Midterms Notes AgraLaw Atty - Felongco UPVTCxUSC

Agrarian Reform Law & Social Legislation | A.Y. 2020-2021 | Atty. N.C.
Felongco
NATURE AND SUBJECT OF AGRARIAN REFORM AGRARIAN REFORM AS A PIECE OF SOCIAL

LAW & SOCIAL LEGISLATION LEGISLATION
(Module 1-A)
Agrarian Reform has characteristics of a social
SOCIAL LEGISLATION legislation because of its nature and subject.
Nature
“REFORM” - WHY IS THERE A NEED FOR
There exists a social inequality in all many aspects REFORM?
of life, more pertinently in wealth, status, and power.
EQUALITY
Because of the disparity in wealth and status there is prior to colonization, more or less, and
also disparity in power within the society, such that notwithstanding existing class system during that
there are people who yield so much power and there time, all Filipinos had equal access to land and its
are people who, unfortunately, do not seem to have fruits.
any power at all as to how they would rear their life.
Hence, we can say that Social Inequality is a fact CONQUEST
not just in wealth and status but also in power. when the Spaniards arrived, subjugation and land-
grabbing deprived many of the Filipinos access to
STATE AS “EQUALIZER” land.
By nature, therefore, social legislation is a specie of
laws which are passed and used by the State being DIVIDE WITHIN
the supposedly equalizer of social inequities, which while the conquerors sought to consolidate power and
are more often than not addressed by the State. wealth, some select “favored” Filipinos were granted
lands/haciendas.
Social inequalities are - more often than not - caused
by historical developments of the system or lack Encomiendas emerged with the granting of
thereof. The State has the power to rectify that. haciendas.
Therefore, Social Legislation are laws passed by
Congress to implement the non-executory principle NEW “BOSS”
of social justice. while supposed to liberate the Filipinos from the
Spaniards, Americans instead became the new boss.
Subject
Treaty of Paris
COMMON GOOD
Pieces of social legislation are passed with the PRE-AGRARIAN REFORM
common good in mind. there was imbalance and inequality
Common good is malleable such that the notion of during this time, the system is so broken that only a
common good can vary from time to time - it evolves few
through time.
including the State - own lands while the rest do not
Common good has for its scope that set of laws which and are forced to live as subordinates to others
help some portions of the population who are at a
disadvantage in society. EQUALITY INEQUALITY
All Filipinos, more or Land ownership is
PROTECTION TO THE WEAKER
less, had equal access consolidated and
Affording protection to the weaker sectors is the main
to land and their fruits agricultural production is
subject.
alienated.
“Those who have less in life, should have more in
AGRARIAN REFORM LAW
law.” - the goal of social legislation.
Nature
BALANCING ACT
AGRICULTURAL POLICY
In order for Social Legislation to be valid, it must not
smaller land size managed and owned by farm
be confiscatory or oppressive. It must take into
workers produce greater agricultural efficiency.
consideration existing laws.
there is now direct relationship from the worker with
It must not only aim for the common good and
the output from the work done.
protection of the weaker sector of the society but also
to balance the existing rights and privileges of those
REDISTRIBUTIVE POLICY
who are affected especially those who are in power.
in order to achieve this agricultural policy, land
redistribution is required.
UPVTCxUSC | Page 1 of 56
Agrarian Reform Law & Social Legislation | A.Y. 2020-2021 | Atty. N.C. Felongco
because of the consolidation of the ownership of land, • Humanization of Laws
because of the impracticalities in terms of absentee • Approximation of Justice (Calalang V. Williams, 70
land ownership Phil 726)
• Adoption of Government Measures for Social
FOUR CHARACTERISTICS OF AGRARIAN Equilibrium
REFORM
POSITIVE ACT OF THE STATE CALALANG VS WILLIAMS 70 PHIL 726

