AGRARIAN REFORM:

JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
AND JURISPRUDENCE
JUSTICE OSWALDO D. AGCAOILI
Philippine Judicial Academy
Supreme Court
CONCEPT OF AGRARIAN REFORM

It means redistribution of lands, regardless of
crops or fruits produced, to farmers and
regular farmworkers who are landless,
irrespective of tenurial arrangement
GOVERNING LAWS
Sec. 4, Article XIII, 1987 Constitution
The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform
program founded on the right of farmers and regular
farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or
collectively the lands they till . . .

PD No. 27, or the Tenant Emancipation Decree
Decree emancipated tenant farmers of private
agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice and
corn

RA No. 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Law of 1988 as amended
by RA 9700

The State shall encourage and undertake the
just distribution of all agricultural lands,
subject to the priorities and retention limits
set forth in the Act.
CARP COVERAGE UNDER RA 6657 AS
AMENDED BY RA 9700
(a) All alienable and disposable lands of the
public domain devoted to or suitable for
agriculture.
(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.

Retention Limits

To landowner, not to exceed five (5) hectares
To each child, three (3) hectares, provided:
1. he is at least fifteen (15) years of age; and
2. he is actually tilling the land or directly
managing the farm.
The right to choose the area to be retained, which
shall be compact or contiguous, shall pertain to the
landowner.
But if the area selected for retention by the landowner
is tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to choose
whether to remain therein or be a beneficiary in the
same or other agricultural land with similar or
comparable features.
Ancestral lands
The right of indigenous cultural communities to their
ancestral lands shall be protected to ensure their
economic, social and cultural well-being. In 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.
But the Torrens System shall be respected.

