OVERVIEW OF THE COURSE ON AGRARIAN LAW

GENERAL CONCEPTS OF AGL

AGRARIAN LAW
- The term "agrarian" is derived from the Latin word "ager," which means "a field."
- The word agrarian means "relating to land or to the ownership or division of
land."
- It refers to the distribution of public agricultural lands and large estates, as well as the
regulation of the relationship between the landowner and the farmer who works on
the land
- It embraces all laws that govern and regulate the rights and relationship over
agricultural lands between landowners, tenants, lessees, or agricultural workers
- It focuses on agrarian reform, the thrust of which is the redistribution of agricultural
lands.
- Primary objective
- to break up agricultural lands and transform them into economic-size farms to
be owned by the farmers themselves, with the end in view of uplifting their
socio-economic status
- It is founded on the right of farmers and regular farm workers who are landless, to
own, directly or collectively the lands they till or to receive a just share in the fruits
thereof
- Another definition
- Agrarian law embraces all laws that govern and regulate the rights and
relationship over agricultural lands between landowners, tenants, lessees or
agricultural workers

SOCIAL LEGISLATION
- No precise definition for social legislation
- It covers labor laws, agrarian laws, and welfare laws
- It emphasizes more on the aspect of general public good and social welfare

AGRARIAN REFORM
- Section 3(a), RA 6657, as amended by RA 9700 (memorize)
- Agrarian Reform means the 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.
- The agrarian reform is not confined to distribution of lands to landless farmers and
regular farmers
- It includes other alternative modes, such as
- Labor administration
- Profit-sharing
- Stock distribution
 - Rationale
- Because to confine agrarian reform to land distribution is not feasible
considering there is not enough agricultural land that can be distributed to
every farmer or regular farmworker

HISTORICAL BACKDROP
- Pre-spanish era
-
- Spanish era
- During spanish era, the relationship between landowners and tenants was
governed by the civil code particularly by the special provisions for rural
leases
- American regime (Act 4054)
- The Rice Share Tenancy Act was promulgated
- It regulated the relationship between landlords and tenants on rice
lands
- Sugar Tenancy Act
- It was enacted to regulate the relationship between landlords and
tenants on lands planted to sugar case
- Commonwealth period (Commonwealth Act 53)
- This recognized the testimony of the tenant as prima facie evidence of the
terms of a tenancy contract that was not reduced in writing in a language
known to him
- It was enacted to amend the provisions of the Rice Share Tenancy Act
- Commonwealth Act 271
- was enacted to amend Act 4113 by extending its application to sugar
farm workers
- Commonwealth Act 461 was enacted to provide security of tenure to
agricultural tenants
- Was amended by CA 608
- Independence
- RA 34 was enacted to amend the Rice Share Tenancy Act by introducing
changes in crop division
- Then the Agricultural Share Tenancy Act was enacted
- This repealed all the earlier tenancy laws except the Sugar Tenancy
Act
- RA 2263 amended RA 34
- RA 1400 was passed setting in motion the expropriation of all tenanted
estates
- Agricultural Land Reform Code
- Abolishes share tenancy
- It instituted the agricultural leasehold system
- It was amended by RA 6389 (Code of Agrarian Reforms)
- Martial law
- Tenant Emancipation Law was promulgated
- To provide for the transfer of lands primarily devoted to rice and corn
to the tenants
- Court of Agrarian Relations
 - Was reorganized with the enactment of PD 946
- PD 1038 was promulgated to strengthen the security of tenure of tenants in
non-rice or corn agricultural lands
- PD 251, 444, 1039, 1817
- Amended the Code of Agrarian Reforms
- 1987 (Aquino Administration)
- Issued EO 228 and EO 229
- EO 228
- Declaring full land ownership in favor of beneficiaries under PD
27
- EO 229
- Providing the mechanics for its implementation
- PD 131
- Institutes a comprehensive agrarian reform
- 1988
- Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Lawn (CARL) was enacted
- RA 7881, 7905, 8532, and 9700
- Amended certain provisions of the CARL
- RA 8532 - Agrarian Reform Fund Bill
- RA 9700 - Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP Law)