Agrarian Reform is a policy that is carried out by a
positive act of the State. Therefore, it involves the The National Traffic Commission recommended
exercise of the powers of the State. the Director of Public Works and to the Secretary
of Public Works and Communication that animal-
POWERS OF THE STATE drawn vehicles be prohibited from passing along
Implementation of Agrarian Reform involves the Rosario St. extending from Plaza Calderon de la
exercise of the power of the State. Barca to Dasmarinas St. from 7:30 am to 12 pm
and 1:30 pm to 5:30 pm and also along Rizal
TRIPARTITE SET-UP Avenue from 7 am to 11 pm from a period of one
It is a set-up that is not purely contractual, but year from the date of the opening of Colgante
essentially involves three parties. Farmer - Bridge to traffic. It was subsequently passed and
Landowner - State. thereafter enforce by Manila Mayor and the acting
chief of police. Maximo Calalang then, as a citizen
AGRICULTURAL LANDS and a taxpayer challenges its constitutionality.
Not all lands are subject of Agrarian Reform.
SC ruled that the promotion of social justice is to
Subject be achieved not through a mistaken sympathy
Restoration Of Balance And Address Social towards any given group. It is the promotion of the
Inequality. welfare of all people. It is neither communism,
despotism, nor atomism, nor anarchy but the
“Reform” implies that something is broken because it humanization of laws and the equalization of social
seeks to repair it for the better. and economic forces by the state so that justice in
its rational and objectively secular conception may
SOCIAL JUSTICE at least be approximated.
the common denominator between social legislation

and agrarian reform.
Social Justice is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine

Constitution.
Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of

all the people, the adoption by government of
measures calculated to insure economic stability of all
the component elements of society, through the
maintenance of proper economic and social
equilibrium in the interrelations of the members of the
community, constitutionally, through the adoption of
measures legally justifiable, and extra-
constitutionally, through the exercise of powers
underlying the existence of all government on time-
honored principle of salus populi est suprema lex.
(Calalang V. Williams, 70 Phil 726)
“Social Justice is the humanization of laws and the

equalization of economic forces.” (Calalang V.
Williams, 70 Phil 726)
What it is Not
• NOT communism
• NOT despotism or atomism
• NOT anarchy
What it Is
BRIEF LEGAL HISTORY OF AGRARIAN REFORM Caveat: Non-executory in nature. There must be an
OF THE PHILIPPINES enabling law to execute it.
(MODULE 1-B)
EXPROPRIATION
PRE-AGRARIAN REFORM ERA From mere regulation of ownership rights
Imbalance and Inequality
The State acquired lands to become the middle-man
Pre-Agrarian Reform efforts, the system is so broken agricultural contracts
that only a few-including the State-own lands while the
rest do not State now replaces the landowners as landlord of the
farms.
Agrarian Laws seek to remedy this broken system
from Inequality (land ownership is consolidated and But proved to be cumbersome for the State due to
agricultural production is alienated) to Equality (all lack of time and resources
Filipinos more or less had equal access to lands and
their fruits)
LEASEHOLD
Abolition of Tenancy
TENANCY LAWS
Creation of Bond Identifying the problems of the Tenancy relationship
in 1963, tenancy was abolished and, in its stead the
Tenancy Laws (i.e. Rice Tenancy Act and Sugar concept of leasehold was placed, granting them
Tenancy Act in 1933) create a tenancy relationship security of tenure as lessees.
that requires 50-50 sharing between worker and
landowner Worker is not just a tenant anymore; they are provided
with security of tenure as lessees on the lands they
This bond Is regulated by the State are working on. Landowner can’t just simply oust the
worker.
Landowner is still recognized as true owner, therefore
not deprived of land but only 50% of the fruits thereof TRANSFER / REDISTRIBUTION
Abolition of Tenancy
Problem: Workers still had a hard time establishing
their tenancy relationship with landowners since the Fist implemented through PD 27 and then through
latter could hire expensive lawyers and assail the CARL, as amended, agricultural lands started being
relationship. They would not execute any document subject of acquisition and transfer
so when there was an allegation of tenancy they can
simply question where the document of this tenancy Transfer and Redistribution: Acquiring properties
was. and redistributing properties from landowners to
farmers
Problem: As a consensual relationship it was Previous frameworks were not enough, we have now
dependent on whims and caprices of owner. If a developed this current set-up
landowner wanted to terminate the relationship they
can easily do so, with no remedy for the worker.
ACQUISITION – REDSITRBUTION
Current Framework
TESTIMONY AS EVIDENCE FOR TENANCY
Skewing the Scale for Farmers State does not anymore act as middle man for
agricultural relationships. Rather, it acquires land and
Aware of the machinations of landowners at that time, redistributes it to others
the Courts established this for the workers.
Testimonial evidence became prima facie evidence to

establish verbal tenancy contracts
Landowner now must present countervailing evidence

