directly and exclusively used and found to be necessary
operated by public or private schools for educational for school sites and campuses. Although a portion of it
purposes, , shall be exempt from the coverage of this was being used by the Philippine Packing Corporation
Act.13 (now Del Monte Phils., Inc.) under a "Management and
xxxxxxxxx Development Agreement", the undertaking was that the
land shall be used by the Philippine Packing Corporation
as part of the CMU research program, with direct
Page 27 of 31
participation of faculty and students. Moreover, the land authorized the Province of Camarines Sur to take
was part of the land utilization program developed by the possession of the property upon the deposit with the
CMU for its "Kilusang Sariling Sikap Project" (CMU-KSSP), Clerk of Court of the amount of P5,714.00, the amount
a multi-disciplinary applied research extension and provisionally fixed by the trial court to answer for
productivity program.17 Hence, the retention of the land damages that private respondents may suffer in the
was found to be necessary for the present and future event that the expropriation cases do not prosper. The
educational needs of the CMU. On the other hand, the trial court issued a writ of possession in an order dated
lands in this case were not actually and exclusively January18, 1990.
utilized as school sites and campuses, as they were
leased to Anglo Agricultural Corporation, not for The San Joaquins filed a motion for relief from
educational purposes but for the furtherance of its the order, authorizing the Province of Camarines Sur to
business. Also, as conceded by respondent DECS, it was take possession of their property and a motion to admit
the income from the contract of lease and not the an amended motion to dismiss. Both motions were
subject lands that was directly used for the repairs and denied in the order dated February 1990.
renovations of the schools in the locality.
In their petition before the Court of Appeals, the
8. PROVINCE OF CAMARINES SUR vs. CA San Joaquins asked: (a) that Resolution No. 129, Series of
1988 of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan be declared null
FACTS: and void; (b) that the complaints for expropriation be
On December 22, 1988, the Sangguniang dismissed; and (c) that the order dated December 6,
Panlalawigan of the Province of Camarines Sur passed 1989 (i) denying the motion to dismiss and (ii) allowing
Resolution No. 129, Series of 1988, authorizing the the Province of Camarines Sur to take possession of the
Provincial Governor to purchase or expropriate property property subject of the expropriation and the order
contiguous to the provincial capitol site, in order to dated February 26, 1990, denying the motion to admit
establish a pilot farm for non-food and non-traditional the amended motion to dismiss, be set aside. They also
agricultural crops and a housing project for provincial asked that an order be issued to restrain the trial court
government employees. from enforcing the writ of possession, and thereafter to
issue a writ of injunction.
Pursuant to the Resolution, the Province of
Camarines Sur, through its Governor, Hon. Luis In its answer to the petition, the Province of
R.Villafuerte, filed two separate cases for expropriation Camarines Sur claimed that it has the authority to initiate
against Ernesto N. San Joaquin and Efren N. San Joaquin, the expropriation proceedings under Sections 4 and 7 of
docketed as Special Civil Action Nos. P-17-89 and P-19- Local Government Code (B.P. Blg. 337) and that the
89 of the Regional Trial Court, Pili, Camarines Sur, expropriations are for a public purpose.
presided by the Hon. Benjamin V. Panga.
Asked by the Court of Appeals to give his
Forthwith, the Province of Camarines Sur filed a Comment to the petition, the Solicitor General stated
motion for the issuance of writ of possession. The San that under Section 9 of the Local Government Code (B.P.
Joaquins failed to appear at the hearing of the motion. Blg. 337), there was no need for the approval by the
Office of the President of the exercise by the
The San Joaquins moved to dismiss the Sangguniang Panlalawigan of the right of eminent
complaints on the ground of inadequacy of the price domain. However, the Solicitor General expressed the
offered for their property. In an order dated December view that the Province of Camarines Sur must first secure
6, 1989, the trial court denied the motion to dismiss and the approval of the Department of Agrarian Reform of
Page 28 of 31
the plan to expropriate the lands of petitioners for use as the agrarian reform program as it speaks of "the lapse of
a housing project. The Court of Appeals set aside the five (5) years from its award."
order of the trial court
Hence this petition. The rules on conversion of agricultural lands
found in Section 4 (k) and 5 (1) of Executive Order No.
ISSUE: 129-A, Series of 1987, cannot be the source of the
whether the expropriation of agricultural lands authority of the Department of Agrarian Reform to
by local government units is subject, to the prior determine the suitability of a parcel of agricultural land
approval of the Secretary of the Agrarian Reform, as the for the purpose to which it would be devoted by the
implementator of the agrarian reform program. expropriating authority. While those rules vest on the
Department of Agrarian Reform the exclusive authority
RULING: to approve or disapprove conversions of agricultural
NO. lands for residential, commercial or industrial uses, such
authority is limited to the applications for reclassification
Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 337 does not intimate in the least submitted by the land owners or tenant beneficiaries.
that local government, units must first secure the
approval of the Department of Land Reform for the Statutes conferring the power of eminent
conversion of lands from agricultural to non-agricultural domain to political subdivisions cannot be broadened or
use, before they can institute the necessary constricted by implication (Schulman v. People, 10 N.Y.
expropriation proceedings. Likewise, there is no 2d. 249, 176 N.E. 2d. 817, 219 NYS 2d. 241).
provision in the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law To sustain the Court of Appeals would mean that the
which expressly subjects the expropriation of agricultural local government units can no longer expropriate
lands by local government units to the control of the agricultural lands needed for the construction of roads,
Department of Agrarian Reform. The closest provision of bridges, schools, hospitals, etc, without first applying for
law that the Court of Appeals could cite to justify the conversion of the use of the lands with the Department
intervention of the Department of Agrarian Reform in of Agrarian Reform, because all of these projects would
expropriation matters is Section 65 of the naturally involve a change in the land use. In effect, it
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, which reads: would then be the Department of Agrarian Reform to
scrutinize whether the expropriation is for a public
Sec. 65. Conversion of Lands. After the lapse purpose or public use.
of five (5) years from its award, when the land ceases to
be economically feasible and sound for, agricultural Ordinarily, it is the legislative branch of the local
purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the government unit that shall determine whether the use of
land will have a greater economic value for residential, the property sought to be expropriated shall be public,
commercial or industrial purposes, the DAR, upon the same being an expression of legislative policy. The
application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due courts defer to such legislative determination and will
notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing intervene only when a particular undertaking has no real
laws, may authorize the reclassification or conversion of or substantial relation to the public use (United States Ex
the land and its disposition: Provided, That the Rel Tennessee Valley Authority v. Welch, 327 US 546, 90
beneficiary shall have fully paid his obligation. L. ed. 843, 66 S Ct 715; State ex rel Twin City Bldg. and
Invest. Co. v. Houghton, 144 Minn. 1, 174 NW 885, 8 ALR
The opening, adverbial phrase of the provision sends 585).
signals that it applies to lands previously placed under
Page 29 of 31
WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED and the ISSUE:

questioned decision of the Court of Appeals is set aside Whether or not the grandchildren of the
insofar as it (a) nullifies the trial court's order allowing landowner are still entitled to retention rights?
the Province of Camarines Sur to take possession of
private respondents' property; (b) orders the trial court HELD:
to suspend the expropriation proceedings; and (c) As owners in their own right, the redemptioner-
requires the Province of Camarines Sur to obtain the grandchildren enjoyed the right of retention granted to
approval of the Department of Agrarian Reform to all the landowners. This right of retention is a
convert or reclassify private respondents' property from constitutionally guaranteed right, which is subject to
agricultural to non-agricultural use. qualification by balancing the rights of the landowner
and the tenant and by implementing the doctrine that
9. SAMAHAN NG MAGSASAKA SA SAN JOSEP V. social justice was not meant to perpetrate an injustice
MARIETTA VALISNO, ET AL against the landowner. A retained area, as its name
denotes, is land which is not supposed to leave the
FACTS: landowner's dominion, thus, sparing the government
Dr. Nicolas Valisno, Sr. is the registered owner of from the inconvenience of taking land only to return it to
a 57-hectare property situated in La Fuente, Sta. Rosa, the landowners afterwards, which would be a pointless
Nueva. Dr. Valisno mortgaged 12 hectares of his property process.
to the Angelo and Renato Banting. Thereafter, the
property was subdivided into ten lots and individual titles The fact that the grandchildren are minors at the time
were issued in the name of the eight children of Dr. the redemption was made does not make the contract
Valisno, to Angelito Banting and to Renato Banting. The void but only voidable or valid until annulled. Under the
mortgage on the 12 hectare portion was foreclosed and Civil Code, the action to annul the minors' redemption
the property sold at public auction. Four grandchildren could only have been initiated by the minors themselves,
of Dr. Valisno redeemed the property. At the time of the as the victims or the aggrieved parties in whom the law
redemption, only one was of legal age, the others were itself vests the right to file suit. This action was never
only minors. Subsequently, petitioner SMSP filed a initiated by the minors.
petition for coverage of the subject property. The
petition was dismissed but DAR Secretary ultimately held
that the property was covered by CARP subject to the
retention rights of the heirs of Nicolas, Sr.
The Valisno heirs including the four

grandchildren-redemptioners filed a consolidated
Application for Retention and Award under R.A. No.
6657. The Regional Director approved the retention of
the Valisno children. The request for the award to the
grandchildren-redemptioners retention rights of three
hectares each was approved on appeal to the CA.
Petitioners filed a Motion for Reconsideration holding
that the redemptioners are not entitled to retention
rights. The said motion same was denied. Hence, this
Appeal.
Page 30 of 31
Page 31 of 31

Agri Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agri Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agri Reviewer PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATION LEANGIE L.

I. BASIC PRINCIPLES OF AGRARIAN and other terms and conditions of transfer of

the Congress may prescribe, taking into account

of economic-size farms as the basis of case of other farmworkers, to receive a just

c) Tax credits which can be used against any tax

Were the modes of compensation provided under the

II. SCOPE OF THE CARL A. AS TO COVERED LANDS

EXCEPTION: lands obtained through

What are the matters not falling under the

the traditional landowner-tenant or lessor-lessee

III. ACQUISITION OF LANDS UNDER THE Section 5, CARL

CASE: and effectively deprived the beneficiaries

SEC. 6-B. Review of Limits of Land Size. Exceptions:

What are the condition imposed by RA 6657 to

b) be a beneficiary in the same or another

Section 28 of RA 6657 c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for

Governing Conversion of Private Agricultural Lands to

from CARP coverage because it was allegedly devoted to

WHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED and the ISSUE:

The Valisno heirs including the four

You might also like