Agrarian Reform Law Notes

Agrarian Reform Law Notes d.m.g.
Atty. Patricia Castro's outline & lectures; Notes on Ungos UC Law JD 2021
I. Basic Principles
A. Definition of Agrarian Reform
Agrarian Reform means the redistribution of What, to Whom, Why, Such as?
what – R
lands, regardless of crops or fruits produced, to • redistribution of lands, regardless of crops or fruits
farmers and regular farmworkers who are produced
to whom – F & RF
landless, irrespective of tenurial arrangement, • farmers & regular farmworkers who are landless,
to include the totality of factors and support irrespective of tenurial arrangement
services designed to lift the economic status of why – T L E & AA PR
• to include the totality of factors & support services
the beneficiaries and all other arrangement designed to lift the economic status of the
alternative to the physical redistribution of beneficiaries
• and all other arrangement alternative to the physical
lands, such as production or profit-sharing, redistribution of lands
labor administration, and the distribution of such as – PP, L, D
stock, which will allow beneficiaries to receive • production or profit-sharing
• labor administration
a just share of the fruits of the lands they work. • distribution of stock, which will allow beneficiaries to
[Section 3(a) of RA 6657] receive a just share of the fruits of the lands they work
B. Constitutional provisions
1. Article II, Section 21: The State shall promote comprehensive rural development
and agrarian reform.
2. Article XII, Section 1: x x x The State shall promote industrialization and full
employment based on sound agricultural development and agrarian reform, x x x
3. Article XIII, Section 3: x x x The State shall regulate the relations between workers
and employers, recognizing the right of labor to its just share in the fruits of
production and the right of enterprises to reasonable returns on investments, and to
expansion and growth.
4. Article XIII, Section 4: The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform
program founded on the rights of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless,
to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers,
to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall encourage and
undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and
reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account
ecological, developmental, or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of
just compensation. In determining retention limits, the State shall respect the right of
small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives for voluntary land-
sharing.
5. Article XIII, Section 5: The State shall recognize the rights of farmers,
farmworkers, and landowners, as well as cooperatives, and other independent
farmers' organizations to participate in the planning, organization, and management
of the program, and shall provide support to agriculture through appropriate
technology and research, and adequate financial, production, marketing, and other
support services.
6. Article XIII, Section 6: The State shall apply the principles of agrarian reform or
stewardship, whenever applicable in accordance with law, in the disposition or
utilization of other natural resources, including lands of the public domain under
lease or concession suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights, homestead rights of
small settlers, and the rights of indigenous communities to their ancestral lands.
The State may resettle landless farmers and farmworkers in its own agriculture
estates which shall be distributed to them in the manner provided by law.
7. Article XIII, Section 8: The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest
the proceeds of the agrarian reform program to promote industrialization, employ-
ment creating, and privatization of public sector enterprises. Financial instruments
used as payment for their lands shall be honored as equity in enterprises of their
choice.
C. Other Important Definitions
1. Agricultural Land refers to land devoted to agricultural activity as defined in the

Agrarian Reform Law and not classified as mineral, forest, residential, commercial or
industrial land. Agri land = devoted to AA + not CFIRM
2. Agricultural Activities means the cultivation of the soil, planting of crops, growing of
fruit trees, including the harvesting of such farm products, and other farm activities and
practices performed by a farmer in conjunction with such farming operations done by
person whether natural or juridical.
Agri actvities = C P G H Oc
3. Agrarian Dispute refers to any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements, whether

leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, over lands devoted to agriculture,
including disputes concerning farmworkers' associations or representation of persons in
negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of
such tenurial arrangements. Agri dispute = C TA, LTSO, including D-FARP-NFMCS
It includes any controversy relating to compensation of lands acquired under the

Agrarian Reform Law and other terms and conditions of transfer of ownership from
landowners to farmworkers, tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whether the
disputants stand in the proximate relation of farm operator and beneficiary, landowner
and tenant, or lessor and lessee.

4. Farmer refers to a natural person whose primary livelihood is cultivation of land or the
production of agricultural crops, either by himself, or primarily with the assistance of his
immediate farm household, whether the land is owned by him, or by another person
under a leasehold or share tenancy agreement or arrangement with the owner thereof.
5. Farmworker is a natural person who renders service for value as an employee or
laborer in an agricultural enterprise or farm regardless of whether his compensation is
paid on a daily, weekly, monthly or "pakyaw" basis.
The term includes an individual whose work has ceased as a consequence of, or in
connection with, a pending agrarian dispute and who has not obtained a substantially
equivalent and regular farm employment.
a) Regular Farmworker is a natural person who is employed on a permanent basis by
an agricultural enterprise or farm.
b) Seasonal Farmworker is a natural person who is employed on a recurrent, periodic
or intermittent basis by an agricultural enterprise or farm, whether as a permanent or
a non-permanent laborer, such as "dumaan", "sacada", and the like.
c) Other Farmworker is a farmworker who does not fall under the definitions above.
D. Constitutionality of RA 6657
1. Police Power - power vested in the legislature by the Constitution to make, ordain,
establish all manner of wholesome and reasonable laws for the good and welfare of the
State and its people (Ermita Malate Hotel vs City Mayor; 1967)
2. Eminent Domain - inherent power of the State that enables it to forcibly acquire private
lands intended for public use upon payment of just compensation to the owner (Assoc.
of Small Landowners vs Secretary of AR; 1989)
Jurisprudence:
1. Association of Small Landowners vs Secretary of AR (July 14, 1989)

In view of the issues raised in this case, the Agrarian Reform Law is a valid xercise of police
power (valid regulation of private properties in accordance with the mandate of the
Constitution for the promotion of social justice through agrarian reform) and power of eminent
domain (there is just compensation). It also does not violate the due process and equal
protection clauses.
On the equal protection clause:

"Classification has been defined as the grouping of persons or things similar to each other in certain particulars and different
from each other in these same particulars. To be valid, it must conform to the following requirements: (1) it must be based
on substantial distinctions; (2) it must be germane to the purpose of the law; (3) it must not be limited to existing conditions
only; and (4) it must apply equally to all the members of the class. The Court finds that all these requisites have been met
by the measures here challenged as arbitrary and discriminatory. Equal protection simply means that all persons or things
similarly situated must be treated alike both as to the rights conferred and the liabilities imposed.” The petitioner have not
shown that they belong to a different class and entitled to a different treatment. The argument that not only landowners but
also owners of other properties must be made to share the burden of implementing land reform must be rejected. There is a
substantial distinction between these two classes of owners that is clearly visible except to those who will not see.”
On police power and power of eminent domain:

“A statute may be sustained under the police power only if there is a concurrence of the lawful subject and the lawful
method. Put otherwise, the interests of the public generally as distinguished from those of a particular class require the
interference of the State and, no less important, the means employed are reasonably necessary for the attainment of the
purpose sought to be achieved and not unduly oppressive upon individuals. As the subject and purpose of agrarian reform
have been laid down by the Constitution itself, we may say that the first requirement has been satisfied. What remains to be
examined is the validity of the method employed to achieve the Constitutional goal.
Eminent domain is an inherent power of the State that enable it to forcibly acquire private lands intended for public use
upon payment of just compensation to the owner. Obviously, there is no need to expropriate where the owner is willing to
sell under terms also acceptable to the purchaser, in which case an ordinary deed of sale may be agreed upon by the par ties.
It is only where the owner is unwilling to sell, or cannot accept the price or other conditions offered by the vendee, that the
power of eminent domain will come into play to assert the paramount authority of the State over the interest of the property
owner. Private rights must then yield to the irresistible demands of the public interest on the time-honored justification, as
in the case of the police power, that the welfare of the people is the supreme law.
For all its primacy and urgency, the power of expropriation is by no means absolute (as indeed no power is absolute). The
limitation is found in the constitutional injunction that "private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation" and in the abundant jurisprudence that has evolved from the interpretation of this principle. Basically, the
requirements for a proper exercise of the power are: (1) public use and (2) just compensation.”
On the determination of just compensation in relation to due process:

“The determination of just compensation is a function addressed to the courts of justice and may not be usurped by any
other branch or official of the government.”
However, in this case, it was held that the law itself grants DAR the power of preliminary
determination of what is “just compensation” for the lands taken. This is not arbitrary
delegation of power because should the landowners disagree with DAR, they are not barred
from seeking relief or filing a petition in the courts. Due process is therefore not violated.
On the payment method of just compensation in relation to agrarian reform being an

extraordinary kind of expropriation:
“It cannot be denied … that the traditional medium for the payment of just compensation is money and no other. ...
However, we do not deal here with the traditional excercise of the power of eminent domain. This 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. What we deal with here is a revolutionary kind of expropriation. The expropriation
before us affects all private agricultural lands whenever found and of whatever kind as long as they are in excess of the
maximum retention limits allowed their owners. This kind of expropriation is intended for the benefit not only of a
particular community or of a small segment of the population but of the entire Filipino nation , from all levels of our society,
from the impoverished farmer to the land-glutted owner. Its purpose does not cover only the whole territory of this country
but goes beyond in time to the foreseeable future, which it hopes to secure and edify with the vision and the sacrifice of the
present generation of Filipinos. Generations yet to come are as involved in this program as we are today, although hopefully
only as beneficiaries of a richer and more fulfilling life we will guarantee to them tomorrow through our thoughtfulness
today. And, finally, let it not be forgotten that it is no less than the Constitution itself that has ordained this revolution in the
farms, calling for "a just distribution" among the farmers of lands that have heretofore been the prison of their dreams but
can now become the key at least to their deliverance. … Accepting the theory that payment of the just compensation is not
always required to be made fully in money, we find further that the proportion of cash payment to the other things of value
constituting the total payment, as determined on the basis of the areas of the lands expropriated, is not unduly oppressive
upon the landowner. It is noted that the smaller the land, the bigger the payment in money, primarily because the small
landowner will be needing it more than the big landowners, who can afford a bigger balance in bonds and other things of
value. No less importantly, the government financial instruments making up the balance of the payment are "negotiable at
any time." The other modes, which are likewise available to the landowner at his option, are also not unreasonable because
payment is made in shares of stock, LBP bonds, other properties or assets, tax credits, and other things of value equivalent
to the amount of just compensation.”
Because of the wide scope and long-term purpose of the law, the Court said that costs will be
tremendous, and inconveniences (especially on the part of the landowners) cannot be avoided.
In view of the financial limitations of the government, it is reasonable that just compensation
will be paid in less conventional (non-cash) but more practical methods.
While the Court ultimately upheld the constitutionality of the law, it also acknowledged its
imperfection in its closing statements:
“To be sure, these enactments are less than perfect; indeed, they should be continuously re-examined and rehoned, that they
may be sharper instruments for the better protection of the farmer's rights. But we have to start somewhere. In the pursuit of
agrarian reform, we do not tread on familiar ground but grope on terrain fraught with pitfalls and expected difficulties. This
is inevitable. The CARP Law is not a tried and tested project. On the contrary, to use Justice Holmes's words, "it is an
experiment, as all life is an experiment," and so we learn as we venture forward, and, if necessary, by our own mistakes. We
cannot expect perfection although we should strive for it by all means. Meantime, we struggle as best we can in freeing the
farmer from the iron shackles that have unconscionably, and for so long, fettered his soul to the soil.”
2. Luz Farms vs DAR (December 4, 1990)

Lands used in the poultry and livestock industry should not be covered by the Agrarian Reform
Program because they cannot be put in the same category as “agricultural lands”. In Justice
Sarmiento's separate opinion, he emphasized that the assailed provisions* which included
poultry and livestock farmers in the program are violative of the equal protection clause,
because land-tillers and poultry/livestock raisers are not similarly situated, and thus, they
cannot be treated in the same way.
*Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 insofar as the inclusion of the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its
coverage as well as the Implementing Rules and Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith, are hereby DECLARED
null and void for being unconstitutional and the writ of preliminary injunction issued is hereby MADE permanent.
The transcripts of the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 on the meaning of the word "agricultural,"
clearly show that it was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution to include livestock and poultry industry in the
coverage of the constitutionally-mandated agrarian reform program of the Government.
The Committee adopted the definition of "agricultural land" as defined under Section 166 of R.A. 3844, as laud devoted to
any growth, including but not limited to crop lands, saltbeds, fishponds, idle and abandoned land. xxx The intention of the
Committee is to limit the application of the word "agriculture." Commissioner Jamir proposed to insert the word
"ARABLE" to distinguish this kind of agricultural land from such lands as commercial and industrial lands and residential
properties because all of them fall under the general classification of the word "agricultural". This proposal, however, was
not considered because the Committee contemplated that agricultural lands are limited to arable and suitable agricultural
lands and therefore, do not include commercial, industrial and residential lands (Record, CONCOM, August 7, 1986)
In the interpellation, then Commissioner Regalado (now a Supreme Court Justice), posed several questions, among others,
quoted as follows:
"Line 19 refers to genuine reform program founded on the primary right of farmers and farmworkers. I wonder if it means
that leasehold tenancy is thereby proscribed under this provision because it speaks of the primary right of farmers and
farmworkers to own directly or collectively the lands they till. As also mentioned by Commissioner Tadeo, farmworkers
include those who work in piggeries and poultry projects. xxx I was wondering whether I am wrong in my appreciation that
if somebody puts up a piggery or a poultry project and for that purpose hires farmworkers therein, these farmworkers will
automatically have the right to own eventually, directly or ultimately or collectively, the land on which the piggeries and
poultry projects were constructed.
The questions were answered and explained in the statement of then Commissioner Tadeo, quoted as follows: "Sa
pangalawang katanungan ng Ginoo ay medyo hindi kami nagkaunawaan. Ipinaaalam ko kay Commissioner Regalado na
hindi namin inilagay ang agricultural worker sa kadahilanang kasama rito ang piggery, poultry at livestock workers. Ang
inilagay namin dito ay farm worker kaya hindi kasama ang piggery, poultry at livestock workers.
It is evident from the foregoing discussion that Section II of R.A. 6657 which includes "private agricultural lands devoted to
commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising" in the definition of "commercial farms" is invalid, to the extent that the
aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be covered by the agrarian reform program of the State. There is simply no
reason to include livestock and poultry lands in the coverage of agrarian reform.
II. APPLICABILITY OF RA 6657

A. Agricultural Tenancy
Definition: It is the physical possession by a person of land devoted to agriculture belonging

to, or legally possessed by, another for the purpose of production through the labor of the
former and of the members of his immediate farm household, in consideration of which the
former agrees to share the harvest with the latter, or to pay a price certain, either in produce or
in money, or in both.1
Elements2:
1. the parties are the landowner and the
tenant or agricultural lessee;
2. the subject matter of the relationship is
agricultural land;
3. there is consent between the parties to Agri Tenancy Elements = PSC PPH
1. Parties
the relationship;
2. SM – agri land
4. the purpose of the relationship is to 3. Consent
bring about agricultural production; 4. Purpose – agri prod
5. there is personal cultivation on the part 5. Personal cultivation
of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6. Harvest shared
6. the harvest is shared between the
landowner and the tenant or agricultural
lessee.
1 Republic Act No. 1199 as amended by Republic Act No. 2263. Section 3
2 Galope vs. Bugarin, G.R. No. 185669, February 1, 2012; Pasong Bayabas Farmers Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals 473 Phil. 64,
98 (2004), citing Almuete v. Andres, 421 Phil. 522, 530 (2001)
Cases:
1. Cayetano & Tiongson vs CA (July 18, 1984)
The essential requisites of tenancy relationship are: 1) the parties are the landholder and the
tenant; 2) the subject is agricultural land; 3) there is consent; 4) the purpose is agricultural
production; and 5) there is consideration, which is “the produce to be divided between the
landholder and tenant in proportion to their respective contributions.”
The Court held in this case that none of the elements of agricultural tenancy are present:
The parties are not landholder and tenant of each other.

