Luz Farms vs.

Secretary of DAR
G.R. No. 86889 (December 4, 1990)

FACTS: Petitioner Luz Farms, a corporation engaged in the livestock and poultry
business, states that it would be prejudicially affected by the enforcement of
sections 3(b), 11, 13, 16 (d), 17 and 32 of RA 6657. The petitioner requested that
the said law be declared unconstitutional. The mentioned sections of the law
provides, among others, the product-sharing plan, including those engaged in
livestock and poultry business.

ISSUE: Whether or not certain provisions of RA 6657 is unconstitutional.

RULING: YES, in the transcripts of the Constitutional Commission of 1986, the

meaning of the word "agricultural," evidently shows that the inclusion of livestock
and poultry industry in its coverage of the constitutionally-mandated agrarian
reform program of the Government was never in the intention of the framers of the
Constitution because there is simply no reason to include livestock and poultry
lands in the coverage of agrarian reform.

Premise considered, the petition is hereby granted.