LEGAL BACKDROP
- Act 4054 – Rice Share Tenancy Act of 1933
- The Legislature enacted the Philippine Rice Share Tenancy Act (Act 4054).
This law regulated the relationship between landlords and tenants on rice
lands wherein there is a 50-50 sharing of the crop, regulation of interest to
10% per agricultural year, and a safeguard against arbitrary dismissal by the
landlord.
- Sugar Tenancy Act
- to regulate the relationship between landlords and tenants on lands
planted to sugarcane
- RA 1199 – Agricultural Tenancy Act of 1954
- enacted to repeal all the earlier tenancy laws except the Sugar Tenancy Act.
- governed the relationship between landowners and tenant farmers by
organizing share-tenancy and leasehold systems.
- The law provided the security of tenure of tenants.
- It also created the Court of Agrarian Relations.
- RA 3844 – Agricultural Land Reform Code of 1963
- abolished share tenancy
- In its place, it instituted the agricultural leasehold system. Its scope was
limited by an order of priority based on utilization and area.
- RA 6389 – Code of Agrarian Reforms of 1971
- amended the Agricultural Land Reform Code
- Created the Department of Agrarian Reform and the Agrarian Reform Special
Account Fund.
- It strengthened the position of farmers and expanded the scope of agrarian
reform.
- PD 27 – Tenants Emancipation Decree of 1972
 - provided for the transfer of lands primarily devoted to rice and corn to the
tenants and set the retention limit at 7 hectares.
- EO 228 – Declaring Full Land Ownership to Qualified Beneficiaries under PD 27
- also determined the value of remaining unvalued rice and corn lands subject
of PD 27 and provided for the manner of payment by the farmer-beneficiaries
and mode of compensation to landowners.
- Proc. 131 – Instituting a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program
- instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform as a major program for the
government. It provided for a special fund known as the Agrarian Reform
Fund (ARF), with an initial amount of P50 Billion to cover the estimated cost
of the program from 1987-1992.
- EO 229 – Mechanisms for Implementation of CARP
- Providing the mechanics of the implementation of the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program
- EO 129-A – Modifying EO 129 Reorganizing and Strengthening DAR
- streamlined and expanded the power and operations of the DAR.
- RA 6657 – Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program of 1988
- instituted a comprehensive agrarian reform program to promote social justice
and industrialization providing the mechanism for its implementation and for
other purposes.
- This law is still the one being implemented at present
- Applies only to agricultural lands (land devoted to agricultural activities. It
contemplates lands that are arable and suitable for farming), and does not
apply to lands classified as residential, commercial, industrial, mineral, or
forest land.
- The law paved the way for the redistribution of agricultural lands to
tenant-farmers from landowners, who were paid in exchange by the
government through just compensation but were also allowed to retain not
more than five hectares of land
- RA 8532 – Amending the CARP
- provided an additional P50 Billion for CARP and extended its implementation
for another 10 years
- RA 9700 – CARPER Law
- Extending the acquisition and distribution of all agricultural lands, instituting
necessary reforms, amending for the purpose certain provisions of RA 6657

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS (memorize)