RA 1199, as amended, defines the following terms:
Sec. 5(b) A landholder shall mean a person, natural or juridical, who, either as owner, lessee, usufructuary, or legal
possessor, lets or grants to another the use or cultivation of his land for a consideration either in shares under the
share tenancy system, or a price certain under the leasehold tenancy system.
Sec. 5(a) A tenant shall mean a person who, himself and with the aid available from within his immediate farm
household, cultivates the land belonging to, or possessed by, another with the latter's consent for purposes of
production, sharing the produce with the landholder under the share tenancy system or paying to the landholder a
price certain in produce or in money or both, under the leasehold tenancy system.”
The parties have not agreed as to their contributions of the several items of productions
such as expenses for transplanting, fertilizers, weeding and application of insecticides,
etc. In the absence of an agreement as to the respective contributions of the parties or
other terms and conditions of their tenancy agreement, the lower court concluded that no
tenancy relationship was entered into between them as tenant and landholder.
The decision of the petitioners not to ask for anymore contributions from Macaya
reveals that there was no tenancy relationship ever agreed upon by the parties. Neither
can such relationship be implied from the facts as there was no agreed system of sharing
the produce of the property.
From 1946 to 1956 at which time, Macaya was also planting rice, there was no payment
whatsoever. At the most and during the limited period when it was in force, the
arrangement was a civil lease where the lessee for a fixed price leases the property while
the lessor has no responsibility whatsoever for the problems of production and enters
into no agreement as to the sharing of the costs of fertilizers, irrigation, seedlings, and
other items.
The subject land is not agricultural but residential.
The land has always been officially classified as "residential" since 1948. The areas
surrounding the disputed six hectares are now dotted with residences and, apparently,
only this case has kept the property in question from being developed together with the
rest of the lot to which it belongs. The fact that a caretaker plants rice or corn on a
residential lot in the middle of a residential subdivision in the heart of a metropolitan
area cannot by any strained interpretation of law convert it into agricultural land and
subject it to the agrarian reform program.
There was no consent between the parties as to the tenancy, and there wasalso no
“consideration”.
The purpose of the “tenancy” was not agricultural as the owners have always intended
the land to be residential. The palay that the respondent had intermittently given to the
owners was grossly proportionate to the taxes they have been paying.
The lot was taxed as residential land in a metropolitan area. There was clearly no
intention on the part of the owners to devote the property for agricultural production but
only for residential purposes.
There was no agreement as to any system of sharing the produce of the land. The
petitioners did not get anything from the harvest and private respondent Macaya was
using and cultivating the land free from any charge or expense.”
2. Stanfilco (SEARBEMCO) vs. DOLE (November 27, 2009)

Agricultural tenancy must exist in order for a dispute to fall under the jurisdiction of DAR
Adjudication Board (DARAB), and for the provisions of CARL to apply. Agrarian reform
extends beyond the mere acquisition and redistribution of land; the law acknowledges other
modes of tenurial arrangements to effect the implementation of CARP. When the question
involves the rights and obligations of persons engaged in the management, cultivation, and use
of an agricultural land covered by CARP, the case falls squarely within the jurisdictional ambit
of the DAR.
Facts: On Jan 1998, SEARBEMCO (as seller) entered into a Banana Production & Purchase Agreement (BPPA)
with DOLE (as buyer). The BPPA states that “the seller agrees to sell exclusively to the BUYER, and the
BUYER agrees to buy all Cavendish Banana of the Specifications and Quality xxx”.
On Dec 2000, DOLE filed a complaint with the RTC against SEARBEMCO, the spouses Elly and Myrna Abujos
(spouses Abujos), and Oribanex Services, Inc. (Oribanex) xxx DOLE alleged that SEARBEMCO sold and
delivered to Oribanex, through the spouses Abujos, the bananas rejected by DOLE, in violation of paragraph
5(p), Article V of the BPPA which limited the sale of rejected bananas for domestic non-export consumption.
DOLE further alleged that Oribanex is likewise an exporter of bananas and is its direct competitor.
Contention of SEARBEMCO: It is the DARAB, not the RTC that has jurisdiction over the case.
“The BPPA, SEARBEMCO claims, is a joint venture and a production, processing and marketing agreement, as
defined under Section 5 (c) (i) and (ii) of DAR AO No. 2-99; hence, any dispute arising from the BPPA is within
the exclusive jurisdiction of the DARAB. SEARBEMCO also asserts that the parties relationship in the present
case is not only that of buyer and seller, but also that of supplier of land covered by the CARP and of manpower
on the part of SEARBEMCO, and supplier of agricultural inputs, financing and technological expertise on the
part of DOLE. Therefore, SEARBEMCO concludes that the BPPA is not an ordinary contract, but one that
involves an agrarian element and, as such, is imbued with public interest”
RTC: The case does not involve an agrarian conflict and is a judicial matter that it can resolve.
CA: The case is not an agrarian dispute within the purview of Section 3(d) of RA No. 6657, but is an action to
compel SEARBEMCO to comply with its obligations under the BPPA; it called for the application of the
provisions of the Civil Code, not RA No. 6657.
Issue: WON DOLE's complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the regular courts.
SC's Ruling: RTC has jurisdiction.
“Section 3(d) of RA No. 6657 is clear in defining an agrarian dispute: any controversy relating to tenurial
arrangements, whether leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or otherwise, over lands devoted to agriculture, including
dispute concerning farm-workers associations or representations of persons in negotiating, fixing, maintaining,
changing or seeking to arrange terms or conditions of such tenurial arrangements. It includes any controversy
relating to compensation of lands acquired under this Act and other terms and conditions of transfer of
ownership from landowners to farmworkers, tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whether the
disputants stand in the proximate relation of farm operator and beneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor and
lessee.
RA No. 6657 is procedurally implemented through the 2003 DARAB Rules of Procedure where Section 1, Rule
II enumerates the instances where the DARAB shall have primary and exclusive jurisdiction. A notable feature
of RA No. 6657 and its implementing rules is the focus on agricultural lands and the relationship over this land
that serves as the basis in the determination of whether a matter falls under DARAB jurisdiction.
In Heirs of the Late Hernan Rey Santos v. Court of Appeals, we held that: For DARAB to have jurisdiction over
a case, there must exist a tenancy relationship between the parties.
In Vda. De Tangub v. Court of Appeals (191 SCRA 885), we held that the jurisdiction of the Department of
Agrarian Reform is limited to the following:
a) adjudication of all matters involving implementation of agrarian reform;
b) resolution of agrarian conflicts and land tenure related problems; and
c) approval and disapproval of the conversion, restructuring or readjustment of agricultural lands into
residential, commercial, industrial, and other non-agricultural uses.
The parties in the present case have no tenurial, leasehold, or any other agrarian relationship that could bring
their controversy within the ambit of agrarian reform laws and within the jurisdiction of the DARAB.
Tenancy relations cannot be presumed. The elements of tenancy must first be proved by substantial evidence
which can be shown through records, documents, and written agreements between the parties. A principal factor,
too, to consider in determining whether a tenancy relationship exists is the intent of the parties.
The definition of agrarian dispute in RA No. 6657 is broad enough to include disputes arising from any tenurial
arrangement beyond the traditional landowner-tenant or lessor-lessee relationship. Agrarian reform extends
beyond the mere acquisition and redistribution of land, the law acknowledges other modes of tenurial
arrangements to effect the implementation of CARP.
When the question involves the rights and obligations of persons engaged in the management, cultivation, and
use of an agricultural land covered by CARP, the case falls squarely within the jurisdictional ambit of the DAR.
This issues of the case pertain to post-harvest transactions involving the produce from CARP-covered
agricultural lands.
The resolution of the present case would therefore involve, more than anything else, the application of civil law
provisions on breaches of contract, rather than agrarian reform principles. Indeed, in support of their arguments,
the parties have capitalized and focused on their relationship as buyer and seller. DOLE, the buyer, filed a
complaint against SEARBEMCO, the seller, to enforce the BPPA between them and to compel the latter to
comply with its obligations. The CA is thus legally correct in its declaration that the action before the RTC does
not involve an agrarian dispute, nor does it call for the application of Agrarian Reform laws.
The inclusion of third parties in the complaint supports our declaration that the present case does not fall under
DARABs jurisdiction. DARABs quasi-judicial powers under Section 50 of RA No. 6657 may be invoked only
when there is prior certification from the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee (or BARC) that the dispute has
been submitted to it for mediation and conciliation, without any success of settlement. Since the present dispute
need not be referred to arbitration (including mediation or conciliation) because of the inclusion of third parties,
neither SEARBEMCO nor DOLE will be able to present the requisite BARC certification that is necessary to
invoke DARABs jurisdiction.”
3. Mendoza vs Germino (November 22, 2010)

An action of forcible entry cannot be resolved by DARAB. This is within the jurisdiction of the
trial courts. The subsequent amendment of the complaint, alleging tenancy relationship
between the parties, will not divest the trial court of jurisdiction.
Facts: Mendoza, owner of a 5-hectare land in Nueva Ecija, filed with the MTC a complaint against Narciso
Germino, charging him of forcible entry.
Mendoza alleged that Narciso unlawfully entered the subject property by means of strategy and stealth, and
without their knowledge or consent. Despite Mendoza's repeated demands, Narciso refused to vacate the subject
property.
Narciso claimed that his brother, Benigno Germino, was the Mendoza's agricultural lessee and he merely helped
the latter in the cultivation as a member of the immediate farm household.
Mendoza filed a motion to remand the case to the DARA), in view of the tenancy issue raised by Narciso.
Without conducting a hearing, and despite Narciso’s objection, the MTC issued an order remanding the case to
the DARAB, Cabanatuan City for further proceedings. Medoza filed an amended complaint with the Provincial
Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD), adding Benigno as a defendant.
PARAD: The respondents were mere usurpers of the subject property, noting that they failed to prove that
respondent Benigno was Mendoza's bona fide agricultural lessee. The PARAD ordered the respondents to vacate
the subject property, and pay the plaintiffs 500 cavans of palay as actual damages. Not satisfied, the respondents
filed an appeal with DARAB, arguing that the case should have been dismissed because the MTC’s referral to
the DARAB was void with the enactment of RA 6657, which repealed the rule on referral under PD 316.
DARAB: It acquired jurisdiction because the amended complaint sufficiently alleged an agrarian dispute, not
because of the MTC’s referral. Thus, it affirmed the PARAD decision. The respondents elevated the case to the
CA via a petition for review under Rule 43.
CA: The MTC erred in transferring the case to the DARAB since the material allegations of the complaint and
the relief sought show a case for forcible entry, not an agrarian dispute. It noted that the subsequent filing of the
amended complaint did not confer jurisdiction upon the DARAB. Thus, the CA set aside the DARAB decision
and remanded the case to the MTC for further proceedings.
Contention of petitioner: Mendoza insists that the jurisdiction lies with the DARAB since the nature of the
action and the allegations of the complaint show an agrarian dispute.
Respondents' answer: R.A. No. 6657 abrogated the rule on referral previously provided in P.D. No. 316.
Moreover, neither the Rules of Court nor the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (RRSP) provides that
forcible entry cases can be referred to the DARAB.
Issue: Whether the MTC or the DARAB has jurisdiction over the case.
SC's ruling: It is the MTC.
“Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the complaint. It is determined exclusively by the Constitution
and the law. It cannot be conferred by the voluntary act or agreement of the parties, or acquired through or
waived, enlarged or diminished by their act or omission, nor conferred by the acquiescence of the court. Under
Batas Pambansa Blg. 129, as amended by R.A. No. 7691, the MTC shall have exclusive original jurisdiction
over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer.”
“Under Section 5028 of R.A. No. 6657, as well as Section 34 of Executive Order No. 129-A, the DARAB has
primary and exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate, to determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes
involving the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program, and other agrarian laws and their
implementing rules and regulations.”
“An agrarian dispute refers to any controversy relating to, among others, tenancy over lands devoted to
agriculture. For a case to involve an agrarian dispute, the following essential requisites of an agricultural tenancy
relationship must be present: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant; (2) the subject is agricultural land;
(3) there is consent; (4) the purpose is agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation; and (6) there is
sharing of harvest or payment of rental.”
“Although respondent Narciso averred tenancy as an affirmative and/or special defense in his answer, this did
not automatically divest the MTC of jurisdiction over the complaint. It continued to have the authority to hear
the case precisely to determine whether it had jurisdiction to dispose of the ejectment suit on its merits. After all,
jurisdiction is not affected by the pleas or the theories set up by the defendant in an answer or a motion to
dismiss. Otherwise, jurisdiction would become dependent almost entirely upon the whims of the defendant.”
“Instead of conducting a preliminary conference, the MTC immediately referred the case to the DARAB. This
was contrary to the rules. Besides, Section 240 of P.D. No. 316, which required the referral of a land dispute case
to the Department of Agrarian Reform for the preliminary determination of the existence of an agricultural
tenancy relationship, has indeed been repealed by Section 7641 of R.A. No. 6657 in 1988.”
“In the absence of any allegation of a tenancy relationship between the parties, the action was for recovery of
possession of real property that was within the jurisdiction of the regular courts.”
B. Coverage and Exclusions
Summary of Exclusions:
1. Lands ADE used for: PWF RFW

a. Parks;
b. Wildlife;
c. Forest reserves;
d. Reforestation;
e. Fish sanctuaries and breeding grounds;
f. Watersheds and mangroves.
2. Private lands A D E used for prawn farms and fishponds, provided they have not
been distributed and CLOA's have not been issued to AR beneficiaries.
3. Lands ADE used and found to be necessary for: NSS CMC PG
a. National defense;
b. School sites and campuses including experimental farm stations
operated by public or private schools for educational purposes;
c. Seeds and seedling research and pilot production center;
d. Church sites and convents appurtenant thereto;
e. Mosque sites and Islamic centers appurtenant thereto;
f. Communal burial grounds and cemeteries;
g. Penal colonies and penal farms actually worked by the inmates;
h. Government and private research and quarantine centers.
4. All lands not developed for agriculture with 18% slope and over.
5. Agricultural lands devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising.
Section 4 of RA 6657: Coverage – “The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1989 shall
cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private
agricultural lands, as provided in Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. 229,
including other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture.
More specifically the following lands are covered by the CARP:
(a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public domain devoted to or suitable for
agriculture. No reclassification of forest or mineral lands to agricultural lands shall
be undertaken after the approval of this Act until Congress, taking into account
ecological, developmental and equity considerations, shall have determined by law,
the specific limits of the public domain.
(b) All lands of the public domain in excess of the specific limits as determined by
Congress in the preceding paragraph;
(c) All other lands owned by the Government devoted to or suitable for agriculture;
and
(d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the
agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon.”
Section 9 of RA 6657: Ancestral lands – “For purposes of this Act, ancestral lands of each
indigenous cultural community shall include, but not be limited to, lands in the actual,
continuous and open possession and occupation of the community and its members: provided,
that the Torrens Systems shall be respected.
The right of these communities to their ancestral lands shall be protected to ensure their
economic, social and cultural well-being.n line with the principles of self-determination and
autonomy, the systems of land ownership, land use, and the modes of settling land disputes of
all these communities must be recognized and respected.
Any provision of law to the contrary notwithstanding, the PARC may suspend the
implementation of this Act with respect to ancestral lands for the purpose of identifying and
delineating such lands: provided, that in the autonomous regions, the respective legislatures
may enact their own laws on ancestral domain subject to the provisions of the Constitution and
the principles enunciated in this Act and other national laws.
Section 10 as amended by RA 7881: Exemptions and Exclusions. —

(a) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used for parks, wildlife, forest reserves,
reforestation, fish sanctuaries and breeding grounds, watersheds and mangroves shall be
exempt from the coverage of this Act.;
(b) Private lands actually, directly and exclusively used for prawn farms and fishponds shall be
exempt from the coverage of this Act: Provided, That said prawn farms and fishponds have not
been distributed and Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA) issued to agrarian reform
beneficiaries under the CARP.
In cases where the fishponds or prawn farms have been subjected to the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law, by voluntary offer to sell, or commercial farms deferment or notices of
compulsory acquisition, a simple and absolute majority of the actual regular workers or tenants
must consent to the exemption within one (1) year from the effectivity of this Act. When the
workers or tenants do not agree to this exemption, the fishponds or prawn farms shall be
distributed collectively to the worker-beneficiaries or tenants who shall form a cooperative or
association to manage the same;
(c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found to be necessary for national defense,
school sites and campuses, including experimental farm stations operated by public or private
schools for educational purposes, seeds and seedling research and pilot production center,
church sites and convents appurtenant thereto, mosque sites and Islamic centers appurtenant
thereto, communal burial grounds and cemeteries, penal colonies and penal farms actually
worked by the inmates, government and private research and quarantine centers and all lands
with eighteen percent (18%) slope and over, except those already developed, shall be exempt
from the coverage of this Act."
Luz Farms case: “Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 insofar as the inclusion of the
raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as the Implementing Rules and
Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith, are hereby DECLARED null and void for
being unconstitutional”
C. Right of Security of Tenure
Section 7 of RA 3844: Tenure of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural leasehold

relation once established shall confer upon the agricultural lessee the right to continue working
on the landholding until such leasehold relation is extinguished. The agricultural lessee shall be
entitled to security of tenure on his landholding and cannot be ejected therefrom unless
authorized by the Court for causes herein provided.
Section 8 of RA 3844: Extinguishment of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural

leasehold relation established under this Code shall be extinguished by:

1. Abandonment of the landholding without the knowledge of the agricultural lessor;
2. Voluntary surrender of the landholding by the agricultural lessee, written notice of which
shall be served three months in advance; or
3. Absence of the persons under Section nine to succeed to the lessee, in the event of death
or permanent incapacity of the lessee.
Section 9 of RA 3844: Agricultural Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Death or

Incapacity of the Parties - In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee to
work his landholding, the leasehold shall continue between the agricultural lessor and the
person who can cultivate the landholding personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor within
one month from such death or permanent incapacity, from among the following:
1. the surviving spouse;
2. the eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or
3. the next eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their age
Provided, That in case the death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee occurs
during the agricultural year, such choice shall be exercised at the end of that agricultural year:
Provided, further, That in the event the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his choice within the
periods herein provided, the priority shall be in accordance with the order herein established.
In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessor, the leasehold shall bind his
legal heirs.
Summary of Security of Tenure:

Once an agricultural leasehold has been established, it shall persist until it is
extinguished in the 3 manners prescribed by law, namely:
1. abandonment by the lessee without the lessor's knowledge
2. voluntary surrender of the land by the lessee, provided that a written
notice was served 3 months in advance
3. absence of successors in case of the death or permanent incapacity
of the lessee.
Within 1 month from the death or incapacity of the lessee (and if it occurs
during the agricultural year—at the end of that year), the lessor must choose a
successor among the following:
a. surviving spouse;
b. eldest direct descendant by consanguinity;
c. next eldest descendant, in order of age.
The successor must be willing and capable of taking over the role of the
dead or incapacitated lessee. If the lessor fails to chose within the periods
prescribed, the priority will be according to the order above.
If it is the lessor who dies or becomes permanently incapacitated, the
leasehold will bind his legal heirs.
If the lessor sells, alienates or transfers legal possession of the land, he
merely passes on his rights and obligations as lessor to the buyer or transferee.
Leasehold will not be extinguished.
Section 28 of RA 3844: Termination of Leasehold by Agricultural Lessee During Agricultural

Year - The agricultural lessee may terminate the leasehold during the agricultural year for any
of the following causes:
1. Cruel, inhuman or offensive, treatment of the agricultural lessee or any member of his
immediate farm household by the agricultural lessor or his representative with the
knowledge and consent of the lessor;
2. Non-compliance on the part of the agricultural lessor with any of the obligations
imposed upon him by the provisions of this Code or by his contact with the agricultural
lessee;
3. Compulsion of the agricultural lessee or any member of his immediate farm household
by the agricultural lessor to do any work or render any service not in any way connected
with farm work or even without compulsion if no compensation is paid;
4. Commission of a crime by the agricultural lessor or his representative against the
agricultural lessee or any member of his immediate farm household; or
5. Voluntary surrender due to circumstances more advantageous to him and his family
Valid Grounds for Termination: CNCCV
The lessee may terminate the leasehold for any of the following causes:
1. cruel, inhuman, or offensive treatment of the lessee or his farm
household by the lessor, or by the his representative with his consent;
2. non-compliance of lessor with obligations imposed by law or contract;
3. compulsion of the lessee or his farm household by the lessor to do work
or render service not connected with farm work, or non-compensation of
such, even without compulsion;
4. commission of a crime by the lessor or his representative against the
lessee or his farm household; or
5. voluntary surrender due to circumstances more advantageous to the
lessor and his family.
Section 36 of RA 3844: Possession of Landholding; Exceptions - Notwithstanding any

agreement as to the period or future surrender, of the land, an agricultural lessee shall continue
in the enjoyment and possession of his landholding except when his dispossession has been
authorized by the Court (the DARAB) in a judgment that is final and executory if after due
hearing it is shown that:
1. The landholding is declared by the department head upon recommendation of the
National Planning Commission to be suited for residential, commercial, industrial or
some other urban purposes: Provided, That the agricultural lessee shall be entitled to
disturbance compensation equivalent to five times the average of the gross harvests on
his landholding during the last five preceding calendar years 3;
2. The agricultural lessee failed to substantially comply with any of the terms and
conditions of the contract or any of the provisions of this Code unless his failure is
caused by fortuitous event or force majeure;
3. The agricultural lessee planted crops or used the landholding for a purpose other than
what had been previously agreed upon;
4. The agricultural lessee failed to adopt proven farm practices as determined under
paragraph 3 of Section twenty-nine;
Section 29. Rights of the Agricultural Lessor - It shall be the right of the agricultural
lessor: xxx (3) To require the agricultural lessee, taking into consideration his
financial capacity and the credit facilities available to him, to adopt in his farm
proven farm practices necessary to the conservation of the land, improvement of its
fertility and increase of its productivity: Provided, That in case of disagreement
as to what proven farm practice the lessee shall adopt, the same shall be settled by
the Court according to the best interest of the parties concerned;
5. The land or other substantial permanent improvement thereon is substantially damaged

or destroyed or has unreasonably deteriorated through the fault or negligence of the
agricultural lessee;
6. The agricultural lessee does not pay the lease rental when it falls due: Provided, That if
the non-payment of the rental shall be due to crop failure to the extent of seventy-five
per centum as a result of a fortuitous event, the non-payment shall not be a ground for
dispossession, although the obligation to pay the rental due that particular crop is not
thereby extinguished; or
7. The lessee employed a sub-lessee on his landholding in violation of the terms of
paragraph 2 of Section twenty-seven.
Section 27. Prohibitions to Agricultural Lessee - It shall be unlawful for the
agricultural lessee: xxx (2) To employ a sub-lessee on his landholding: Provided,
however, That in case of illness or temporary incapacity he may employ laborers
whose services on his landholding shall be on his account.
3 As amended by RA 6389 (1971). This provision was previously worded: “The agricultural lessor-owner or a
member of his immediate family will personally cultivate the landholding or will convert the landholding, if suitably located, into residential,
factory, hospital or school site or other useful non-agricultural purposes: Provided; That the agricultural lessee shall be entitled to disturbance compensation equivalent to five
years rental on his landholding in addition to his rights under Sections twenty-five and thirty-four, except when the land owned and leased by the agricultural lessor, is not more
than five hectares, in which case instead of disturbance compensation the lessee may be entitled to an advanced notice of at least one agricultural year before ejectment
proceedings are filed against him: Provided, further, That should the landholder not cultivate the land himself for three years or fail to substantially carry out such conversion
within one year after the dispossession of the tenant, it shall be presumed that he acted in bad faith and the tenant shall have the right to demand possession of the land and
recover damages for any loss incurred by him because of said dispossessions.
Rationale for amendment: If the lessor is given this discretion, it would be very easy to eject lessees.
Summary of Grounds for Ejection: LN PARS
A lessee may be dispossessed of the land when it has been authorized by the
DARAB in a final judgment on the following grounds:
1. legal conversion—the land is declared suited for RCI or some other urban
purposes, provided that the lessee will be given disturbance compensation
(5 x ave gross harvests during the last 5 preceding years;
2. non-compliance—the lessee substantially failed to comply with the terms
and conditions of the contract and the law, unless such failure is due to a
fortuitous event;
3. planting of crops or use of the land for a purpose other than that
agreed upon;
4. failure of the lessee to adopt the proven farm practices;
5. damage—the land or a permanent improvement is substantially damaged,
destroyed or has unreasonably deteriorated through the lessee's fault or
negligence;
6. non-payment of rental when it falls due, except if such is to a fortuitous
event which causes at least 75% crop failure; or
7. sub-leasing of the land by the lessee.
Jurisprudence:
1. Talavera vs. CA (February 27, 1990)

The very essence of agricultural tenancy lies in the cardinal rule that an agricultural tenant
enjoys security of tenurial status. The agricultural leasehold relation shall be extinguished in 3
ways under the law: (1) Abandonment without the knowledge of the lessor; (2) Voluntary
surrender by the lessee, written notice served three months in advance; or (3) Absence of the
persons under Section 9 (spouse, relatives, etc) to succeed to the lessee, in the event of death or
permanent incapacity of the lessee.
To protect the tenant's right to security of tenure, voluntary surrender must be convincingly and
sufficiently proved by competent evidence. The tenant's intention to surrender the landholding
cannot be presumed, much less determined by mere implication. Otherwise, the right of a
tenant to security of tenure becomes an illusory one.
Facts: An action for recovery of possession was instituted by Jose Laxamana against spouses Talavera over a
parcel of agricultural land located at Brgy. Sto. Domingo 11, Sitio Tambo, Capas, Tarlac.
Laxamana (respondent): Laxamana had been a bonafide tenant of the parcel of land since 1958 until the
petitioners took possession sometime in 1984; that Laxamana had been in continuous possession and cultivation
of the said landholding since 1958 but the Talaveras, for unknown reasons and without the knowledge of
Laxamana, planted palay thereon in 1984 through force and intimidation after plowing and harrowing were done
by Laxamana; and that due to the Talavera's illegal actions, Laxamana suffered damages.
Talavera (petitioners): They counter-alleged that their tenancy relationship with Laxamana was terminated
pursuant to a document captioned "Casunduan" executed on March 30, 1973 where Laxamana sold his rights
and interests over the agricultural landholding under litigation for a consideration of P1,000.00; that Laxamana
was not actually a tenant of the Talaveras and whatever tenancy rights the former had exercised over the
landholding in question were voluntarily surrendered by him upon the execution of the Casunduan.
RTC & CA: Laxamana obtained a favorable judgment from the lower court. The Court of Appeals also affirmed
the holding that the Casunduan (even if assumed to be valid) did not constitute "voluntary surrender", hence,
Laxamana ought to be reinstated as tenant.
Issue: Whether there was voluntary surrender by Laxamana of the landholding by virtue of the Casunduan and
whether he should be reinstated to the landholding.
SC's ruling: No. The evidence on record and the arguments are not enough to overcome the rights of the private
respondent provided in the Constitution and agrarian statutes.
The very essence of agricultural tenancy lies in the cardinal rule that an agricultural tenant enjoys security of
tenurial status. The Code of Agrarian Reforms of the Philippines (RA 3844) specifically enumerates the grounds
for the extinguishment of agricultural leasehold relations:
(1) Abandonment of the landholding without the knowledge of the agricultural lessor;
(2) Voluntary surrender of the land holding by the agricultural lessee, written notice of which shall be served
three months in advance; or
(3) Absence of the persons under Section 9 to succeed to the lessee, in the event of death or permanent
incapacity of the lessee.
Voluntary surrender, as a mode of extinguishment of tenancy relations, does not require any court authorization
considering that it involves the tenant's own volition. To protect the tenant's right to security of tenure, voluntary
surrender must be convincingly and sufficiently proved by competent evidence. The tenant's intention to
surrender the landholding cannot be presumed, much less determined by mere implication. Otherwise, the right
of a tenant to security of tenure becomes an illusory one.
Standing by itself, the Casunduan indicates a voluntary relinquishment of tenancy rights. It states that on his own
initiative, Jose Laxamana went to the Talaveras and requested that he be allowed to sell "the plot I am farming"
to the couple. A subscribing witness, Ermela Lumanlan testified on the voluntary sale of tenancy rights for
P1,000.00, her signing as a witness at the bottom of the contract, and Laxamana's signing the document.
Laxamana needed money to pay for the expenses incident to the illness of his wife which led to her death. The
agreement was prepared by petitioner Visitacion A. Talavera. Laxamana could hardly sign his own name. He was
clearly at a disadvantage in the execution of the contract and the wording of the agreement. The intention to give
up the landholding must be gleaned from evidence in addition to the document which was signed by an ignorant
and illiterate peasant in an hour of emotional stress and financial need.
Laxamana continued to till their land even after he was ejected (1973-1984). The spouses claim that they have
been cultivating the land themselves but Laxamana is a resident of the sitio where the land is situated while the
they reside in another barangay.
Tenancy relations cannot be bargained away except for the strong reasons provided by law which must be
convincingly shown by evidence in line with the State's policy of achieving a dignified existence for the small
farmers free from pernicious institutional restraints and practices.
2. Milestone Realty and co. vs. CA (April 19, 2002)

Agricultural leasehold relationship is not extinguished by the death or incapacity of the parties.
In case the agricultural lessee dies or is incapacitated, the leasehold relation shall continue
between the agricultural lessor and any of the successors of the agricultural lessee who can
cultivate the landholding personally, in the order of preference provided under Section 9. The
lessor has the right of choice, which he must execute within one month from the death or
permanent incapacity. Failure to do so will amount to a waiver of such right, and the priority
laid down under the law will be followed.
Facts: An agricultural land (Lot 616) located in Valenzuela City was co-owned by Spouses Alfonso Olympia &
Carolina Zacarias and Spouses Claro Zacarias & Cristina Lorenzo. Eventually, Carolina became the owner
through a Deed of Extrajudicial Settlement (October 17, 1976 by the heirs of Alfonso Olympia, one of whom is
Francisco Olympia, on their respective shares) after Alfonso's death and by an Affidavit of Settlement (June 24,
1992) by the spouses Claro and Cristina Zacarias on their shares in the property.
Anacleto Pea who was a tenant and a holder of a Certificate of Agricultural Leasehold (February 23, 1982) He
and his two children (Emilio & Celia) had houses constructed on the lot. On February 4, 1986, Anacleto, 78
years old and a widower, married Delia Razon, 29 years old. On February 17, 1990, Anacleto died intestate and
was survived by Delia and his children.
Emilio and Delia, the latter with the help of respondent Raymundo Eugenio, her son-in-law, continued tilling and
cultivating the property. On January 22, 1992, Emilio signed a handwritten declaration that he was the tenant in
the land and he was returning the landholding to Carolina Zacarias in consideration of the sum o f P1,500,000 as
disturbance compensation. After receipt of the money, he executed a Katibayang Paglilipat ng Pag-mamay-ari.
In the meantime, petitioner William Perez, Joseph Lim, Willy Lim, Winston Lim, Edgar Lim, and Jaime Lim
established Milestone as incorporators, in order to acquire and develop the aforesaid property and the adjacent
parcel.
Carolina Zacarias executed a deed of sale (July 30, 1992) transferring the property to Milestone.
Milestone became the owner of the adjoining lots, Lot Nos. 616 (Carolina's previous property) and 617
(previously William Perez') of the Malinta Estate with a total area of 3 hectares. Development of the property
then commenced.
Delia Razon Pea and Raymundo Eugenio filed (October 1992) a complaint against Emilio Pea, Carolina
Zacarias, Francisco Olympia, William Perez and Milestone as respondent, praying:
a. to declare the sale of Carolina to Perez, and later to Milestone, as null and void;
b. to recognize and respect the tenancy of private respondents Delia and Raymundo.
In her answer (affidavit), Carolina declared that she chose Emilio Pea as her tenant-beneficiary on the said
property within 30 days after the death of Anacleto, conformably with Section 9 of RA 3844 on Agricultural
Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Death or Incapacity of the Parties:
In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee to work in his landholding, the leasehold shall
continue between the agricultural lessor and the person who can cultivate the landholding personally, chosen by
the agricultural lessor within one month from such death or permanent incapacity, from among the following:
(a) the surviving spouse;
(b) the eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or
(c) the next eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their age
xxx Provided, further, That in the event the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his choice within the periods
herein provided, the priority shall be in accordance with the order herein established.
PARAD: (July 1993) Ruled against Delia & Raymundo, ruling that the order of preference in Section 9 of
Republic Act 3844 is not absolute and may be disregarded for valid cause. It also took note that Emilio's two
siblings have openly recognized Emilio as the legitimate successor to Anacleto's tenancy rights.
DARAB: Reversed PARAD and declared respondent Delia as the bona fide tenant, and voided the sale of said
lot, noting that: Carolina's affidavit did not show any categorical admission that she made her choice within the
1-month period, she only stated when Anacleto died. The right of the deceased was inherited by Emilio Pea
which could only mean that she recognized Emilio Pea by force of circumstance under a nebulous time frame.
CA: Affirmed DARAB, holding that Carolina & Francisco Olympia failed to choose any tenant in substitution of
Anacleto within the statutory period and that without prior or simultaneous notice to Delia Pea (widow), they
made their choice of Emilio Pea (son) as substitute tenant only in January, 1992, after they had agreed to sell the
property to Milestone.
Issues:
1. Whether or not Delia Razon Pea has a right of first priority over Emilio Pea in succeeding to the tenancy
rights of Anacleto over the subject landholding. (Who is the rightful and legal successor to Anacleto's tenancy
rights?)
2. Whether or not the sales of the subject lots by Carolina Zacarias to William Perez and then to Milestone are
null and void.
Petitioners (Carolina, etc): Section 9 does not require any form or manner in which the choice should be
made. Based on her affidavit, Carolina recognized Emilio Pea as the successor to Anacletos tenancy rights.
Petitioners argued that Delia could not have qualified as a successor-tenant to Anacleto due to lack of personal
cultivation. Further, she had not been paying rent on the land
Respondents (Delia, etc): Carolina did not choose the successor to Anacleto's tenancy rights within one month
from his death. It was only after 2 years that both Carolina and Emilio claimed in their respective affidavits that
Emilio inherited the rights of Anacleto as a tenant. Such inaction to make a choice within the time frame
required by law is equivalent to waiver on Carolina's part to choose a substitute tenant.
Held (SC): Partially granted petition.
1. Who is the rightful successor? Delia Pea. Carolina had failed to exercise her right to choose a substitute for
the deceased tenant, from among those qualified, within the statutory period.
Section 9 of RA 3844 is clear and unequivocal in providing for the rules on succession to tenancy rights.
Agricultural leasehold relationship is not extinguished by the death or incapacity of the parties. In case the
agricultural lessee dies or is incapacitated, the leasehold relation shall continue between the agricultural lessor
and any of the legal heirs of the agricultural lessee who can cultivate the landholding personally, in the order of
preference provided under Section 9 of RA 3844, as chosen by the lessor within one month from such death or
permanent incapacity.
Delia, the surviving spouse of the original tenant, Anacleto, is the first in the order of preference to succeed to
the tenancy rights of her husband because the lessor, Carolina, failed to exercise her right of choice within the
one month period from the time of Anacleto's death.
2. Should the sale should be voided? No.
As an owner, Carolina has the right to dispose of the property. This attribute of ownership is impliedly
recognized in Sections 10, 11 and 12 of RA 3844, where the law allows the agricultural lessor to sell the
landholding, with or without the knowledge of the agricultural lessee and at the same time recognizes the right of
preemption and redemption of the agricultural lessee. Thus, the existence of tenancy rights of agricultural lessee
cannot affect nor derogate from the right of the agricultural lessor as owner to dispose of the property. The only
right of the agricultural lessee or his successor in interest is the right of preemption and/or redemption.
3. Villaviza, et al. vs. Panganiban (April 30, 1964)