Exemptions and Exclusions
Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found
to be necessary for:
1. national defense, school sites and campuses,
etc.
2. church sites and convents appurtenant
thereto;
3. penal colonies and penal farms;
4. government and private research and
quarantine centers; and
5. all lands with eighteen percent (18%) slope
and over.
Also excluded:
1. Lands converted to non-agricultural uses prior to
the effectivity of CARL
2. Farms used for raising livestock, poultry and
swine
3. Agricultural lands reclassified by LGUs into
residential, commercial or industrial uses
4. Lands used for academic or educational purposes
5. Homesteads
PROCEDURE FOR ACQUISTION OF
PRIVATE LANDS
After having identified the land, the landowners and
the beneficiaries, the DAR shall send its notice to
acquire the land to the owners thereof;
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 monuments of title.
In case of rejection or failure to reply, the DAR
shall conduct summary administrative
proceedings to determine the compensation for
the land by requiring the landowner, the LBP and
other interested parties to submit evidence as to
the just compensation for the land, and shall
decide the case within thirty (30) days;
Upon receipt by the landowner of the
corresponding payment, the DAR shall take
immediate possession of the land and request the
Register of Deeds to issue a TCT in the name of
the Republic.The DAR shall thereafter proceed
with the redistribution of the land to the qualified
beneficiaries.
DETERMINATION OF COMPENSATION
The cost of acquisition of the land, the value of
the standing crop, current value of like properties,
its nature, actual use and income, the sworn
valuation by the owner, the tax declarations, and
the assessment made by government assessors,
and 70% of the zonal valuation of the BIR,
translated into a basic formula, by the DAR shall
be considered.
The LBP shall compensate the landowner in such
amounts as may be agreed upon by the landowner
and the DAR and the LBP, or as may be finally
determined by the court.
QUALIFIED BENEFICIARIES
The land shall be distributed to landless residents of
the same barangay, or in the absence thereof, landless
residents of the same municipality in the following
priority:
Agricultural lessees and share tenants;
Regular farmworkers;
Seasonal farmworkers;
Other farmworkers;
Actual tillers or occupants of public lands;
Collectives or cooperatives of the above beneficiaries; and
Others directly working on the land.
A landless beneficiary is one who owns less than
three (3) hectares of agricultural land.
Beneficiaries under PD 27 who have culpably sold,
disposed of, or abandoned their lands are disqualified
to become beneficiaries.
A person who is the owner of more than 3 hectares of
residential or commercial land but does not own any
agricultural land is considered a landless beneficiary
and, therefore, may be awarded 3 hectares of
agricultural land.
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.
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.
CANCELLATION OF REGISTERED
PATENTS
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.
TRANSFERABILITY OF AWARDED LANDS
Lands acquired by beneficiaries under the Act or
other agrarian reform laws shall not be sold,
transferred or conveyed except through hereditary
succession, or to the government, or to the LBP, or to
other qualified beneficiaries through the DAR for a
period of ten (10) years.
But 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.
QUASI-JUDICIAL POWERS OF THE DAR
The DAR is vested with 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
or evidence.
Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of Appeals,
the decision of the DAR shall be immediately
executory except a decision or a portion thereof
involving solely the issue of just compensation. (Sec.
50, RA 6657, as amended by RA 9700)
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.
If no certification is issued by the BARC within thirty
(30) days, the case or dispute may be brought before
the PARC.
The findings of fact of the DAR shall be final and
conclusive if based on substantial evidence.
No court in the Philippines shall have jurisdiction to
issue any restraining order or writ of preliminary
injunction against the PARC or any of its duly
authorized or designated agencies in any case, dispute
or controversy arising from, necessary to, or in
connection with the application, implementation,
enforcement, or interpretation of the Act and other
pertinent laws on agrarian reform.
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION
ON AGRARIAN DISPUTE
No court or prosecutor's office shall take cognizance
of cases pertaining to the implementation of the
CARP except those provided under Section 57 of RA
6657, as amended.
If there is an allegation from any of the parties that
the case is agrarian in nature and one of the parties is
a farmer, farmworker, or tenant, the case shall be
automatically referred by the judge or the prosecutor
to the DAR which shall determine and certify within
fifteen (15) days from referral whether an agrarian
dispute exists. (But see Sec. 50-A, RA 9700)
From the determination of the DAR, an aggrieved
party shall have judicial recourse.In cases referred by
the municipal trial court and the prosecutor's office,
the appeal shall be with the proper regional trial
court, and in cases referred by the RTC, the appeal
shall be to the Court of Appeals.
In cases where regular courts or quasi-judicial bodies
have competent jurisdiction, agrarian reform
beneficiaries or identified beneficiaries and/or their
associations shall have legal standing and interest to
intervene concerning their individual or collective
rights and/or interests under the CARP.
Except for the Supreme Court, no court shall have
jurisdiction to issue any restraining order or writ of
preliminary injunction against the PARC, the DAR,
or any of its duly authorized or designated agencies in
any case, dispute or controversy arising from,
necessary to, or in connection with the application,
implementation, enforcement, or interpretation of the
Act and other pertinent laws on agrarian reform.
JURISDICTION OF THE ADJUDICATION
BOARD
The Agrarian Adjudication Board shall have primary
jurisdiction, both original and appellate, to deterjmine
and adjudicate all agrarian disputes and other matters
involving the CARP.
Example: cases involving the valuation of land,
determination and payment of just compensation;
fixing and collection of lease rentals; disturbance
compensation; amortization payments; and similar
disputes concerning the function of the Land Bank.
Other disputes: cases involving the sale, alienation,
mortgage, foreclosure, pre-emption and redemption
of agricultural lands under the CARP; and cases
involving the issuance of CLTs, CLOAs and EPs and
the administrative correction thereof.
The RARAD and PARAD may have delegated
jurisdiction to receive, hear, determine and adjudicate
all agrarian cases and incidents arising within their
respective territorial jurisdiction.
The Board shall have exclusive appellate jurisdiction
to review, reverse, modify, alter or affirm resolutions,
orders, and decisions of the RARAD and PARAD.
BARC CERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT
The Board or its Adjudicators shall not take
cognizance of any agrarian dispute unless a certificate
is presented from the Barangay Agrarian Reform
Council (BARC) except where
Issue involves the valuation of land
The parties reside in different barangays
One party is a public or private corporation
Issue merely involves the administrative implementation of
the agrarian reform law.
SPECIAL AGRARIAN COURT
The Supreme Court may designate at least one (1)
branch of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) within each
province to act as a Special Agrarian Court or more
branches to constitute such additional Special
Agrarian Courts as may be necessary to cope with the
number of agrarian cases in each province.
The SAC 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.
The Special Agrarian Courts shall have original and
exclusive jurisdiction over all petitions (a) for the
determination of just compensation to landowners,
and (b) the prosecution of all criminal offenses under
this Act. The Rules of Court shall apply to all
proceedings before the SAC.
An appeal may be taken from the decision of the SAC
by filing a petition for review with the Court of
Appeals within fifteen (15) days from receipt of
notice of the decision
GENERAL PROVISIONS
After the lapse of five (5) years from its award, when
(a) the land ceases to be economically feasible and
sound for agricultural purposes, or (b) the locality has
become urbanized and the land will have a greater
economic value for residential, commercial or
industrial purposes, the DAR, upon application of the
beneficiary or the landowner, with due notice to the
affected parties, and subject to existing laws, may
authorize the reclassification or conversion of the
land and its disposition: Provided, That the
beneficiary shall have fully paid his obligation.
Transactions involving a transfer of ownership shall be
exempted from taxes arising from capital gains, and
from the payment of registration fees, and all other
taxes and fees for the conveyance or transfer thereof.
Registers of Deeds shall register, free from payment of
all fees and other charges, patents, titles, etc. for the
implementation of the CARP.
The sale or disposition of agricultural lands retained by
a landowner as a consequence of Section 6 shall be
valid as long as the total landholdings that shall be
owned by the transferee thereof inclusive of the land to
be acquired shall not exceed the landholding ceiling
provided for in the Act.