- Article 2 - Sections 9, 10, 17, and 21
- Section 9
- The State shall promote a just and dynamic social order that will
ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the
people from poverty through policies that provide adequate social
services, promote full employment, a rising standard of living, and an
improved quality of life for all.
- Section 10
- The State shall promote social justice in all phases of national
development.
- Section 17
 - The State shall give priority to education, science and technology, arts,
culture, and sports to foster patriotism and nationalism, accelerate
social progress, and promote total human liberation and development.
- Section 21
- The State shall promote comprehensive rural development and
agrarian reform
- Article 3 – Sections 1, 9, and 10
- Section 1
- No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due
process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of
the laws.
- Section 9
- Private property shall not be taken for public use without just
compensation
- Section 10
- No law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.
- Article 12 – Section 10
- Section 10
- The Congress shall, upon recommendation of the economic and
planning agency, when the national interest dictates, reserve to
citizens of the Philippines or to corporations or associations at least
sixty per centum of whose capital is owned by such citizens, or such
higher percentage as Congress may prescribe, certain areas of
investments. The Congress shall enact measures that will encourage
the formation and operation of enterprises whose capital is wholly
owned by Filipinos.
- In the grant of rights, privileges, and concessions covering the national
economy and patrimony, the State shall give preference to qualified
Filipinos.
- The State shall regulate and exercise authority over foreign
investments within its national jurisdiction and in accordance with its
national goals and priorities.
- Article 13 – Sections 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8
- Section 1
- The Congress shall give highest priority to the enactment of measures
that protect and enhance the right of all the people to human dignity,
reduce social, economic, and political inequalities, and remove cultural
inequities by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for the
common good.
- To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, ownership, use,
and disposition of property and its increments.
- Section 2
- The promotion of social justice shall include the commitment to create
economic opportunities based on freedom of initiative and
self-reliance
- Section 4
- 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 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.
- Section 5
- The State shall recognize the right 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.
- 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 agricultural
estates which shall be distributed to them in the manner provided by
law.
- Section 7
- The State shall protect the rights of subsistence fishermen, especially
of local communities, to the preferential use of the communal marine
and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide
support to such fishermen through appropriate technology and
research, adequate financial, production, and marketing assistance,
and other services. The State shall also protect, develop, and
conserve such resources. The protection shall extend to offshore
fishing grounds of subsistence fishermen against foreign intrusion.
Fishworkers shall receive a just share from their labor in the utilization
of marine and fishing resources.
- Section 8
- The State shall provide incentives to landowners to invest the
proceeds of the agrarian reform program to promote industrialization,
employment creation, and privatization of public sector enterprises.
Financial instruments used as payment for their lands shall be
honored as equity in enterprises of their choice.
LAND ACQUISITION
- Agrarian Reform, Agricultural Land, Agrarian Dispute, Idle/Abandoned Lands,
Farmer, Regular Farmworker, Seasonal Farmworker, and Cooperatives defined –
MEMORIZE Sec. 3, RA 6657
- Section 3(a) - agrarian reform
- 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.
- Section 3(c) - agricultural lands
- Agricultural Land refers to land devoted to agricultural activity as
defined in this Act and not classified as mineral, forest, residential,
commercial or industrial land
- Section 3(d) - agrarian dispute
- 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.
- 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.
- Section 3(e) - idle/abandoned lands
- Idle or Abandoned Land refers to any agricultural land not cultivated,
tilled or developed to produce any crop nor devoted to any specific
economic purpose continuously for a period of three (3) years
immediately prior to the receipt of notice of acquisition by the
government as provided under this Act, but does not include land that
has become permanently or regularly devoted to non-agricultural
purposes. It does not include land which has become unproductive by
reason of force majeure or any other fortuitous event, provided that
prior to such event, such land was previously used for agricultural or
other economic purpose.
- Section 3(f) - farmer
- 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
 - Section 3(h) - regular farmworker
- Regular Farmworker is a natural person who is employed on a
permanent basis by an agricultural enterprise or farm.
- Section 3(i) - seasonal farmworker
- 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
- Section 3(k) - cooperatives
- Cooperatives shall refer to organizations composed primarily of small
agricultural producers, farmers, farmworkers, or other agrarian reform
beneficiaries who voluntarily organize themselves for the purpose of
pooling land, human, technological, financial or other economic
resources, and operated on the principle of one member, one vote. A
juridical person may be a member of a cooperative, with the same
rights and duties as a natural person.
- Scope of the Program – Sec. 4, RA 6657
- 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 Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Program:
- (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.
- Priorities of Coverage – Sec. 7, RA 6657
- The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in coordination with the
Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) shall plan and program the
acquisition and distribution of all agricultural lands through a period of ten (10)
years from the effectivity of this Act. Lands shall be acquired and distributed
as follows:
- Phase One: 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; all lands foreclosed by the 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 within a period of
not more than four (4) years;
- Phase Two: 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 in excess of fifty (50)
hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage is concerned, to implement
principally the rights of farmers and regular farmworkers, who are the
landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till, which shall
be distributed immediately upon the effectivity of this Act, with the
implementation to be completed within a period of not more than four
(4) years.
- Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands commencing with
large landholdings and proceeding to medium and small landholdings
under the following schedule:
- (a) Landholdings above twenty-four (24) hectares up to fifty
(50) hectares, to begin on the fourth (4th) year from the
effectivity of this Act and to be completed within three (3)
years; and
- (b) Landholdings from the retention limit up to twenty-four (24)
hectares, to begin on the sixth (6th) year from the effectivity of
this Act and to be completed within four (4) years; 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
by this program shall be made in accordance with the above order of priority,
which shall be provided in the implementing rules to be prepared by the
Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC), taking into consideration the
following; the need to distribute land to the tillers at the earliest practicable
time; the need to enhance agricultural productivity; and the availability of
funds and resources to implement and support the program.
- In any case, the PARC, upon recommendation by the Provincial Agrarian
Reform Coordinating Committee (PARCCOM), may declare certain provinces
or region as priority land reform areas, in which the acquisition and
distribution of private agricultural lands therein may be implemented ahead of
the above schedules.
- In effecting the transfer within these guidelines, priority must be given to lands
that are tenanted.
- The PARC shall establish guidelines to implement the above priorities and
distribution scheme, including the determination of who are qualified
beneficiaries: provided, that an owner-tiller may be a beneficiary of the land
he does not own but is actually cultivating to the extent of the difference
between the area of the land he owns and the award ceiling of three (3)
hectares.
- Land Acquisition: Compulsory Acquisition – Sec. 16, RA 6657
 - For purposes of acquisition of private lands, the following procedures shall be
followed:
- (a) After having identified the land, the landowners and the
beneficiaries, the DAR shall send its notice to acquire the land to the
owners thereof, 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 determination of just
compensation.
- Land Acquisition: Voluntary Offer to Sell – Sec. 19, RA 6657
- 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.