A tenant's right to be respected in his tenure is an obligation of the landholder created by law,
and an action for violation thereof prescribes in 10 years under the Civil Code.
Facts: The respondents were tenants since 1944 in a riceland situated in Aliaga, Nueva Ecija owned by Domingo
Fajardo. Fajardo leased out the land (civil lease) to Capalad, starting with the crop year 1955-56. Capalad (June
1955) plowed the land by machinery. When the respondents went back to their respective landholdings to
prepare them for planting, they found the land already cultivated. Every year, the respondents-tenants demanded
their reinstatement, and each time, Capalad promised to reinstate them, but never fulfilled said promise.
Court of Agrarian Relations: Respondent Quirino Capalad was ordered to pay each of the 7 petitioners in
amounts ranging from P164 to P297. The other respondents were ordered to vacate their respective landholdings
in favor of the petitioners.
SC: Affirmed CAR's decision.
A tenant's right to be respected in his tenure under RA 1199, as amended, is an obligation of the landholder
created by law, and an action for violation thereof prescribes in ten years under No. 2 of Article 1144 of the Civil
Code. The respondents were ousted from their landholdings in June 1955. They filed the present action on 31
March 1960; therefore, the period of limitation had not expired.
The tenancy court found that the ejected tenants-respondents have engaged in gainful occupations since their
illegal ejectment and had delayed the filing of the case, and for these reasons the court made an award for
damages against Quirino Capalad equivalent to only two harvests based on the landholder's share for the crop
year 1954-1955.
The premises for the award are erroneous. Under section 27(1) of RA 1199, as amended, a tenant's earnings may
not be deducted from the damages because the said section positively provides that the tenant's freedom to earn
elsewhere is to be added ("in addition") to his right to damages in case of illegal ejectment. Nor can it be said
that the respondents-tenants are guilty of laches for having unnecessarily delayed to Capalad's promises to
reinstate them.
The amount of the award to each respondent should not, however, be disturbed because the respondents' non-
appeal from the decision indicates their satisfaction therewith and a waiver of any amounts other than those
indicated in the decision.
D. Right of Pre-emption and Redemption

Preemption is the purchase of goods or shares by one person or party before the opportunity is offered
to others. It is the act of forestalling. The right of preemption is similar to the right of first refusal in a
civil lease.
Section 11 is supported by Section 13 which provides that an Affidavit (stating that the lessee gave
notice of his intention to exercise his right of pre-emption) must be presented before the Register of
Deeds.
Redemption is the act of taking back a thing sold. The right of redemption arises when the lessee is
deprived of the right of pre-emption.
Section 10 of RA 3844: Agricultural Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Expiration of

Period, etc. - The agricultural leasehold relation under this Code shall not be extinguished by
mere expiration of the term or period in a leasehold contract nor by the sale, alienation or
transfer of the legal possession of the landholding. In case the agricultural lessor sells, alienates
or transfers the legal possession of the landholding, the purchaser or transferee thereof shall be
subrogated to the rights and substituted to the obligations of the agricultural lessor.
RA 3844 (August 8, 1963) Amendment by RA 6389 (September 10, 1971)

Sec 11 Lessee's Right of Pre-emption - In Lessee's Right of Pre-emption. - In case the agricultural
case the agricultural lessor
decides to sell the landholding,
lessor decides to sell the landholding, the agricultural
the agricultural lessee shall have lessee shall have the preferential right to buy the same
the preferential right to buy the under reasonable terms and conditions: Provided, That the
same under reasonable terms and entire landholding offered for sale must be pre-empted by
conditions: Provided, That the
entire landholding offered for sale the Department of Agrarian Reform upon petition of the
must be pre-empted by the Land lessee or any of them: Provided, further, That where there
Authority if the landowner so are two or more agricultural lessees, each shall be entitled
desires, unless the majority of the
lessees object to such acquisition: to said preferential right only to the extent of the area
Provided, further, That where actually cultivated by him. The right of pre-emption under
there are two or more agricultural this Section may be exercised within one hundred eighty
lessees, each shall be entitled to
said preferential right only to the
days from notice in writing, which shall be served by the
extent of the area actually owner on all lessees affected and the Department of
cultivated by him. The right of Agrarian Reform.
pre-emption under this Section
may be exercised within ninety If the agricultural lessee agrees with the terms and
days from notice in writing which conditions of the sale, he must give notice in writing to the
shall be served by the owner on
all lessees affected.
agricultural lessor of his intention to exercise his right of
pre-emption within the balance of one hundred eighty
day's period still available to him, but in any case not less
than thirty days. He must either tender payment of, or
present a certificate from the land bank that it shall make
payment pursuant to section eighty of this Code on, the
price of the landholding to the agricultural lessor. If the
latter refuses to accept such tender or presentment, he may
consign it with the court.
Any dispute as to the reasonableness of the terms and
conditions may be brought by the lessee or by the
Department of Agrarian Reform to the proper Court of
Agrarian Relations which shall decide the same within
sixty days from the date of the filing thereof: Provided,
That upon finality of the decision of the Court of Agrarian
Relations, the Land Bank shall pay to the agricultural
lessor the price fixed by the court within one hundred
twenty days: Provided, further, That in case the Land Bank
fails to pay within that period, the principal shall earn an

interest equivalent to the prime bank rate existing at the
time.
Upon the filing of the corresponding petition or request
with the department or corresponding case in court by the
agricultural lessee or lessees, the said period of one
hundred and eighty days shall cease to run.
Any petition or request for pre-emption shall be solved
within sixty days from the filing thereof; otherwise, the
said period shall start to run again."
Sec 12 Lessee's Right of Redemption - In Lessee's right of Redemption. - In case the landholding is
case the landholding is sold to a
third person without the
sold to a third person without the knowledge of the
knowledge of the agricultural agricultural lessee, the latter shall have the right to redeem
lessee, the latter shall have the the same at a reasonable price and consideration: Provided,
right to redeem the same at a That where there are two or more agricultural lessees, each
reasonable price and
consideration: Provided, That the shall be entitled to said right of redemption only to the
entire landholding sold must be extent of the area actually cultivated by him. The right of
redeemed: Provided, further, That the redemption under this Section may be exercised within
where these are two or more
agricultural lessees, each shall be one hundred eighty days from notice in writing which shall
entitled to said right of be served by the vendee on all lessees affected and the
redemption only to the extent of Department of Agrarian Reform upon the registration of
the area actually cultivated by
him. The right of redemption
the sale, and shall have priority over any other right of
under this Section may be legal redemption. The redemption price shall be the
exercised within two years from reasonable price of the land at the time of the sale.
the registration of the sale, and
shall have priority over any other "Upon the filing of the corresponding petition or request
right of legal redemption. with the department or corresponding case in court by the
agricultural lessee or lessees, the said period of one
hundred and eighty days shall cease to run.
"Any petition or request for redemption shall be resolved
within sixty days from the filing thereof; otherwise, the
said period shall start to run again.
"The Department of Agrarian Reform shall initiate, while
the Land Bank shall finance, said redemption as in the case
of pre-emption."
Summary
PRE-EMPTION REDEMPTION
Who The agricultural lessee The agricultural lessee
What Has the right to buy the landholding Has the right to redeem the landholding
at a reasonable price and consideration,
to be determined at the time of the sale,
not during the knowledge of the sale
When In case the lessor decides to sell the In case the landholding is sold to a third
landholding person without the lessee's knowledge
How/Conditions 1. The entire landholding must be When there are 2 or more lessees, each
pre-empted by the DAR upon shall be entitled to the right to the
petition of the lessee or any of extent of the respective areas they
them. cultivated.
2. When there are 2 or more lessees,
each shall be entitled to the right
to the extent of the respective
areas they cultivated.
Prescription The right may be exercised within 180 The right may be exercised within 180
days from service of a written notice by days from service of a written notice
the owner on all lessees affected and the by the vendee on all lessees affected
DAR. and the DAR upon registration of sale.
• Upon the lessee's filing of the • Upon the lessee's filing of the
petition or request with the DAR petition or request with the
or the case in court, the 180 days DAR or the case in court, the
ceases to run. 180 days ceases to run.
• Any petition/request shall be • Any petition/request shall be
solved within 60 days from filing, solved within 60 days from
otherwise, the period will start to filing, otherwise, the period
run again. will start to run again.
3. If the lessee agrees with the T&C The DAR shall initiate, while the Land
of the sale, he must give a written Bank shall finance, the redemption, as
notice to the lessor stating his in the case of pre-emption.
intention to exercise his right of
pre-emption within the available
balance left in the 180-day period,
but not less than 30 days.
4. The lessee must either:
a. tender payment of; or
b. present a certificate from
the Land Bank that it will pay
the price of the land to the
lessor.
5. If the lessor refuses to accept the
tender/presentment, he may
consign it with the court;
6. Any dispute on the reasonable of
the T&C may be brought by the
lessee or the DAR to the court of
AR
F. Share Tenancy
RA 1199 (Agricultural Tenancy Act of 1954) Section 4 classified Agricultural Tenancy into:
1. leasehold tenancy; or
2. share tenancy
Leasehold tenancy is when a person undertakes to cultivate a piece of agricultural land

belonging to or legally possessed by another, in consideration of a price certain or ascertainable
by the person cultivating either in (1) percentage of the production; (2) in a fixed amount of
money; or both.
Share tenancy (now abolished for not being in line with the aim of Agrarian Reform) is
whenever two or more persons agree on a joint undertaking for agricultural production where:
a. one party furnishes the land, the other his labor;
b. either or both contributes items of production; and
c. the produce will be divided between the landholder and tenant, in proportion to their
respective contributions.
Section 4 of RA 3844 (1963): Section 4, as amended by RA 6389 (1971):

Abolition of Agricultural Share Tenancy Automatic Conversion to Agricultural
Leasehold.
This strengthened the prohibition on share tenancy.
Agricultural share tenancy, as herein defined, is hereby Agricultural share tenancy throughout the
declared to be contrary to public policy and shall be
abolished: Provided, That existing share tenancy contracts
country, as herein defined, is hereby declared
may continue in force and effect in any region or locality, to contrary to public policy and shall be
be governed in the meantime by the pertinent provisions of automatically converted to agricultural
Republic Act Numbered Eleven hundred and ninety-nine, as leasehold upon the effectivity of this section.
amended, until the end of the agricultural year when the
National Land Reform Council proclaims that all the
government machineries and agencies in that region or The credit assistance traditionally extended by
locality relating to leasehold envisioned in this Code are a land-owner and a local lender to a tenant
operating, unless such contracts provide for a shorter period
or the tenant sooner exercise his option to elect the leasehold under the share tenancy systems in agriculture
system: Provided, further, That in order not to jeopardize for production loans and loans for the
international commitments, lands devoted to crops covered purchase of work animals, tillage equipment,
by marketing allotments shall be made the subject of a
separate proclamation that adequate provisions, such as the
seeds, fertilizers, poultry, livestock feed and
organization of cooperatives, marketing agreements, or other other similar items, and advances for the
similar workable arrangements, have been made to insure subsistence of a lease and his family, may be
efficient management on all matters requiring continued by said landowner and local lender:
synchronization of the agricultural with the processing
phases of such crops: Provided, furthermore, That where the
agricultural share tenancy contract has ceased to be Provided, That the total charges on these
operative by virtue of this Code, or where such a tenancy loans, including interest and service,
contract has been entered into in violation of the provisions
of this Code and is, therefore, null and void, and the tenant
inspection and issuance fees, shall not exceed
continues in possession of the land for cultivation, there fourteen per cent (14%) per calendar year
shall be presumed to exist a leasehold relationship under the
provisions of this Code, without prejudice to the right of the
and the principal thereof shall not be subject
landowner and the former tenant to enter into any other to upward adjustment even in case of
lawful contract in relation to the land formerly under extraordinary inflation and/or devaluation:
tenancy contract, as long as in the interim the security of Provided, further, That on all loans or
tenure of the former tenant under Republic Act Numbered
Eleven hundred and ninety-nine, as amended, and as advances other than money, the interest shall
provided in this Code, is not impaired: Provided, finally, be computed on the basis of current price of
That if a lawful leasehold tenancy contract was entered into the goods at the time when the loans or
prior to the effectivity of this Code, the rights and
obligations arising therefrom shall continue to subsist until advances were made.
modified by the parties in accordance with the provisions of
this Code” Any work animal and tillage equipment in the
possession of a share tenant but owned by a
landowner shall automatically be sold to said
tenant on installment for a period not
exceeding five years and at a price agreed
upon by the parties: Provided, however, That
the tenant shall pay in advance ten per cent of
the price agreed upon.
Existing share tenancy contracts may continue

in force and effect in any region or locality, to
be governed in the meantime by the pertinent
provisions of Republic Act Numbered Eleven
hundred and ninety-nine, as amended, until
the end of the agricultural year when the
President of the Philippines shall have
organized by executive order the Department
of Agrarian Reform in accordance with the
provisions of this amendatory Act, unless such
contracts provide for a shorter period or the
tenant sooner exercises his option to elect the
leasehold system: Provided, That in order not
to jeopardize international commitments,
lands devoted to crops covered by marketing
allotments shall be made the subject of a
separate proclamation by the President upon
the recommendation of the department head
that adequate provisions, such as the

organization of cooperatives, marketing
agreement, or other similar workable
arrangements, have been made to insure
efficient management on all matters requiring
synchronization of the agricultural with the
processing phases of such crops.
In case some agricultural share tenants do not

want to become agricultural lessees of their
respective landholding, they shall, with the
assistance of the Bureau of Agrarian Legal
Assistance, notify in writing the landowners
concerned. In such a case, they shall have one
agricultural year4 from the date of the notice
to accept leasehold relationship, otherwise the
landowner may proceed to their ejectment.”
(ground for dispossession)
PD 1425 (June 10, 1978)