CONVERSION OF LANDS
After the lapse of five (5) years from its award, when
the land ceases to be economically feasible and sound
for agricultural purposes, or the locality has become
urbanized and the land will have a greater economic
value for residential, commercial or industrial
purposes, the DAR, upon application of the
beneficiary or the landowner with respect only to
his/her retained area which is tenanted, with due
notice to the affected parties, and subject to existing
laws, may authorize the reclassification or conversion
of the land and its disposition (except irrigated lands).
SUBSTANTIVE AND JURISDICTIONAL
ISSUES: ILLUSTRATIVE CASES
COVERAGE
Lands previously converted by government
agencies to non-agricultural uses prior to the
effectivity of the CARL (June 15, 1988) are outside
its coverage. Here, the lands were classified within
an urban zone by a city ordinance of Davao in 1982.
(Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Association v.
Nicolas, GR No. 168394, Oct. 6, 2008; also Natalia
Realty v. DAR, GR No. 103302, Aug. 12, 1993))

Where the subject parcels of lands were reclassified
within an urban zone pursuant to a city ordinance
prior to the effectivity of the CARL (June 10, 1988),
said lands are considered non-agricultural and
may be utilized for residential, commercial, and
industrial purposes. The parcels of land are deemed
exempted from the laws coverage. (Pasong Bayabas
Farmers Association, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, GR
No. 142359 May 25, 2004, 429 SCRA 109).
While PD 27, which took effect on Oct. 21, 1972,
clearly applies to private agricultural lands planted
to rice and corn, it does not preclude nor prohibit
the disposition of landholdings planted with other
crops (like sugar cane) to the tenants by express will
of the landowner.
Ownership of lands granted to tenant-farmers under
PD 27 may not be transferred or conveyed to third
parties except by hereditary succession (intestate or
testate) or to the government, in order to develop
generations of farmers to have an adequate and
sustained agricultural production. (Encarnacion v.
Dizon, GR No. 148777, Oct. 18, 2007)

BENEFICIARIES

DAR has authority to identify qualified agrarian
reform beneficiaries or to select a substitute to a
previously designated beneficiary who may have
surrendered or abandoned his claim (Manuel v.
DARAB, GR No. 149095, July 24, 2007)

Agrarian laws were enacted to help small farmers
uplift their economic status by providing them with
a modest standard of living sufficient to meet their
needs for food, clothing, shelter and other basic
necessities. The law grants them the right to
constitute a home lot as their dwelling and
subsistence. (Bautista v. Mag-isa, GR No. 152564,
Sept. 13, 2004)
A homesteader has rights superior to that of tenants
under the CARP. The homesteader is entitled to a
homelot for himself and family and to plant what is
necessary for their subsistence. (Taguinod v. Court
of Appeals, GR No. 154654, Sept. 14, 2007)