CASES
Association of Small Landowners in the Phils. v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform, GR. No.
79310, July 14, 1989
- Facts
- In this case, RA 3844 or the Agricultural Land Reform Code was enacted by
the Congress and was later on amended by PD 27 which aims to provide for
the compulsory acquisition of private lands for distribution among
tenant-farmers and to specify maximum retention limits for landowners
- In 1987, EO 228 was issued declaring full land ownership in favor of the
beneficiaries of P.D. No. 27 and providing for the valuation of still unvalued
lands covered by the decree as well as the manner of their payment. This
was followed on July 22, 1987 by Presidential Proclamation No. 131,
instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform program (CARP), and E.O. No.
229, providing the mechanics for its implementation
- Later, the Congress enacted RA 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law of 1988 which amended the previous laws
- As a result, the consolidated cases were filed to question the constitutionality
of RA 6657 on the following grounds:
- that these laws already valuated their lands for the agrarian reform
program and that the specific amount must be determined by the
Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). Manaay averred that this
violated the principle in eminent domain which provides that only
courts can determine just compensation. Therefore violated due
process for under the constitution, no property shall be taken for public
use without just compensation.
- that the power to provide for a Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Program as decreed by the Constitution belongs to the Congress and
not to the President
- That they cannot eject their tenants and so are unable to enjoy their
right of retention because the Department of Agrarian Reform has so
far not issued the implementing rules of the decree.
- that since their landholdings are less than 7 hectares, they should not
be forced to distribute their land to their tenants under R.A. 6657 for
they themselves have shown willingness to till their own land,
therefore they want to be exempted from agrarian reform program
because they claim to belong to a different class.
- That the provision which states that landowners may be paid for their
land in bonds and not necessarily in cash is unconstitutional because
just compensation has always been in the form of money and not in
bonds.
- Issue
- Whether EO 228, PD 27, and RA 6657 are unconstitutional
- Ruling
- No
- The Court ruled that there was no violation of the equal protection clause
because it was found that the Association had not shown any proof that they
belong to a different class exempt from the agrarian reform program. Under
the law, 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.
- The Court also ruled that the promulgation of PD 27 as well as the
Proclamation 131 and EO 228 and 229 are constitutional. As to PD 27, its
promulgation by President Marcos in the exercise of his powers under martial
law has already been sustained in Gonzales v. Estrella. As to the power of
President Aquino to promulgate Proc. No. 131 and E.O. Nos. 228 and 229,
the same was authorized under Section 6 of the Transitory Provisions of the
1987 Constitution
- As to the issue regarding just compensation, the Court ruled that while it is
true that the medium of payment of just compensation is money, this case 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. The agrarian reform program is a revolutionary
exercise of eminent domain
- The Court also ruled that there is no law which prohibits administrative
bodies like the DAR from determining just compensation. In fact, just
compensation can be that amount agreed upon by the landowner and
the government – even without judicial intervention so long as both
parties agree. The DAR can determine just compensation through
appraisers and if the landowner agrees, then judicial intervention is
not needed. What is contemplated by law however is that the just
compensation determined by an administrative body is merely
preliminary. If the landowner does not agree with the finding of just
compensation by an administrative body, then it can go to court and
the determination of the latter shall be the final determination.