“AMENDING PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1040 BY STRENGTHENING THE
PROHIBITION AGAINST AGRICULTURAL SHARE TENANCY AND PROVIDING
PENALTIES FOR VIOLATION THEREOF”
WHEREAS, under the provisions of the Code of Agrarian Reforms, agricultural share tenancy throughout the country, with
the exceptions and/or qualifications provided for in said Code, has been declared contrary to public policy and automatically
converted into agricultural leasehold;
WHEREAS, under Presidential Decree No. 2 dated September 26, 1972, the whole country has been proclaimed as a land
reform area;
WHEREAS, notwithstanding such provisions of the Code of Agrarian Reforms and Presidential Decree No. 2, many
landowners, landholders, civil law lessees, legal possessors, and usufructuaries, including persons acting for and in their
behalf, particularly in tenanted rice and/or corn lands, still insist on the crop sharing system to govern the tenancy
relationship with their tenants; and
WHEREAS, the penal provisions of the Code of Agrarian Reform are inadequate to enforce full compliance with the
aforestated declared policy on leasehold and, therefore, there is a need to strengthen said penal provisions by imposing
stiffer penalties;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, President of the Philippines, by virtue of the powers vested in me by
the Constitution, do hereby decree and order:
Section 1. The agricultural leasehold system shall continue to govern the relationship between the
landowner, landholder, civil law lessee, legal possessor, usufructuary or any person acting for and in his
behalf, and the tenantfarmer in rice and/or corn lands not covered by the land transfer program under
4 Agricultural year means the period of time required for raising a particular agricultural product, including the
preparation of the land, sowing, planting and harvesting of crops and, whenever applicable, threshing of said
crops: Provided, however, That in case of crops yielding more than one harvest from planting, "agricultural year"
shall be the period from the preparation of the land to the first harvest and thereafter from harvest to harvest. In
both cases, the period may be shorter or longer than a calendar year.
Presidential Decree No. 27 as well as in those tenanted lands devoted to other crops with the exceptions
and/or qualifications provided for in Sections 4 and 35 of the Code of Agrarian Reforms.
Section 2. In all cases covered by Section 1 hereof, all agricultural leasehold contracts shall, upon
demand by either party, be reduced in writing and shall be registered in the form and manner
provided for in the Code of Agrarian Reforms: Provided, That the leasehold contract may be
acknowledged either before the municipal judge of the municipality where the land is situated or before
the field lawyer of the Department of Agrarian Reform duly commissioned as a Notary Public for the
province/city where the land is situated.
Section 3. Any landowner, landholder, civil law, lessee, legal possessor, usufructuary, or any
person acting for and in his behalf, who refuse upon the demand by the tenant to comply with the
provisions of Section 1 of this Decree by continuing and maintaining the share tenancy system, or
any person who induces another to enter into a share tenancy contract, relationship or
arrangement shall, upon conviction, suffer the penalty of two (2) years imprisonment or a fine of
not more than P5,000 or both in the discretion of the court: Provided, That the execution of a share
tenancy contract shall be considered prima facie evidence of such inducement. In the case of judicial
persons, the manager or the person who has charge of the management or administration of the
property, or in his absence the person acting in his stead, shall be liable under this Section.
Section 4. In case the tenant refuses to enter into a leasehold contract, he may be proceeded against
before the Court of Agrarian Relations under the provisions of Section 4, Republic Act No. 3844, as
amended by Republic Act No. 6389, and other pertinent provisions of existing law.
Section 5. Violations of the penal provisions of this Decree shall exclusively be cognizable by the
Court of Agrarian Relations.
Section 6. Presidential Decree No. 1040 and all other laws, decrees, orders, and rules and regulations,
or parts thereof inconsistent herewith are hereby repealed, amended or modified accordingly.
Section 7. This Decree shall take effect immediately.”
G. Rights, Obligations and Prohibitions of Lessee and Lessor
Section 23. Rights of Agricultural Lessee - It shall be the right of the agricultural lessee:
(1) To have possession and peaceful enjoyment of the land;
(2) To manage and work on the land in a manner and method of cultivation and harvest
which conform to proven farm practices;
(3) To mechanize all or any phase of his farm work; and
(4) To deal with millers and processors and attend to the issuance of quedans and
warehouse receipts for the produce due him.
Section 24. Right to a Home Lot - The agricultural lessee shall have the right to continue in the
exclusive possession and enjoyment of any home lot he may have occupied upon the effectivity
of this Code, which shall be considered as included in the leasehold.
Section 25. Right to be Indemnified for Labor - The agricultural lessee shall have the right to be
indemnified for the cost and expenses incurred in the cultivation, planting or harvesting and
other expenses incidental to the improvement of his crop in case he surrenders or abandons his
landholding for just cause or is ejected therefrom. In addition, he has the right to be
indemnified for one-half of the necessary and useful improvements made by him on the
landholding: Provided, That these improvements are tangible and have not yet lost their utility
at the time of surrender and/or abandonment of the landholding, at which time their value shall
be determined for the purpose of the indemnity for improvements.
Section 26. Obligations of the Lessee - It shall be the obligation of the agricultural lessee:
(1) To cultivate and take care of the farm, growing crops, and other improvements on the
landholding as a good father of a family and perform all the work therein in accordance
with proven farm practices;
(2) To inform the agricultural lessor within a reasonable time of any trespass committed
by third persons upon the farm, without prejudice to his direct action against the
trespasser;
(3) To take reasonable care of the work animals and farm implements delivered to him
by the agricultural lessor and see that they are not used for purposes other than those
intended or used by another without the knowledge and consent of the agricultural
lessor: Provided, however, That if said work animals get lost or die, or said farm
implements get lost or are destroyed, through the negligence of the agricultural lessee,
he shall be held responsible and made answerable therefor to the extent of the value of
the work animals and/or farm implements at the time of the loss, death or destruction;
(4) To keep his farm and growing crops attended to during the work season. In case of
unjustified abandonment or neglect of his farm, any or all of his expected produce may,
upon order of the Court, be forfeited in favor of the agricultural lessor to the extent of
the damage caused thereby;
(5) To notify the agricultural lessor at least three days before the date of harvesting or,
whenever applicable, of threshing; and
(6) To pay the lease rental to the agricultural lessor when it falls due.
Section 27. Prohibitions to Agricultural Lessee - It shall be unlawful for the agricultural lessee:
(1) To contract to work additional landholdings belonging to a different agricultural
lessor or to acquire and personally cultivate an economic family-size farm, without the
knowledge and consent of the agricultural lessor with whom he had entered first into
household, if the first landholding is of sufficient size to make him and the members of
his immediate farm household fully occupied in its cultivation; or
(2) To employ a sub-lessee on his landholding: Provided, however, That in case of
illness or temporary incapacity he may employ laborers whose services on his
landholding shall be on his account.
Section 29. Rights of the Agricultural Lessor - It shall be the right of the agricultural lessor:
(1) To inspect and observe the extent of compliance with the terms and conditions of
their contract and the provisions of this Chapter;
(2) To propose a change in the use of the landholding to other agricultural purposes, or
in the kind of crops to be planted: Provided, That in case of disagreement as to the
proposed change, the same shall be settled by the Court according to the best interest of
the parties concerned: Provided, further, That in no case shall an agricultural lessee be
ejected as a consequence of the conversion of the land to some other agricultural
purpose or because of a change in the crop to be planted;
(3) To require the agricultural lessee, taking into consideration his financial capacity and
the credit facilities available to him, to adopt in his farm proven farm practices necessary
to the conservation of the land, improvement of its fertility and increase of its
productivity: Provided, That in case of disagreement as to what proven farm practice the
lessee shall adopt, the same shall be settled by the Court according to the best interest of
the parties concerned; and
(4) To mortgage expected rentals.
Section 30. Obligations of the Agricultural Lessor - It shall be the obligation of the lessor:
(1) To keep the agricultural lessee in peaceful possession and cultivation of his
landholding; and
(2) To keep intact such permanent useful improvements existing on the landholding at
the start of the leasehold relation as irrigation and drainage system and marketing
allotments, which in the case of sugar quotas shall refer both to domestic and export
quotas, provisions of existing laws to the contrary notwithstanding.
Section 31. Prohibitions to the Agricultural Lessor - It shall be unlawful for the lessor:
(1) To dispossess the agricultural lessee of his landholding except upon authorization by
the Court under Section thirty-six. Should the agricultural lessee be dispossessed of his
landholding without authorization from the Court, the agricultural lessor shall be liable
for damages suffered by the agricultural lessee in addition to the fine or imprisonment
prescribed in this Code for unauthorized dispossession;
(2) To require the agricultural lessee to assume, directly or indirectly, the payment of the
taxes or part thereof levied by the government on the landholding;
(3) To require the agricultural lessee to assume, directly or indirectly, any part of the
rent, "canon" or other consideration which the agricultural lessor is under obligation to
pay to third persons for the use of the land;
(4) To deal with millers or processors without written authorization of the lessee in cases
where the crop has to be sold in processed form before payment of the rental; or
(5) To discourage, directly or indirectly, the formation, maintenance or growth of unions
or organizations of agricultural lessees in his landholding, or to initiate, dominate, assist
or interfere in the formation or administration of any such union or organization.
LESSOR LESSEE
PRIM – PI – DRUMT MMP HDI – PINKCT – CS
Rights 1. to propose a change in the use of the 1. To manage and work on the land
landholding to other agricultural in a manner and method which
purposes, or in the kind of crops to be conform to proven farm practices
planted 2. To mechanize all or any phase of
2. to require the agricultural lessee to his farm work
adopt proven farm practices 3. To have possession and peaceful
3. to inspect and observe compliance with enjoyment of the land
the terms and conditions of their 4. to a home lot within the property
contract and the provisions RA 3844 5. To deal with millers and
4. to mortgage expected rentals processors and attend to the
issuance of quedans and
warehouse receipts
6. to be indemnified for the cost and
expenses of cultivation, planting
or harvesting, and the
improvement of the crops
Obligations 1. to keep the lessee in peaceful 1. To pay the rentals

possession and cultivation of his 2. To inform the lessor of any
landholding trespass committed by third
2. to keep intact the permanent useful persons
improvements on the landholding at the 3. To notify the lessor at least 3 days
start of the leasehold relation before the date of harvesting or
threshing
4. To keep his farm and growing
crops attended to during the work
season
5. To cultivate and take care of the
farm, growing crops, and other
improvements as a good father of
a family
6. To take reasonable care of the
work animals and farm
implements
1. To dispossess the lessee of his
Prohibitions landholding except upon authorization
1. To contract to work additional
by the Court
landholdings of a different lessor
2. To require the lessee to assume the
or to acquire and personally
rent, canon, or other consideration
cultivate an economic family-size
payable to third persons
farm, without the knowledge and
3. To discourage the formation,
consent of the first lessor
maintenance or growth of unions or
organizations of the lessees 2. To sub-lease the landholding

4. To deal with millers or processors
without written authorization of the
lessee
5. To require the lessee to assume the
payment of the taxes
III. LAND ACQUISITION
A. Legal Provisions
1. Section 3(a) of RA 6657 – Agrarian Reform means redistribution of lands, regardless of
crops or fruits produced, to farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, irrespective of
tenurial arrangement, to include the totality of factors and support services designed to lift the
economic status of the beneficiaries and all other arrangements alternative to the physical
redistribution of lands, such as production or profit-sharing, labor administration, and the
distribution of shares of stocks, which will allow beneficiaries to receive a just share of the
fruits of the lands they work.
2. Section 4: Scope
RA 6657 RA 9700 (CARPER)
The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of
1989 shall cover, regardless of tenurial 1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial
arrangement and commodity produced, all public arrangement and commodity produced, all public
and private agricultural lands, as provided in and private agricultural lands as provided in
Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No. Proclamation No. 131 and Executive Order No.
229, including other lands of the public domain 229, including other lands of the public domain
suitable for agriculture. suitable for agriculture: Provided, That
landholdings of landowners with a total area of
five (5) hectares and below shall not be covered
for acquisition and distribution to qualified
beneficiaries.
More specifically the following lands are covered More specifically, the following lands are covered
by the CARP: by the CARP:
(a) All alienable and disposable lands of the (a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public
public domain devoted to or suitable for domain devoted to or suitable for agriculture. No
agriculture. No reclassification of forest or reclassification of forest or mineral lands to
mineral lands to agricultural lands shall be agricultural lands shall be undertaken after the
undertaken after the approval of this Act until approval of this Act until Congress, taking into
Congress, taking into account ecological, account ecological, developmental and equity
developmental and equity considerations, shall considerations, shall have determined by law, the
have determined by law, the specific limits of the specific limits of the public domain;
public domain. (b) All lands of the public domain in excess of the
(b) All lands of the public domain in excess of the specific limits as determined by Congress in the
specific limits as determined by Congress in the preceding paragraph;

preceding paragraph; (c) All other lands owned by the Government
(c) All other lands owned by the Government devoted to or suitable for agriculture; and
devoted to or suitable for agriculture; and (d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for
(d) All private lands devoted to or suitable for agriculture regardless of the agricultural products
agriculture regardless of the agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon.
raised or that can be raised thereon. A comprehensive inventory system in consonance
with the national land use plan shall be instituted
by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR), in
accordance with the Local Government Code, for
the purpose of properly identifying and classifying
farmlands within one (1) year from effectivity of
this Act5, without prejudice to the implementation
of the land acquisition and distribution.
3. Section 7: Priorities
RA 6657 RA 9700
The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in The DAR, in coordination with the Presidential
coordination with the Presidential Agrarian Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) shall plan and
Reform Council (PARC) shall plan and program program the final acquisition and distribution of
the acquisition and distribution of all agricultural all remaining unacquired and undistributed
lands through a period of ten (10) years from the agricultural lands from the effectivity of this Act
effectivity of this Act6. Lands shall be acquired until June 30, 2014. Lands shall be acquired and
and distributed as follows: distributed as follows:
Phase One: During the five (5)-year extension
Phase One: Rice and corn lands under period hereafter all remaining lands above fifty
Presidential Decree No. 27; all idle or abandoned (50) hectares shall be covered for purposes of
lands; all private lands voluntarily offered by the agrarian reform upon the effectivity of this Act.
owners for agrarian reform; all lands foreclosed All private agricultural lands of landowners with
by the government financial institutions; all lands aggregate landholdings in excess of fifty (50)
acquired by the Presidential Commission on Good hectares which have already been subjected to a
Government (PCGG); and all other lands owned notice of coverage issued on or before December
by the government devoted to or suitable for 10, 2008; rice and corn lands under Presidential
agriculture, which shall be acquired and Decree No. 27; all idle or abandoned lands; all
distributed immediately upon the effectivity of private lands voluntarily offered by the owners for
this Act, with the implementation to be completed agrarian reform: Provided, That with respect to
within a period of not more than four (4) years; voluntary land transfer, only those submitted by
June 30, 2009 shall be allowed: Provided, further,
That after June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition
shall be limited to voluntary offer to sell and
compulsory acquisition: Provided, furthermore,
That all previously acquired lands wherein
5 RA 9700 became effective on July 1, 2009.
6 RA 6657 became effective on June 15, 1988. Hence, ten years therefrom is June 15, 1998.
valuation is 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
Constitution, Republic Act No. 6657, as amended,
and Republic Act No. 3844, as amended, only
farmers (tenants or lessees) and regular
farmworkers actually tilling the lands, as certified
under oath by the Barangay Agrarian Reform
Council (BARC) and attested under oath by the
landowners, are the qualified beneficiaries. The
intended beneficiary shall state under oath before
the judge of the city or municipal court that he/she
is willing to work on the land to make it
productive and to assume the obligation of paying
the amortization for the compensation of the land
and the land taxes thereon; all lands foreclosed by
government financial institutions; all lands
acquired by the Presidential Commission on Good
Government (PCGG); and all other lands owned
by the government devoted to or suitable for
agriculture, which shall be acquired and
distributed immediately upon the effectivity of
this Act, with the implementation to be completed
by June 30, 2012;
Phase Two: Phase Two:

(a) Lands twenty-four (24) hectares up to fifty
(50) hectares shall likewise be covered for
purposes of agrarian reform upon the effectivity of
All alienable and disposable public agricultural this Act. All alienable and disposable public
lands; all arable public agricultural lands under agricultural lands; all arable public agricultural
agroforest, pasture and agricultural leases already lands under agro-forest, pasture and agricultural
cultivated and planted to crops in accordance with leases already cultivated and planted to crops in
Section 6, Article XIII of the Constitution; all accordance with Section 6, Article XIII of the
public agricultural lands which are to be opened Constitution; all public agricultural lands which
for new development and resettlement; and all are to be opened for new development and
private agricultural lands in excess of fifty (50) resettlement; and all private agricultural lands of
hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage is landowners with aggregate landholdings: above
concerned, to implement principally the rights of twenty-four (24) hectares up to fifty (50) hectares
farmers and regular farmworkers, who are the which have already been subjected to a notice of
landless, to own directly or collectively the lands coverage issued on or before December 10, 2008,
they till, which shall be distributed immediately to implement principally the rights of farmers and
upon the effectivity of this Act, with the regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own
implementation to be completed within a period directly or collectively the lands they till, which
of not more than four (4) years. shall be distributed immediately upon the
effectivity of this Act, with the implementation to
be completed by June 30, 2012; and
(b) All remaining private agricultural lands of
landowners with aggregate landholdings in excess
of twenty-four (24) hectares, regardless as to
whether these have been subjected to notices of
coverage or not, with the implementation to begin
on July 1, 2012 and to be completed by June 30,
2013;
Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands
commencing with large landholdings and commencing with large landholdings and
proceeding to medium and small landholdings proceeding to medium and small landholdings
under the following schedule: under the following schedule:
(a) Landholdings above twenty-four (24) hectares (a) Lands of landowners with aggregate
up to fifty (50) hectares, to begin on the fourth landholdings above ten (10) hectares up to twenty-
(4th) year from the effectivity of this Act and to be four (24) hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage
completed within three (3) years; and above ten (10) hectares is concerned, to begin on
July 1, 2012 and to be completed by June 30,
2013; and
(b) Landholdings from the retention limit up to (b) Lands of landowners with aggregate
twenty-four (24) hectares, to begin on the sixth landholdings from the retention limit up to ten
(6th) year from the effectivity of this Act and to be (10) hectares, to begin on July 1, 2013 and to be
completed within four (4) years; to implement completed by June 30, 2014; to implement
principally the right of farmers and regular principally the right of farmers and regular
farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or
collectively the lands they till. collectively the lands they till.
The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of
all agricultural lands covered by this program all agricultural lands covered by this program
shall be made in accordance with the above order shall be made in accordance with the above order
of priority, which shall be provided in the of priority, which shall be provided in the
implementing rules to be prepared by the PARC, implementing rules to be prepared by the PARC,
taking into consideration the following; the need taking into consideration the following: the
to distribute land to the tillers at the earliest landholdings wherein the farmers are organized
practicable time; the need to enhance agricultural and understand the meaning and obligations of
productivity; and the availability of funds and farmland ownership; the distribution of lands to
resources to implement and support the program. the tillers at the earliest practicable time; the
enhancement of agricultural productivity; and the
availability of funds and resources to implement
and support the program: Provided, That the
PARC shall design and conduct seminars,
symposia, information campaigns, and other
similar programs for farmers who are not
organized or not covered by any landholdings.