JURISDICTION
All controversies on the implementation of the
CARP fall under the jurisdiction of the DAR . The
notice of coverage relates to the implementation of
the CARP which is under the quasi-judicial
jurisdiction of the DAR. Its decisions are
immediately executory. (DAR v. Cuenca, GR No.
154112, Sept. 23, 2004)
RA No. 6657 invests DAR with original jurisdiction,
generally, over all cases involving agrarian laws.
(Tangub v. Court of Appeals, GR No. UDK No.
1964, Dec. 3, 1990)
Implementation of the CARP falls under the
exclusive jurisdiction of the DAR Secretary.
He determines whether a tract of land is covered by
or exempt from CARP.
Questions regarding the eligibility of CARP
beneficiaries must be addressed to him.
He decides to whom lands placed under the CARP
shall be distributed. (Department of Agrarian
Reform v. Polo Coconut Plantation, Co., Inc., GR
No. 168787, Sept. 3, 2008)
DARAB has primary and exclusive jurisdiction,
both original and appellate, to determine and
adjudicate all agrarian dispute involving the
implementation of the CARP. (Note: Such
jurisdiction extended to cases for the issuance,
correction or cancellation of CLOAs and EPs
already registered; however, under RA 9700, the
DAR Secretary has now jurisdiction over all cases
for the cancellation of titles issued under the
agrarian reform program). (Gabriel v. Jamias, GR
No. 156482, Sept. 17, 2008)
Note: DAR Secretary has now jurisdiction over all
cases for the cancellation of titles issued under the
agrarian reform program, thus:
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. (Sec. 24,
RA No. 6657, as amended by RA No. 9700, dated
August 8, 2009)
Prior to registration with the Register of Deeds,
cases involving the issuance, recall or cancellation
of CLOAs or EPs were within the jurisdiction of the
DAR; corollarily, cases involving the issuance,
correction or cancellation of CLOAs or EPs which
had already been registered were within the
jurisdiction of the DARAB. (Dao-Ayan v.
DARAB, GR No. 172109, Aug. 29, 2007)
Note: RA 9700 now vests in the DAR exclusive
jurisdiction to cancel registered emancipation
patents or CLOAs.

The doctrine of primary jurisdiction precludes the
courts from resolving a controversy over which
jurisdiction has initially been lodged with an
administrative body of special competence.
For agrarian reform cases, jurisdiction is vested in
the DARAB. (Hilario v. Prudente, GR No. 150635,
Sept. 11, 2008)

DARAB has exclusive original jurisdiction over
cases involving the rights and obligations of persons
engaged in the management, cultivation and use of
all agricultural lands covered by the CARL. (Rivera
v. Del Rosario, GR No. 144934, Jan. 15, 2004)

For DARAB to have jurisdiction over the case,
there must be a tenancy relationship between the
parties. (Mateo v. Court of Appeals, GR No.
128392, April 29, 2005)
Where DARAB and the MCTC exercised
jurisdiction over two cases involving the same
subject matter, issue, and parties, and ultimately
rendered conflicting decisions, the circumstances
clearly make out a case for prohibition. (David v.
Rivera, GR No. 139913, Jan. 16, 2004)

ELEMENTS OF TENANCY
Parties are the landowner and the tenant;
Subject matter is an agricultural land;
There is consent between the parties to the
relationship;
Purpose is to bring about agricultural production;
There is personal cultivation on the part of the
tenant; and
The harvest is shared between the parties.
The fact that the land in dispute is an agricultural
land does not ipso facto make it an agrarian dispute
within the jurisdiction of the DARAB.
Tenancy relationship can only be created with the
consent of the true and lawful landholder who is
either the owner, lessee, usufructuary or legal
possessor of the land.
The fact alone of working on another's landholding
does not raise a presumption of the existence of
agricultural tenancy. (Dandoy v. Tongson, GR No.
144652, Dec. 16, 2005. J. Austria-Martinez)
A person who occupies the land of another at the
latter's tolerance or permission, without any contract
between them, is necessarily bound by an implied
promise to vacate upon demand, failing which, a
summary action for ejectment is the proper remedy.
It is the duty of the court to determine the existence of
a tenancy relationship; if tenancy is proved, the court
should dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction.
(Magpily v. Dela Cruz, GR No. 167748, Nov. 8.
2005)
A tenancy relationship may be established either
verbally or in writing, expressly or impliedly.
(Monsanto v. Zerna, GR No. 142501, Dec. 7, 2001)

Dispute as to the tenancy relationship between
respondent and petitioner is an agrarian dispute.
Agrarian dispute means any controversy relating
to tenurial arrangements over lands devoted to
agriculture. (Salazar v. De Leon, GR No. 127965,
Jan. 20, 2009)
DAR Secretary is vested with the administrative
authority to issue and correct or recall the CLOA
issued under Section 24 of RA No. 6657. Ruling
of the Secretary is appealable to the OP, thence,
by a petition for review to the CA. (Dela Cruz v.
Cruz, GR No. 162890, Nov. 22, 2005)
To be a bona fide tenant, the person must cultivate
the land himself and with the aid available from his
immediate farm household. (Castillo v. Court of
Appeals, GR No. 161959, Feb. 2, 2007)
All the requisites must concur in order to create a
tenancy relationship between the parties; the absence
of one or more requisites does not make the alleged
tenant a de facto tenant as contradistinguished from a
de jure tenant. (Jugalbot v. Court of Appeals, GR No.
170346, March 12, 2007)