Roxas v. CA, GR 127876, Dec. 17, 1999

- Facts
- In this case, Roxas & Co., a domestic corporation, owns three haciendas in
Batangas namely, Hacienda Palico, Banilad, and Caylaway
- Before the effectivity of RA 6657, it filed with the DAR a voluntary offer to sell
Hacienda Caylaway pursuant to EO 229, then Haciendas Palico and Banilad
were placed under compulsory immediate acquisition by DAR in accordance
with the CARL despite the petitioner’s application for conversion of the two
haciendas from agricultural to non-agricultural lands
- In 1992, Roxas then sent a letter to the Secretary of the DAR withdrawing its
VOS of Hacienda Caylaway. The Sangguniang Bayan of Nasugbu allegedly
authorized the reclassification of Hacienda Caylaway from agricultural to
non-agricultural, therefore Roxas informed DAR that it was applying for
conversion of Hacienda Caylaway from agricultural to other uses.
- The DAR also informed Roxas that a reclassification of the land would not
exempt it from agrarian reform
- Issue
- Whether the acquisition proceedings over the haciendas were valid and in
accordance with law
- Ruling
- No
- The court ruled that for a valid implementation of the CARP a notice of
coverage and a letter of invitation to a preliminary conference must be first
sent to the landowner, the representatives of the BARC, LBP, farmer
beneficiaries and other interested parties as well as the notice of acquisition
must be sent to the landowner
- In this case, DAR claims that it sent a letter of invitation to petitioner, however,
he was not authorized by the corporation
- The Court ruled that the failure of respondent DAR to comply with the
requisites of due process in the acquisition proceedings does not give this
Court the power to nullify the CLOA's already issued to the farmer
beneficiaries
Alita vs. CA, GR 78517, Feb. 27, 1989
- Facts
- In this case, the respondents acquired parcels of land Zamboanga del Sur
acquired through their predecessors-in-interest through homestead patents
under CA 141
- They desired to personally cultivate the lands however the petitioners refused
to vacate the said land relying on PD 27 and PD 136
- Respondents then filed a complaint against petitioners on the grounds that
PD 27 and PD 136 and appurtenant regulations are inapplicable to
homestead lands
- The Court of Appeals ruled that PD 27 is inapplicable to homestead lands and
allowed the respondents to cultivate their farmholding as owners and ordered
for the ejectment of petitioners
- Issue
- Whether the lands obtained through homestead patterns are covered by PD
27
- Ruling
- No
- The Court ruled that although PD 27 decreeing the emancipation of tenants
from the bondage of the soil and transferring to them ownership of the land
they till is a sweeping social legislation, it still cannot be invoked to defeat the
purpose of the Public Land Act or the CA 141.
- Jurisprudence provides that the Homestead Act has been enacted for the
welfare and protection of the poor. The law gives a needy citizen a piece of
land where he may build a modest house for himself and family and plant
what is necessary for subsistence and for the satisfaction of life's other needs.
The right of the citizens to their homes and to the things necessary for their
subsistence is as vital as the right to life itself
- Therefore, the Constitution likewise respects the superiority of the
homesteaders' rights over the rights of the tenants guaranteed by the
Agrarian Reform statute, wherein it provides under Article 13 section 6 that
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 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.

Natalia Realty v. DAR, GR 103302, Aug. 12, 1993

- Facts
- In this case, Natalia Realty owns 3 parcels of land in Antipolo
- Natalia Properties were situated within the areas proclaimed as townsite
reservation when Presidential Proclamation 1637 set aside 20,312 hectares
of land in Antipolo as townsite areas to absorb the population overspill in the
metropolis designated as Lungsod Silangan Townsite.
- The estate development, the developer of Natalia, was granted a preliminary
approval and locational clearances by the Human Settlements Regulatory
Commission. Petitioners were likewise issued development permits after
 complying with the requirements. Thus the Natalia properties later became
the Antipolo Hills Subdivision.
- When CARL was enacted in 1988, the DAR issued a Notice of Coverage on
the underdeveloped portions of Antipolo Hills Subdivision which was objected
to by Natalia Realty and requested for the cancellation of such notice
- Natalia and EDIC both argued that the properties ceased to be agricultural
lands when they were included in the areas reserved by Presidential
Proclamation for the townsite reservation. DAR then contended that the
permits granted were not valid and binding since they did not comply with the
implementing Standards, Rules and Regulations of PD 957 and that there
was no valid conversion of the properties.
- Issue
- Whether the lands already classified for residential, commercial, or industrial
use are covered by RA 6657
- Ruling
- No
- The Court ruled that Sec. 4 of RA 6657 provides that CARL shall cover,
regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and
private agricultural lands. And agricultural lands are referred to as land
devoted to agricultural activity and not classified as mineral, forst, residential,
commercial or industrial land. Thus, the underdeveloped portions of the
Antipolo Hills Subdivision cannot be considered as agricultural lands for this
land was intended for residential use. They ceased to be agricultural land by
virtue of the Presidential Proclamation No. 1637.