Completion by these farmers of the
aforementioned seminars, symposia, and other
similar programs shall be encouraged in the
implementation of this Act particularly the
provisions of this Section.
Land acquisition and distribution shall be
completed by June 30, 2014 on a province-by-
province basis.
In any case, the PARC, upon recommendation by In any case, the PARC or the PARC Executive
the Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating Committee (PARC EXCOM), upon
Committee (PARCCOM), may declare certain recommendation by the Provincial Agrarian
provinces or region as priority land reform areas, Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM),
in which the acquisition and distribution of private may declare certain provinces as priority land
agricultural lands therein may be implemented reform areas, in which case the acquisition and
ahead of the above schedules. distribution of private agricultural lands therein
In effecting the transfer within these guidelines, under advanced phases may be implemented
priority must be given to lands that are tenanted. ahead of the above schedules on the condition that
prior phases in these provinces have been
completed: Provided, That notwithstanding the
above schedules, phase three (b) shall not be
implemented in a particular province until at least
ninety percent (90%) of the provincial balance of
that particular province as of January 1, 2009
under Phase One, Phase Two (a), Phase Two (b),
and Phase Three (a), excluding lands under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Environment
and Natural Resources (DENR), have been
successfully completed.
The PARC shall establish guidelines to implement The PARC shall establish guidelines to implement
the above priorities and distribution scheme, the above priorities and distribution scheme,
including the determination of who are qualified including the determination of who are qualified
beneficiaries: provided, that an owner-tiller may beneficiaries: Provided, That an owner-tiller may
be a beneficiary of the land he does not own but is be a beneficiary of the land he/she does not own
actually cultivating to the extent of the difference but is actually cultivating to the extent of the
between the area of the land he owns and the difference between the area of the land he/she
award ceiling of three (3) hectares. owns and the award ceiling of three (3) hectares:
Provided, further, That collective ownership by
the farmer beneficiaries shall be subject to Section
25 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended:
Provided, furthermore, That rural women shall be
given the opportunity to participate in the
development planning and implementation of this
Act: Provided, finally, That in no case should the
agrarian reform beneficiaries' sex, economic,

religious, social, cultural and political attributes
adversely affect the distribution of lands.
Notes on Priorities
1. Guiding Principle
In effecting the transfer, priority must be given to lands that are tenanted.
2. Factors to consider in implementation

a. the need to distribute lands to the tillers at the earliest practical time;
b. the need to enhance agricultural productivity; and
c. Availability of funds and resources to implement and support the program
3. Phases of Implementation
Phase One – the implementation to be completed by June 30, 2012:

• During the 5-year extension period, all remaining lands above 50 hectares shall
be covered.
• All private agricultural lands of landowners with aggregate landholdings in
excess of 50 hectares which have already been subjected to a notice of coverage
issued on or before December 10, 2008;
• Rice and corn lands under Presidential Decree No. 27;
• All idle or abandoned lands;
• All private lands voluntarily offered by the owners for agrarian reform
◦ With respect to voluntary land transfer, only those submitted by June 30, 2009
shall be allowed.
◦ After June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition shall be limited to voluntary
offer to sell and compulsory acquisition.
◦ All previously acquired lands wherein valuation is subject to challenge by
landowners shall be completed and finally resolved pursuant to Section 17.
◦ Only farmers (tenants or lessees) and regular farmworkers actually tilling the
lands, as certified under oath by the Barangay Agrarian Reform Council
(BARC) and attested under oath by the landowners, are the qualified
beneficiaries. The intended beneficiary shall state under oath before the judge
of the city or municipal court that he/she is willing to work on the land to
make it productive and to assume the obligation of paying the amortization for
the compensation of the land and the land taxes.
• All lands foreclosed by government financial institutions;
• All lands acquired by the PCGG; and
• All other lands owned by the government devoted to or suitable for agriculture
Phase Two – (a) Lands 24-50 hectares shall be covered– the implementation to be
completed by June 30, 2012:
• All alienable and disposable public agricultural lands;
• All arable public agricultural lands under agro-forest, pasture and agricultural
leases already cultivated and planted to crops in accordance with Section 6,
Article XIII of the Constitution;
• All public agricultural lands which are to be opened for new development and
resettlement; and
• All private agricultural lands of landowners with aggregate landholdings above
24-50 hectares which have already been subjected to a notice of coverage issued
on or before December 1O, 2008, to implement principally the rights of farmers
and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the
lands they till
(b) All remaining private agricultural lands of landowners with aggregate landholdings
in excess of 24 hectares, regardless as to whether these have been subjected to notices of
coverage or not, with the implementation to begin on July 1, 2012 and to be completed
by June 30, 2013
Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands commencing with large landholdings
and proceeding to medium and small landholdings under the following schedule:
(a) Lands of landowners with aggregate landholdings above 10- 24 hectares, insofar
as the excess hectarage above 10 hectares is concerned, to begin on July 1,2012 and
to be completed by June 30, 2013; and
(b) Lands of landowners with aggregate landholdings from the retention limit up to
10 hectares, to begin on July 1, 2013 and to be completed by June 30, 2014; to
implement principally the right of farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless,
to own directly or collectively the lands they till.
The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of all agricultural lands covered shall be
made in accordance with the above order of priority, taking into consideration the
following:
1. the landholdings wherein the farmers are organized and understand;
2. the meaning and obligations of farmland ownership;
3. the distribution of lands to the tillers at the earliest practicable time;
4. the enhancement of agricultural productivity; and
5. the availability of funds and resources to implement and support the program
The PARC shall establish guidelines to implement the above priorities and distribution
scheme, including the determination of who are qualified beneficiaries.
◦ An owner-tiller may be a beneficiary of the land he/she does not own but is actually
cultivating to the extent of the difference between the area of the land he/she owns
and the award ceiling of 3 hectares.

◦ Collective ownership by the farmer beneficiaries shall be subject to Section 25.
◦ Rural women shall be given the opportunity t o participate in the development
planning and implementation of this Act.
◦ In no case should the agrarian reform beneficiaries' sex, economic, religious, social,
cultural and political attributes adversely affect the distribution of lands.
4. Exceptions from the Implementation Phases

(a) Land acquisition and distribution shall be completed by June 30, 2014 on a
province-by- province basis. In any case, the PARC or the PARC EXCOM, upon
recommendation by PARCCOM, may declare certain provinces as priority land
reform areas, in which case the acquisition and distribution of private agricultural
lands under advanced phases may be implemented ahead of the above schedules as
long as the prior phases in these provinces have been completed.
(b) The PARC may suspend the implementation of CARL with respect to ancestral lands
for purpose of identifying and delineating such lands. (Section 9)
B. Modes of Acquisition
Legal Provisions:
1. Section 16 of RA 6657: Procedure for Acquisition of Private Lands.7 — For purposes of acquisition of
private lands, the following procedures shall be followed:
(a) After identification pf the land, the landowners and the beneficiaries, the DAR shall send its notice to acquire
the land to the owners, by personal delivery or registered mail, and post the same in a conspicuous place in the
municipal building and barangay hall of the place where the property is located.
Said notice shall contain the offer of the DAR to pay a corresponding value in accordance with the valuation set
forth in Sections 17, 18, and other pertinent provisions hereof.
(b) Within thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of written notice by personal delivery or registered mail, the
landowner, his administrator or representative shall inform the DAR of his acceptance or rejection of the offer.
(c) If the landowner accepts the offer of the DAR, the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) shall pay the
landowner the purchase price of the land within thirty (30) days after he executes and delivers a deed of transfer
in favor of the government and surrenders the Certificate of Title and other muniments of title.
(d) In case of rejection or failure to reply, the DAR shall conduct summary administrative proceedings to
determine the compensation for the land requiring the landowner, the LBP and other interested parties to submit
evidence as to the just compensation for the land, within fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the notice. After
the expiration of the above period, the matter is deemed submitted for decision. The DAR shall decide the case
within thirty (30) days after it is submitted for decision.
(e) Upon receipt by the landowner of the corresponding payment or, in case of rejection or no response from the
landowner, upon the deposit with an accessible bank designated by the DAR of the compensation in cash or in
LBP bonds in accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the land and shall request
the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of the Republic of the
Philippines. The DAR shall thereafter proceed with the redistribution of the land to the qualified beneficiaries.
(f) Any party who disagrees with the decision may bring the matter to the court of proper jurisdiction for final
7 RA 9700 states that “The title of Section 16 … is hereby further amended to read as follows: "SEC. 16. Procedure for
Acquisition and Distribution of Private Lands."
determination of just compensation.

2. Section 17 - Determination of Just Compensation. — In determining just compensation, the cost of
acquisition of the land, the current value of the like properties, its nature, actual use and income, the sworn
valuation by the owner, the tax declarations, and the assessment made by government assessors shall be
considered. The social and economic benefits contributed by the farmers and the farmworkers and by the
Government to the property as well as the non-payment of taxes or loans secured from any government
financing institution on the said land shall be considered as additional factors to determine its valuation.
3. Section 19 - Incentives for Voluntary Offers for Sales. — Landowners, other than banks and other financial
institutions, who voluntarily offer their lands for sale shall be entitled to an additional five percent (5%) cash
payment.
4. Section 20 - Voluntary Land Transfer.8 — Landowners of agricultural lands subject to acquisition under this
Act may enter into a voluntary arrangement for direct transfer of their lands to qualified beneficiaries subject to
the following guidelines:
(a) All notices for voluntary land transfer must be submitted to the DAR within the first year of the
implementation of the CARP. Negotiations between the landowners and qualified beneficiaries covering any
voluntary land transfer which remain unresolved after one (1) year shall not be recognized and such land shall
instead be acquired by the government and transferred pursuant to this Act.
(b) The terms and conditions of such transfer shall not be less favorable to the transferee than those of the
government's standing offer to purchase from the landowner and to resell to the beneficiaries, if such offers have
been made and are fully known to both parties.
(c) The voluntary agreement shall include sanctions for non-compliance by either party and shall be duly
recorded and its implementation monitored by the DAR.
The Compulsory Acquisition Process INRTTD

1. Identification – The DAR will identify the: (a) land; (b) landowner;
and (c) beneficiary.
2. Notice – The DAR will notify the LO of the compulsory acquisition
and the price offer thru:
(a) personal notice or registered mail; and
(b) posting of notice in a conspicuous place in the barangay hall and
municipal hall where land is located.
3. Reply – The LO will accept or reject the offer, and:
(a) if he accepts – the LBP will pay him within 30 days from the
execution and delivery of the Deed of Transfer;
(b) if he rejects – the DAR will determine the JC thru summary
administrative proceedings; or
(c) if he disagrees with the DAR's determination of the JC – he may go
to court for final determination.
4. Taking – The DAR will immediately take possession of the land:
(a) if the LO receives the payment; or
8 Note: RA 9700 allowed voluntary land transfer under Section 20 up to June 30, 2009 only.
After that, only (a) compulsory acquisition under Section 16; and (b) voluntary offer ro sell
under Section 19 are allowed.
(b) if the LO doesn't respond to the Notice of Acquisition.

5. Transfer – The DAR will send a request to the Register of Deeds for
the issuance of a TCT in the name of the Republic of the Philippines
6. Distribution – The land will be distributed to the qualified
beneficiaries.
Two-notice requirement - For valid implementation of the AR

program, 2 notices to the LO are required:
1. Notice of Coverage (pursuant to DAR AO No. 12 of 1989) to comply
with the administrative due process because the AR is an exercise of
police power and power of eminent domain (i.e., expropriation); and
2. Notice of Acquisition (pursuant to CARL Section 16).
Why must the land acquisition process be strictly construed?
The AR program is an extraordinary method of expropriation. So the
failure of the DAR or any of the agencies to comply with the proper
procedure for expropriation (failure to send the Notice of Coverage) is a
violation of constitutional due process.
When is ownership transferred to the State?
Transfer of ownership over the land will only happen upon full payment
of the just compensation in cash and LBP bonds. Prior to that, title and
ownership remains with the LO.
The following do not constitute transfer of title to the State:
(a) deposit by the DAR of the offer price with the LBP; or
(b) opening of a trust account. (Lubrica v LBP)
Stock Distribution Option (SDO) for Corporate landowners:

Section 31. — Corporate landowners may voluntarily transfer ownership over their agricultural landholdings to the Republic of the
Philippines pursuant to Section 20 hereof or to qualified beneficiaries, under such terms and conditions, consistent with this Act, as they
may agree upon, subject to confirmation by the DAR.
Upon certification by the DAR, corporations owning agricultural lands may give their qualified beneficiaries the right to
purchase such proportion of the capital stock of the corporation that the agricultural land, actually devoted to agricultural activities, bears
in relation to the company's total assets, under such terms and conditions as may be agreed upon by them.n no case shall the
compensation received by the workers at the time the shares of stocks are distributed be reduced. The same principle shall be applied to
associations, with respect to their equity or participation.
Corporations or associations which voluntarily divest a proportion of their capital stock, equity or participation in favor of their
workers or other qualified beneficiaries under this section shall be deemed to have complied with the provisions of the Act: provided, that
the following conditions are complied with:
(a) In order to safeguard the right of beneficiaries who own shares of stocks to dividends and other financial benefits, the books
of the corporation or association shall be subject to periodic audit by certified public accountants chosen by the beneficiaries;
(b) Irrespective of the value of their equity in the corporation or association, the beneficiaries shall be assured of at least one (1)
representative in the board of directors, or in a management or executive committee, if one exists, of the corporation or association; and
(c) Any shares acquired by such workers and beneficiaries shall have the same rights and features as all other shares.
(d) Any transfer of shares of stocks by the original beneficiaries shall be void ab initio unless said transaction is in favor of a
qualified and registered beneficiary within the same corporation.
If within two (2) years from the approval of this Act, the land or stock transfer envisioned above is not made or realized or the
plan for such stock distribution approved by the PARC within the same period, the agricultural land of the corporate owners or
corporation shall be subject to the compulsory coverage of this Act.
Note: The schemes under Section 31 (stock distribution) are no longer operative, per RA 9700.
Jurisprudence:
1. Roxas and Co., Inc. vs CA; GR No. 127876
2. Hacienda Luisita vs PARC; GR No. 171101; Issues:
(a) Does the PARC have jurisdiction, power and authority to nullify and revoke the SDO
Agreement?
SC: Yes. Even though it was not expressly provided under RA 6657 or any other law, the
power to revoke or recall a Stock Distribution Plan is deemed included in PARC's power
to approve such plan, under the principle of necessary implication.
(b) Was the PARC correct in revoking the SDO Agreement?
SC: Yes. Firstly, the corporation did not fully comply with its undertaking to distribute
the homelots to the beneficiaries, as agreed upon in the SD plan. Sixteen years have
already elapsed. Secondly, the mechanics and timelines of stock distribution violated the
provisions of DAO 10. The distribution of stocks depended on a contingency (the
number of man days or the number of days the beneficiaries worked during the year)
and this effectively deprived them of equal share in the distribution.
(c) Was the PARC correct in including the 500-hectare portion of the hacienda, that have
been transferred to RCBC and LIPCO, to the coverage of the AR program?
SC: No. As bona fide purchasers for value, LIPCO and RCBC have acquired rights
which cannot be disregarded. And since the sale and transfer happened after the
hacienda was placed into compulsory coverage of the CARP, the beneficiaries are
entitled to their share in the proceeds of the sale.
(d) How about the 80.51-hectare land transferred to the government for the SCTEX
project? Should it be included?
SC: No. It should be excluded, considering that it is consistent with the power of
eminent domain. But the beneficiaries are also entitled to their share in the
compensation the corporation received for this government project.
C. Retention rights
Legal provisions:
1. Section 6 of RA 6657
2. PD No. 27
3. Section 10 of RA 6657
4. DAR AO No. 11, Series of 1990
5. DAR AO No. 2, Series of 2003
6. Supplemental Guideline – DAR AO No. 4, Series of 1991
Notes on Retention Rights9:

(a) Five hectares is the retention limit. No person may own or retain, directly or indirectly,
any public or private agricultural land, the size of which shall vary according to factors
governing a viable family-sized farm, such as commodity produced, terrain, infrastructure, and
soil fertility as determined by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), but in no case
shall the retention limit exceed five (5) hectares.
(b) Additional three hectares may be awarded to each child, subject to the following
qualifications:
(i) That the child is at least fifteen (15) years of age; and
(ii) That the child is actually tilling the land or directly managing the farm.
(c) Exceptions to the retention limit of five hectares:
(i) Landowners whose lands have been covered by PD 27; and
(ii) Original homestead grantees or direct compulsory heirs who still own the original
homestead at the time of the approval of CARL, as long as they continue to cultivate said
homestead.
(iii) Provincial, city, and municipal government, units acquiring private agricultural
lands by expropriation or other modes of acquisition to be used for actual, direct and exclusive
public purposes, such as roads and bridges, public markets, school sites, resettlement sites,
local government facilities, public parks and barangay plazas or squares, consistent with the
approved local comprehensive land use plan, shall not be subject to the five-hectare retention
limit under this Section and Sections 70 and 73(a) of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended:
Provided, That lands subject to CARP shall first undergo the land acquisition and distribution
process of the program: Provided, further, That when these lands have been subjected to
expropriation, the agrarian reform beneficiaries therein shall be paid just compensation.
(d) Right to choose the area to be retained:
The right to choose the area to be retained, which shall be compact or contiguous, shall
pertain to the landowner.
If the land retained is tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to choose whether to
remain therein or be a beneficiary in the same or another agricultural land. The tenant must
exercise this option within a period of one (1) year from the time the landowner manifest his
choice of the area for retention.
9 Atty. Casis' summary of RA 6657, DAR website.

(i) In case the tenant chooses to remain in the retained area, he shall be considered a
leaseholder and shall lose his right to be a beneficiary under this Act.
(ii) In case the tenant chooses to be a beneficiary in another agricultural land, he loses
his right as a leaseholder to the land retained by the landowner.
IV. Just Compensation

A. Definition
It is the full and fair equivalent of the property taken from its owner by the expropriator.
The measure is not the taker's gain, but the owner's loss. The payment must be:
(a) Prompt – The immediate deposit and release of payment is included in the concept of
“just” compensation. This means the payment should be done within a reasonable time from
the taking.
(b) Full – There can be no prompt payment if it is only partial.
Factors in the valuation of lands:

1. Capitalized Net Income – based on land use and productivity
2. Comparable Sales – 70% of the BIR zonal value
3. Market Value – based on the tax declaration
Formula:
• Land Value = (CNI x 0.6) + (CS x 0.3) + (MV x 0.1)
• If there is no CNI: LV = (CS x 0.9) + (MV x 0.1)
• If there is no CS: LV = (CNI x 0.9) + (MV x 0.1)
• If both CNI and CS are not present: LV = MV x 2
Process of determination of JC:
1. Initial Computation - The LBP will determine the value of the land.
2. Offer – Based on the LBP's computation, the DAR will make the offer to the LO.
3. If the LO rejects, the DAR will conduct a summary administrative proceeding, where
the LO, LBP and other interested parties will submit evidence as to the JC. There will be
30 days to resolve this. Notices will be sent to the parties.
4. If the LO or any party disagrees with the DAR's resolution, the adjudicator has 15 days
to bring the matter to the RTC as a Special Agrarian Court for final determination.
When is the reckoning point of valuation?

• The basis of JC should be at the time it was taken from the owner and appropriated by
the government.
• But if there is undue delay in the payment, the value should be determined not at the
time of taking, but at the time of full payment of the JC.
B. Land Valuation
1. Section 17 (supra) and 18, RA 6657: Valuation and Mode of Compensation. — The LBP shall compensate the
landowner in such amounts as may be agreed upon by the landowner and the DAR and the LBP, in accordance with the criteria provided
for in Sections 16 and 17, and other pertinent provisions hereof, or as may be finally determined by the court, as the just compensation for
the land. The compensation shall be paid on one of the following modes, at the option of the landowner:
(1) Cash payment, under the following terms and conditions;
(a) For lands above fifty (50) hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage is concerned. — Twenty-five percent (25%) cash, the
balance to be paid in government financial instruments negotiable at any time.
(b) For lands above twenty-four (24) hectares and up to fifty (50) hectares. — Thirty percent (30%) cash, the balance to be paid
in government financial instruments negotiable at any time.
(c) For lands twenty-four (24) hectares and below. — Thirty-five percent (35%) cash, the balance to be paid in government
financial instruments negotiable at any time.
(2) Shares of stock in government-owned or controlled corporations, LBP preferred shares, physical assets or other qualified
investments in accordance with guidelines set by the PARC;
(3) Tax credits which can be used against any tax liability;
(4) LBP bonds, which shall have the following features:
(a) Market interest rates aligned with 91-day treasury bill rates. Ten percent (10%) of the face value of the bonds shall mature
every year from the date of issuance until the tenth (10th) year: provided, that should the landowner choose to forego the cash
portion, whether in full or in part, he shall be paid correspondingly in LBP bonds;
(b) Transferability and negotiability. Such LBP bonds may be used by the landowner, his successors in interest or his assigns, up
to the amount of their face value, for any of the following:
(i) Acquisition of land or other real properties of the government, including assets under the Asset Privatization Program and
other assets foreclosed by government financial institutions in the same province or region where the lands for which the bonds
were paid are situated;
(ii) Acquisition of shares of stock of government-owned or -controlled corporations or shares of stocks owned by the
government in private corporations;
(iii) Substitution for surety or bail bonds for the provisional release of accused persons, or performance bonds;
(iv) Security for loans with any government financial institution, provided the proceeds of the loans shall be invested in an
economic enterprise, preferably in a small-and medium-scale industry, in the same province or region as the land for which the
bonds are paid;
(v) Payment for various taxes and fees to government; provided, that the use of these bonds for these purposes will be limited to
a certain percentage of the outstanding balance of the financial instruments: provided, further, that the PARC shall determine the
percentage mentioned above;
(vi) Payment for tuition fees of the immediate family of the original bondholder in government universities, colleges, trade
schools, and other institutions;
(vii) Payment for fees of the immediate family of the original bondholder in government hospitals; and
(viii) Such other uses as the PARC may from time to time allow. In case of extraordinary inflation, the PARC shall take
appropriate measures to protect the economy.
Summary of Modes of Payment
1. Cash and gov't financial instrument (gfi) under the following scheme:
(a) above 50 hectares: 25% cash, 75% gfi
(b) 25 to 50 hectares: 30% cash, 70% gfi
(c) 24 hectares and below: 35% cash , 65% gfi
Note: In case of voluntary offers (Section 19), the LO shall be entitled to

an additional 5% cash payment.
2. Shares of stock in government-owned or controlled corporations,

LBP preferred shares, physical assets or other qualified investments
3. Tax credits which can be used against any tax liability
4. LBP Bonds which shall have the following features:

(a) 10% of the face value of the bonds shall mature every year from the
date of issuance until the 10th year
(b) transferability and negotiability
(c) the bonds can be used for any of the following:
(i) acquisition of land or other real properties of the gov't
(ii) acquisition of land shares of stock of GOCCs or shares owned by
the gov't in private corporations
(iii) bail bonds for the provisional liberty of accused persons, or
performance bonds
(iv) security for loans with government financial institution, provided
that the loan would be invested in an economic enterprise
(v) payment of government taxes and fees
(vi) payment of tuition fees of the immediate family of the original
bondholder
(vii) payment of hospital (gov't) fees of the original bondholder's
immediate family
2. DAR's authority over land valuation cases

The DARAB or the PARAD can conduct a summary administrative proceeding for the
preliminary determination of JC. It will determine whether the land valuation of the LBP is in
accordance with the rules and administrative orders.
Jurisdiction would depend on the initial valuation by the LBP:
(a) PARAD – when LV is < 10M
(b) RARAD – when LV is 10M to 50M
(c) DARAB – when LV > 50M
But the order above may be dispensed with in the event of the lower adjudicatory
board's non-availability, inhibition, or disqualification (i.e., if the PARAD is unavailable, even
if the LV is less than 10M, the RARAD may conduct the preliminary proceedings).
Who has the authority to determine JC?

The valuation of the DAR is not conclusive. The LO can still contest it in the RTC
designated as Special Agrarian Court. The determination of the JC is essentially a judicial
function. But this doesn't mean that the court can disregard the formula laid down by the DAR.
The factors for determination and computations set by the DAR are mandatory and not mere
guides which the courts may disregard.
Factors to consider in JC determination (CCONSIDE):

1. cost of acquisition of the land
2. current value of similar properties
3. official assessment by the government
4. nature of the property
5. non-payment of taxes or loans
6. sworn valuation of the owner
7. actual income and use
8. tax declarations
9. economic and social benefits
Is the consent of the farmer-beneficiary necessary in determining JC?

No. The CARL, under Section 18, states that the compensation may be agreed upon by
the LO, DAR, and IBP. The law doesn't mention the participation of the beneficiary.
Article XIX of 2009 DARAB Rules

SECTION 1. Principal Role of Board/Adjudicator. — The principal role of the Board/Adjudicator in the summary administrative
proceedings for the preliminary determination of just compensation is to determine whether the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) and
the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in their land valuation computations have complied with the administrative orders and other
issuances of the Secretary of the DAR and the LBP.
SECTION 2. By whom Conducted. — The preliminary proceedings of land valuation for the purpose of the determination of just
compensation for its acquisition shall be conducted:
a. by the PARAD when the initial land valuation of the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) is less than Ten Million Pesos
(PhP10,000,000.00);
b. by the RARAD when the said valuation is Ten Million Pesos and above but not exceeding Fifty Million Pesos (PhP50,000,000.00);
and
c. by the Board when the said valuation is Fifty Million Pesos (PhP50,000,000.00) and above.
In the event of non-availability, inhibition or disqualification of a designated PARAD in the locality, the RARAD concerned may conduct
preliminary proceedings of land valuation notwithstanding that the jurisdictional amount is less than Ten (10) Million Pesos.
On account of non-availability, inhibition or disqualification of the RARAD concerned, the Board may conduct the preliminary
proceedings of land valuation or designate the same to an Adjudicator from among the PARADs in the region.
SECTION 3. Order for Submission of Evidence, Position Papers, and Notice of Hearing. — Upon receipt of the Claim Folder (CF)
containing all the pertinent documents, the Board/Adjudicator shall issue an order:
a. to the landowner, the LBP, the DAR officials concerned, the farmer-beneficiaries and other interested parties, that they may examine
the claim folder in the Adjudicator’s possession and to submit evidence, pertinent documents, and their respective position papers and
affidavits within thirty (30) days from receipt of the order; and
b. notifying said parties of the date set for hearing on the matter.
Thereafter, the Board/Adjudicator shall proceed to make an administrative determination of just compensation following the procedure in
ordinary cases.
The Order shall be served in the same manner as the service of summons as provided for in Rule VII hereof.
SECTION 4. Failure to Comply with Above Order. — If the parties fail to submit the required documents and their position papers,
and/or to appear on the date set for hearing, despite proper notice, the matter shall be deemed submitted for resolution.
SECTION 5. When Resolution Deemed Final. — Failure on the part of the aggrieved party to contest the resolution of the
Board/Adjudicator within the afore-cited reglementary period provided shall be deemed a concurrence by such party with the land
valuation, hence said valuation shall become final and executory.
SECTION 6. Filing of Original Action with the Special Agrarian Court for Final Determination. — The party who disagrees with
the decision of the Board/Adjudicator may contest the same by filing an original action with the Special Agrarian Court (SAC) having
jurisdiction over the subject property within fifteen (15) days from his receipt of the Board/Adjudicator’s decision.
Immediately upon filing with the SAC, the party shall file a Notice of Filing of Original Action with the Board/Adjudicator, together with
a certified true copy of the petition filed with the SAC.
Failure to file a Notice of Filing of Original Action or to submit a certified true copy of the petition shall render the decision of the
Board/Adjudicator final and executory. Upon receipt of the Notice of Filing of Original Action or certified true copy of the petition filed
with the SAC, no writ of execution shall be issued by the Board/Adjudicator.
SECTION 7. Notice of Resolution. — A copy of the resolution of the Board/Adjudicator shall be sent to the landowner, the Land Bank
of the Philippines, the potential farmer beneficiaries, other interested parties, and their counsels.
SECTION 8. Return of Claim Folder. — The Board/Adjudicator shall, within three (3) days from return of the notice of the resolution
pursuant to the preceding section, transmit the Claim Folder (CF), together with the complete records thereof to the office of origin or the
Provincial Agrarian Reform Officer (PARO) concerned, copy furnished the LBP.
SECTION 9. Execution of Judgments for Just Compensation which have become Final and Executory. — The Sheriff shall enforce
a writ of execution of a final judgment for compensation by demanding for the payment of the amount stated in the writ of execution in
cash and bonds against the Agrarian Reform Fund in the custody of the LBP in accordance with RA 6657, as amended, and the LBP shall
pay the same in accordance with the final judgment and the writ of execution within five (5) days from the time the landowner
accordingly executes and submits to the LBP the corresponding deed/s of transfer in favor of the government and surrenders the
muniments of title to the property in accordance with Section 16(c) of RA 6657, as amended.
3. Procedure for acquisition of private lands