A tenancy relationship arises between a landholder
and a tenant once they agree to undertake jointly the
cultivation of a land belonging to the landholder.
An action to enforce rights as an agricultural tenant
is barred by prescription if not filed within three (3)
years. (Landicho v. Sia, GR No. 169472, Jan. 20,
2009)
The principal factor in determining whether a
tenancy relationship exists is intent. (Reyes v.
Joson, GR No. 143111, June 7, 2007)
Where respondent is not identified as one of the
farmers-beneficiaries in the DARAB case, he has no
personality to assert that the DAR has primary
jurisdiction over the land subject matter of the
unlawful detainer case before the MTC. (Active
Realty and Devt. Corporation v. Fernandez, GR No.
157186, Oct. 19, 2007)
Certifications issued by administrative agencies
and/or officials concerning the presence or the
absence of a tenancy relationship are merely
preliminary or provisional and are not binding on
the courts. (Masaquel v. Orial, GR No. 148044, Oct.
19, 2007)
JUST COMPENSATION
Valuation of property in eminent domain is
essentially a judicial function vested with the RTC
acting as SAC. (Apo Fruits Corporation v. Court of
Appeals, GR No. 164195, Feb. 6, 2007)
While a petition for the fixing of just compensation
with the SAC is not an appeal from the agrarian
reform adjudicator's decision but an original action,
the same has to be filed within the 15-day period
stated in the DARAB Rules; otherwise, the
adjudicator's decision will attain finality.
The adjudicators land valuation and determination of
just compensation is directly appealable to the SAC
within 15 days from receipt of notice. A petition for
the fixing of just compensation filed 26 days after
receipt of the PARAD decision renders said decision
final and enforceable by a writ of execution.
The Administrative Code of 1987 mandates the
OGCC, not the LBP Legal Department, to act as the
principal law office of the LBP. (Land Bank of the
Philippines v. Martinez, GR No. 169008, Aug. 14,
2007)

Section 57 of R.A. No. 6657 vests RTC, acting as a
SAC, original and exclusive jurisdiction over all
petitions for the determination of just compensation
to landowners.
What adjudicators are empowered to do is only to
determine in a preliminary manner the reasonable
compensation to be paid to landowners, leaving to
the courts the ultimate power to decide this
question. (Land Bank of the Philippines v. Suntay,
GR No. 157903, Oct. 11, 2007)
APPEAL
A decision of the RTC acting as a SAC should be
brought to the CA via a petition for review under
Rule 42. (Concepcion v. Court of Appeals,
GR No. 161844, Dec. 8, 2008)
In appeals in agrarian cases, the only function
required of the Court of Appeals is to determine
whether the findings of fact of the DARAB are
supported by substantial evidence. (Joson v.
Mendoza, GR No. 144071, Aug. 25, 2005)
In several instances, the Court entertained and allowed
lapsed appeals in the higher interest of justice.
Moreover, proceedings before the DAR are summary
and pursuant to Section 50 of RA 6657, the DAR is not
bound by technical rules of procedure and evidence.
(Department of Agrarian Reform v. Samson, GR No.
161910, June 17, 2008)
Section 1 of Rule 47 limits the subject matter of
petitions for annulment to final judgments and orders
rendered by RTC in civil actions.
Final judgments or orders of quasi-judicial tribunals
or administrative bodies such as the Office of the
President and PARAD are not covered. (Fraginal v.
Paraal, GR No. 150207, Feb. 23, 2007)
A petition for the fixing of just compensation with the
SAC has to be filed within the 15-day period stated in
the DARAB Rules. (Land Bank of the Philippines v.
Martinez, GR No. 169008, July 31, 2008)
CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITY

While a court may have authority to pass upon the
criminal liability of the accused, it has no jurisdiction
to make any civil awards that relate to the agrarian
relationship of the parties.
The matter (of civil awards) falls within the
jurisdiction of the DARAB which has quasi-judicial
powers to determine and adjudicate agrarian reform
matters. (Monsanto v. Zerna, GR No. 142501, Dec.
7, 2001)

THANK YOU

JUSTICE OSWALDO D. AGCAOILI
PHILIPPINE JUDICIAL ACADEMY
SUPREME COPURT