Milestone Farms, Inc., v. Office of the President, GR 182332, Feb. 23, 2011
- Facts
- In this case, Milestone Farms is engaged in the raising of cattle, pigs, and
other livestock, to acquire lands which may needed for its purpose, to breed,
raise, and sell poultry, and to import cattle, pigs, and other livestock and
animal food
- When RA 6657 was enacted, it included the raising of livestock, poultry, and
swine in its coverage. However, it was ruled in Luz vs Secretary of DAR that
agricultural lands devoted to livestock, poultry, and swine raising are excluded
from CARP
- Milestone then applied for the exemption/exclusion of its property. The DAR
then issued DAR AO No.9 which provides for the rules and regulations to
govern the exclusion of agricultural lands used for livestock, poultry, and
swine from CARP coverage. Therefore, Milestone re-documented its
application pursuant to such order
- The DAR LUCEC conducted an ocular inspection on Milestone’s 316.0422
hectare property and ordered for the exemption of such
- When RA 6657 was amended by RA 7881, private agricultural lands devoted
to livestock, poultry, and swine raising were excluded from the coverage of
the CARL.
- However, the DAR secretary issued an order exempting from CARP only
240.9776 of the 316.0422 hectares previously exempted and declared
75.0646 hectares of the property to be covered by CARP
 - Issue
- Whether the subject land is exempted from CARL coverage
- Ruling
- Yes
- The Court ruled that although the Administrative Order sought to regulate
livestock farms by including them in the coverage of agrarian reform and
prescribing a maximum retention limit for their ownership. However, the
deliberations of the 1987 Constitutional Commission show a clear intent to
exclude all lands exclusively devoted to livestock, swine and poultry-raising.
- According to Luz Farms vs Sec. of Agrarian Reform, livestock, swine and
poultry-raising are industrial activities and do not fall within the definition of
"agriculture" or "agricultural activity." The raising of livestock, swine and
poultry is different from crop or tree farming. It is an industrial, not an
agricultural, activity.
- The Court also ruled that the DAR has no power to regulate livestock farms
which have been exempted by the Constitution from the coverage of agrarian
reform. It has exceeded its power in issuing the assailed A.O.

Luz Farms v. Sec. of Agrarian Reform, GR 86889, Dec. 4, 1990

- Facts
- In this case, Luz Farms is a corporation engaged in the livestock and poultry
business. When RA 6657 was promulgated, it filed a petition to declare the
law unconstitutional on the grounds that
- it is adversely affected by the enforcement of such because the it
includes the raising of livestock in the definition of agricultural
enterprise or activity
- it defines commercial farms as private agricultural lands devoted to
commercial, livestock, poultry, and swine raising
- it provides for the execution of product-sharing plan including those
engaged in livestock and poultry business
- that it vests on the DAR the authority to summarily determine just
compensation
- It further argued
- that livestock or poultry raising is not similar with crop or tree farming.
- That the land is not the primary resource in this undertaking and
represents no more than 5% of the total investments of commercial
livestock and poultry raisers.
- That the land is incidental but not the principal factor or consideration
in their industry. Hence, it argued that it should not be included in the
coverage of RA 6657 which covers “agricultural lands.
- In its defense, the DAR contends that
- that livestock and poultry raising is embraced in the term "agriculture"
and the inclusion of such enterprise under Section3(b) of R.A. 6657 is
proper.
- He cited that Webster's International Dictionary, "Agriculture
—the art or science of cultivating the ground and raising and
harvesting crops, often, including also, feeding, breeding and
management of livestock, tillage, husbandry, farming
- Issue
 - Whether or not Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 (the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988), insofar as the said law
includes the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as
the Implementing Rules and Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith
are constitutional.
- Ruling
- No
- The Court ruled that
- Sec. 3 (b) and Sec. 11 of RA 6657 are unconstitutional in so far as
they include lands devoted to raising livestock, swine and poultry
within its coverage. The use of land is incidental to but not the
principal factor or consideration of productivity in this industry. It was
never the intention of the framers of the Constitution to include the
livestock and poultry industry in the coverage of the agrarian reform
program of the government.
- The intention of the Committee was to limit the application of the word
“agriculture”. Thus, Section II of RA 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.
- As to sections 13 and 32, the Court ruled that such requirement of
directing “corporate farms” to execute and implement
“production-sharing plans” is unreasonable for being confiscatory and
violative of due process, with respect to livestock and poultry raisers
because there is no reason to include livestock and poultry lands in
the coverage of agrarian reform, there is no need to call upon them to
distribute from 3% of their gross sales and 10% of their net profits to
their workers as additional compensation