Jurisprudence:
1. Land Bank vs. Natividad; GR No. 127198
2. Lubica vs Land Bank; GR No. 170220
3. Land Bank vs CA and Yap; GR No. 118712
V. Land Redistribution
A. Legal provisions
Section 22. Qualified Beneficiaries. — The lands covered by the CARP shall be distributed as much as possible to landless residents of
the same barangay, or in the absence thereof, landless residents of the same municipality in the following order of priority: (a) agricultural
lessees and share tenants; (b) regular farmworkers; (c) seasonal farmworkers; (d) other farmworkers; (e) actual tillers or occupants of
public lands; (f) collectives or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries; and (g) others directly working on the land. Provided, however,
that the children of landowners who are qualified under Section 6 of this Act shall be given preference in the distribution of the land of
their parents: and provided, further, that actual tenant-tillers in the landholdings shall not be ejected or removed therefrom. Beneficiaries
under Presidential Decree No. 27 who have culpably sold, disposed of, or abandoned their land are disqualified to become beneficiaries
under this Program. A basic qualification of a beneficiary shall be his willingness, aptitude, and ability to cultivate and make the land as
productive as possible. The DAR shall adopt a system of monitoring the record or performance of each beneficiary, so that any
beneficiary guilty of negligence or misuse of the land or any support extended to him shall forfeit his right to continue as such beneficiary.
The DAR shall submit periodic reports on the performance of the beneficiaries to the PARC. If, due to the landowner's retention rights or
to the number of tenants, lessees, or workers on the land, there is not enough land to accommodate any or some of them, they may be
granted ownership of other lands available for distribution under this Act, at the option of the beneficiaries. Farmers already in place and
those not accommodated in the distribution of privately-owned lands will be given preferential rights in the distribution of lands from the
public domain.
Section 23. Distribution Limit. — No qualified beneficiary may own more than three (3) hectares of agricultural land.
Section 24. Award to Beneficiaries. — The rights and responsibilities of the beneficiary shall commence from the time the DAR makes
an award of the land to him, which award shall be completed within one hundred eighty (180) days from the time the DAR takes actual
possession of the land. Ownership of the beneficiary shall be evidenced by a Certificate of Land Ownership Award, which shall contain
the restrictions and conditions provided for in this Act, and shall be recorded in the Register of Deeds concerned and annotated on the
Certificate of Title.
Section 25. Award Ceilings for Beneficiaries. — Beneficiaries shall be awarded an area not exceeding three (3) hectares which may
cover a contiguous tract of land or several parcels of land cumulated up to the prescribed award limits. For purposes of this Act, a landless
beneficiary is one who owns less than three (3) hectares of agricultural land. The beneficiaries may opt for collective ownership, such as
co-ownership or farmers cooperative or some other form of collective organization: provided, that the total area that may be awarded shall
not exceed the total number of coowners or member of the cooperative or collective organization multiplied by the award limit above
prescribed, except in meritorious cases as determined by the PARC. Title to the property shall be issued in the name of the coowners or
the cooperative or collective organization as the case may be.
Section 26. Payment by Beneficiaries. — Lands awarded pursuant to this Act shall be paid for by the beneficiaries to the LBP in thirty
(30) annual amortizations at six percent (6%) interest per annum. The payments for the first three (3) years after the award may be at
reduced amounts as established by the PARC: provided, that the first five (5) annual payments may not be more than five percent (5%) of
the value of the annual gross production as established by the DAR. Should the scheduled annual payments after the fifth year exceed ten
percent (10%) of the annual gross production and the failure to produce accordingly is not due to the beneficiary's fault, the LBP may
reduce the interest rate or reduce the principal obligations to make the repayment affordable. The LBP shall have a lien by way of
mortgage on the land awarded to the beneficiary; and this mortgage may be foreclosed by the LBP for non-payment of an aggregate of
three (3) annual amortizations. The LBP shall advise the DAR of such proceedings and the latter shall subsequently award the forfeited
landholdings to other qualified beneficiaries. A beneficiary whose land, as provided herein, has been foreclosed shall thereafter be
permanently disqualified from becoming a beneficiary under this Act.
Section 27. Transferability of Awarded Lands. — Lands acquired by beneficiaries under this Act may not be sold, transferred or
conveyed except through hereditary succession, or to the government, or the LBP, or to other qualified beneficiaries for a period of ten
(10) years: provided, however, that the children or the spouse of the transferor shall have a right to repurchase the land from the
government or LBP within a period of two (2) years. Due notice of the availability of the land shall be given by the LBP to the Barangay
Agrarian Reform Committee (BARC) of the barangay where the land is situated. The Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating
Committee (PARCCOM) as herein provided, shall, in turn, be given due notice thereof by the BARC. If the land has not yet been fully
paid by the beneficiary, the rights to the land may be transferred or conveyed, with prior approval of the DAR, to any heir of the
beneficiary or to any other beneficiary who, as a condition for such transfer or conveyance, shall cultivate the land himself. Failing
compliance herewith, the land shall be transferred to the LBP which shall give due notice of the availability of the land in the manner
specified in the immediately preceding paragraph. In the event of such transfer to the LBP, the latter shall compensate the beneficiary in
one lump sum for the amounts the latter has already paid, together with the value of improvements he has made on the land.
Notes:
1. Qualified Beneficiaries
Who are eligible to be AR beneficiaries? (ARSOACO)
(a) agricultural lessees and share tenants
(b) regular farmworkers
(c) seasonal farmworkers

(d) other farmworkers
(e) actual tillers or occupants of public lands
(f) collectives or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries
(g) other persons directly working on the land
What are the qualifications?
(1) General qualification – He must be landless, but not literally, because the law considers a
farmer/tiller to have passed this qualification as long as he owns an area of less than 3 hectares.
(2) Under DAR AO No. 2, Series of 2009, he must also meet the following: (ARCC)
(a) Age – He/she must be at least 15 years old at the time of identification, screening,
and selection.
(b) Residency – He must reside in the barangay/municipality where the land is located.
(c) Citizenship – He must be a Filipino citizen.
(d) Capability – He must be willing, able and equipped with aptitude to cultivate and
make the land productive.
2. Distribution limit & Order of preference
(1) Each child of the LO, who is at least 15 years old and actually tilling or directly managing
the farm, enjoys first preference in the distribution of the land, up to 3 hectares each.
(2) After the children, up to 3 hectares for each:
(a) agricultural lessees and share tenants
(b) regular farmworkers
(3) Once the lessees, tenants, and regular farmworkers have received their share, the remaining
portion, if any, will be given to:
(c) seasonal farmworkers
(d) other farmworkers
(e) actual tillers or occupants of public lands
(f) collectives or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries
(g) other persons directly working on the land
3. Award Ceiling
The limit is 3 hectares. It is the maximum area that can be owned by each AR
beneficiary, not the fixed mandatory area to be distributed for each. So if the beneficiary
already owns 2 hectares of agricultural land, he could only be awarded 1 hectare.
The factors to consider in determining the size to be awarded are: (a) type of crop; (b)
type of soil; (c) weather patterns; and (d) other pertinent factors critical for the success of the
beneficiaries.
4. Disqualifications
(a) those who have sold, abandoned, disposed, lands awarded by virtue of Operation
Land Transfer under PD 27;
(b) those guilty of negligence or misuse of the land itself;
(c) those who own more than 3 hectares of agricultural land; and
(d) those who have been awarded lands, that had become subject to foreclosure because
of failure to pay 3 annual amortizations.
B. Indefeasibility of Titles
Transfer of ownership to the beneficiaries is not automatic
Compulsory acquisition doesn't mean automatic transfer of ownership of the land to the tenant,
lessee, or farm worker. Title and ownership over the land can be transferred to the beneficiaries
only upon full payment of the JC to the LO.
When does the DAR issue a Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA)?
The DAR will issue the CLOA only upon full payment of amortization by the farmer-
beneficiary. The CLOA in turn, becomes the basis for the issuance in his name of an original or
transfer certificate of title.
CLOA is indefeasible
CLOAs are titles brought under the operation of the Torrens system. They are conferred the
same indefeasibility of titles granted under PD 1529, after one year from its registration with
the RoD.
Grounds for Cancellation of CLOAs (FANMIS)
(a) Failure to pay 3 annual amortizations
(b) Abandonment of the land
(c) Neglect or misuse of the land
(d) Misuse or diversion of financial and support services
(e) Illegal conversion of the land
(f) Sale, transfer, or conveyance of the right to use the land
Jurisprudence: Estribillo, et al. Vs DAR and Hacienda Maria; GR No. 159674

Obligations of AR beneficiaries:
(a) exercise due diligence in the use, cultivation and maintenance of the land;and
(b) pay the LBP thirty annual ammortizations with 6% interest per annum
These will begin from the receipt of a duly registered CLOA and their actual physical
possession of the awarded land.
The payment of amortization starts one year from the date of registration of the CLOA.
But id the actual occupancy of the land takes place after registration, the reckoning period will
be from constructive occupation of the land.
VI. Resolution of Agrarian Disputes

A. Sections 50-53, RA 6657
Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the DAR. — The DAR is hereby vested with the primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate
agrarian reform matters and shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matters involving the implementation of agrarian reform
except those falling under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture (DA) and the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources (DENR). It shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence but shall proceed to hear and decide all
cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in
accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case. Toward this end, it shall adopt a uniform rule of procedure to achieve a just,
expeditious and inexpensive determination for every action or proceeding before it. It shall have the power to summon witnesses,
administer oaths, take testimony, require submission of reports, compel the production of books and documents and answers to
interrogatories and issue subpoena, and subpoena duces tecum, and enforce its writs through sheriffs or other duly deputized officers. It
shall likewise have the power to punish direct and indirect contempts in the same manner and subject to the same penalties as provided in
the Rules of Court. Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to represent themselves, their fellow farmers, or their organizations in any
proceedings before the DAR: provided, however, that when there are two or more representatives for any individual or group, the
representatives should choose only one among themselves to represent such party or group before any DAR proceedings.
Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the decision of the DAR shall be immediately executory.
Section 51. Finality of Determination. — Any case or controversy before it shall be decided within thirty (30) days after it is submitted for
resolution. Only one (1) motion for reconsideration shall be allowed. Any order, ruling or decision shall be final after the lapse of fifteen
(15) days from receipt of a copy thereof.
Section 52. Frivolous Appeals. — To discourage frivolous or dilatory appeals from the decisions or orders on the local or provincial
levels, the DAR may impose reasonable penalties, including but not limited to fines or censures upon erring parties.
Section 53. Certification of the BARC. — The DAR shall not take cognizance of any agrarian dispute or controversy unless a certification
from the BARC that the dispute has been submitted to it for mediation and conciliation without any success of settlement is presented:
provided, however, that if no certification is issued by the BARC within thirty (30) days after a matter or issue is submitted to it for
mediation or conciliation the case or dispute may be brought before the PARC
Administrative Adjudication
Jurisdiction
1. The DAR is vested with primary jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate agrarian
reform matters and shall have exclusive original jurisdiction over all matter involving
the implementation of agrarian reform, except those falling under the exclusive juris-
diction of the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources.
2. DAR Adjudicator
(a) Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB)
(i) Exercises both original and appellate jurisdiction

(ii) Exercises functional supervision over the RARADs and PARADs
(b) Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (RARAD)
(i)E xecutive Adjudicator in his region
(ii) Receives, hears and adjudicates cases which the PARAD cannot handle
because the latter is disqualified or inhibits himself or because the case is
complex or sensitive
(c) Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD)
3. Exclusive Jurisdiction of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform
Matters involving strictly the administrative implementation of the CARP and agrarian laws
and regulations shall be the exclusive prerogative of and cognizable by the Secretary of
Agrarian Reform
Rules of Procedure
1. The DAR shall not be bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence but shall
proceed to hear and decide all cases, disputes or controversies in a most expeditious
manner, employing all reasonable means to ascertain the facts of every case in
accordance with justice and equity and the merits of the case.
2. Responsible leaders shall be allowed to represent themselves, their fellow farmers, or
their organizations in any proceedings before the DAR
3. To discourage frivolous or dilatory appeals from the decision or order on the local or
provincial levels, the DAR may impose reasonable penalties, including but not limited
to fines or censures upon erring parties.
Judicial Review
1. Any decision, order, award or ruling of the DAR on any agrarian dispute or on any
matter pertaining to the application, implementation, enforcement or interpretation of
the CARL and other pertinent laws on agrarian reform may be brought to the Court of
Appeals by certiorari within fifteen (15) days from receipt of a copy thereof.
2. The findings of fact of the DAR shall be final and conclusive if based on substantial
evidence.
3. Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the decision of the DAR shall be
immediately executory.
Special Agrarian Court
Jurisdiction
1. The Special Agrarian Courts (Regional Trial Courts) shall have original and exclusive
jurisdiction over:
a. All petitions for the determination of just compensation to landowners; and
b. The prosecution of all criminal offenses under the CARL.
2. The Special Agrarian Courts, upon their own initiative or at the instance of any of the
parties, may appoint one or more commissioners to examine, investigate and ascertain
facts relevant to the dispute, including the valuation of properties and to file a written
report thereof with the court.
Appeals
1. Appeal from the Decision of the Special Agrarian Court: Within fifteen (15) days from
the receipt of the decision of the Special Agrarian Court, an appeal may be taken by
filing a petition for review with the Court of Appeals.
2. Appeal from the Decision of the Court of Appeals: Within a non-extendible period of
fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the decision of the Court of Appeals, an appeal may
be taken by filing a petition for review with the Supreme Court.
Jurisprudence: Tangub vs CA; UDK No. 9864
B. Authority of DAR Secretary to nullify titles

Section 24 of RA 6657, as ameded by RA 9700
SECTION 9. Section 24 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, is hereby further amended to read as follows: "SEC. 24. Award to
Beneficiaries.— The rights and responsibilities of the beneficiaries shall commence from their receipt of a duly registered emancipation
patent or certificate of land ownership award and their actual physical possession of the awarded land. Such award shall be completed in
not more than one hundred eighty (180) days from the date of registration of the title in the name of the Republic of the Philippines:
Provided, That the emancipation patents, the certificates of land ownership award, and other titles issued under any agrarian reform
program shall be indefeasible and imprescriptible after one (1) year from its registration with the Office of the Registry of Deeds, subject
to the conditions, limitations and qualifications of this Act, the property registration decree, and other pertinent laws. The emancipation
patents or the certificates of land ownership award being titles brought under the operation of the torrens system, are conferred with the
same indefeasibility and security afforded to all titles under the said system, as provided for by Presidential Decree No. 1529, as amended
by Republic Act No. 6732. "It is the ministerial duty of the Registry of Deeds to register the title of the land in the name of the Republic
of the Philippines, after the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) has certified that the necessary deposit in the name of the landowner
constituting full payment in cash or in bond with due notice to the landowner and the registration of the certificate of land ownership
award issued to the beneficiaries, and to cancel previous titles pertaining thereto. "Identified and qualified agrarian reform beneficiaries,
based on Section 22 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended, shall have usufructuary rights over the awarded land as soon as the DAR
takes possession of such land, and such right shall not be diminished even pending the awarding of the emancipation patent or the
certificate of land ownership award.
All cases involving the cancellation of registered emancipation patents, certificates of land
ownership award, and other titles issued under any agrarian reform program are within the
exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Secretary of the DAR.

Agrarian Reform Law Notes

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Agrarian Reform Law Notes

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Agrarian Reform Law Notes d.m.g.

A. Definition of Agrarian Reform

C. Other Important Definitions

1. Agricultural Land refers to land devoted to agricultural activity as defined in the

3. Agrarian Dispute refers to any controversy relating to tenurial arrangements, whether

It includes any controversy relating to compensation of lands acquired under the

and tenant, or lessor and lessee.

1. Association of Small Landowners vs Secretary of AR (July 14, 1989)

On the equal protection clause:

On police power and power of eminent domain:

On the determination of just compensation in relation to due process:

On the payment method of just compensation in relation to agrarian reform being an

2. Luz Farms vs DAR (December 4, 1990)

II. APPLICABILITY OF RA 6657

Definition: It is the physical possession by a person of land devoted to agriculture belonging

The parties are not landholder and tenant of each other.

2. Stanfilco (SEARBEMCO) vs. DOLE (November 27, 2009)

SC's Ruling: RTC has jurisdiction.

3. Mendoza vs Germino (November 22, 2010)

forcible entry cases can be referred to the DARAB.

SC's ruling: It is the MTC.

B. Coverage and Exclusions

1. Lands ADE used for: PWF RFW

Section 10 as amended by RA 7881: Exemptions and Exclusions. —

C. Right of Security of Tenure

Section 7 of RA 3844: Tenure of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural leasehold

Section 8 of RA 3844: Extinguishment of Agricultural Leasehold Relation - The agricultural

leasehold relation established under this Code shall be extinguished by:

Section 9 of RA 3844: Agricultural Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Death or

Summary of Security of Tenure:

Section 28 of RA 3844: Termination of Leasehold by Agricultural Lessee During Agricultural

Valid Grounds for Termination: CNCCV

Section 36 of RA 3844: Possession of Landholding; Exceptions - Notwithstanding any

5. The land or other substantial permanent improvement thereon is substantially damaged

Summary of Grounds for Ejection: LN PARS

1. Talavera vs. CA (February 27, 1990)

2. Milestone Realty and co. vs. CA (April 19, 2002)

Held (SC): Partially granted petition.

3. Villaviza, et al. vs. Panganiban (April 30, 1964)

D. Right of Pre-emption and Redemption

Section 10 of RA 3844: Agricultural Leasehold Relation Not Extinguished by Expiration of

RA 3844 (August 8, 1963) Amendment by RA 6389 (September 10, 1971)

fails to pay within that period, the principal shall earn an

Leasehold tenancy is when a person undertakes to cultivate a piece of agricultural land

Section 4 of RA 3844 (1963): Section 4, as amended by RA 6389 (1971):

Existing share tenancy contracts may continue

that adequate provisions, such as the

In case some agricultural share tenants do not

PD 1425 (June 10, 1978)

G. Rights, Obligations and Prohibitions of Lessee and Lessor

or interfere in the formation or administration of any such union or organization.

Obligations 1. to keep the lessee in peaceful 1. To pay the rentals

organizations of the lessees 2. To sub-lease the landholding

III. LAND ACQUISITION

specific limits as determined by Congress in the preceding paragraph;

valuation is subject to challenge by landowners

Phase Two: Phase Two:

organized or not covered by any landholdings.

agrarian reform beneficiaries' sex, economic,

2. Factors to consider in implementation

Phase One – the implementation to be completed by June 30, 2012:

and the award ceiling of 3 hectares.

4. Exceptions from the Implementation Phases

determination of just compensation.