(hard evidence not just testimonial) to prove
otherwise.
SOCIAL JUSTICE “CONSTITUIONALIZED”

Despite being non-executory
Legislation and arguments in favor of social justice

now have a Constitutional basis
PROCESS: These sections emphasize the crucial policies and
LANDS OWNED BY ON PERSON principle of “social justice”
X owns 100ha of land suitable for farming
Social Justice - a just and dynamic social order, in all
phases of national development which is achievable
ACQUIRED BY THE GOVERNMENT through equitable distribution of wealth opportunities,
Government forcible buys big portion of the and resources
landholding of X.
TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER PERSION AGRARIAN REFORM AS EQUITABLE

A, B, C, and D are given portions of the landholdings DISTRIBUTION OF WELATH
GOVERNMENT IS REIMBURSED Section 1, Article XII: The goals of the national

A, B, C, and D, pays the government for te land in economy are a more equitable distribution of
favorable arrangements opportunities, income, and wealth; a sustained
increase in the amount of goods and services
produced by the nation for the benefit of the people;
CHARACTER AND BASES OF AGRARIAN and an expanding productivity as the key to raising
REFORM IN THE PHILIPPINES (MODULE 1-C) the quality of life for all, especially the
underprivileged.
AGRARIAN REFORM IN A NUTSHELL
Lands are taken from one person and given to The State shall promote industrialization and full
several others employment based on sound agricultural
development and agrarian reform, through
1. Lands owned by one person industries that make full of efficient use of human
2. The government will buy big portion of the and natural resources, and which are competitive
in both domestic and foreign markets. However,
land the State shall protect Filipino enterprises against
3. The government will transfer the land to other unfair foreign competition and trade practices.
people
4. People who will now own the land will In the pursuit of these goals, all sectors of the
reimburse the government economy and all regions of the country shall be
given optimum opportunity to develop. Private
enterprises, including corporations, cooperatives,
HOW IS AGRARIAN REFORM LEGAL and similar collective organizations, shall be
UNDER THE 1987 CONSTITUTION? encouraged to broaden the base of their
There are provisions of the Constitution ownership.
allowing Agrarian Reform Laws in the
Philippines
AGRARIAN REFORM AS A SANCTIONED
AGRARIAN REFORM AS SOCIAL JUSTICE RESTRICTION TO PROPERTY
Section 9: The State shall promote a just and Section 3, Article XII : Lands of the public domain
dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity are classified into agricultural, forest or timber,
and independence of the nation and free the mineral lands and national parks. Agricultural lands
people from poverty through policies that provide of the public domain may be further classified by
adequate social services, promote full law according to the uses to which they may be
employment, a rising standard of living, and an devoted. Alienable lands of the public domain shall
improved quality of life for all be limited to agricultural lands. Private corporations
or associations may not hold such alienable lands
Section 10: The State shall promote a just and of the public domain except by lease, for a period
dynamic social order that will ensure the prosperity not exceeding twenty-five years, renewable for not
and independence of the nation and free the more than twenty-five years, and not to exceed one
people from poverty through policies that provide thousand hectares in area. Citizens of the
adequate social services, promote full Philippines may lease not more than five hundred
employment, a rising standard of living, and an hectares, or acquire not more than twelve hectares
improved quality of life for all thereof, by purchase, homestead, or grant.
Taking into account the requirements of

Section 21: The State shall promote conservation, ecology, and development, and
comprehensive rural development and agrarian subject to the requirements of agrarian reform, the
reform. Congress shall determine, by law, the size of lands
of the public domain which may be acquired,
developed, held, or leased and the conditions Brief background: Article XIII of the Constitution on
therefor Social Justice and Human Rights includes a call for
the adoption by the State of an agrarian reform
Section 1, Article XIII : The Congress shall give program. The State shall, by law, undertake an
highest priority to the enactment of measures that agrarian reform program founded on the right of
protect and enhance the right of all the people to farmers and regular farmworkers, who are landless,
human dignity, reduce social, economic, and to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in
political inequalities, and remove cultural inequities the case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share
by equitably diffusing wealth and political power for of the fruits thereof. RA 3844 was enacted in 1963.
the common good. P.D. No. 27 was promulgated in 1972 to provide for
the compulsory acquisition of private lands for
To this end, the State shall regulate the acquisition, distribution among tenant-farmers and to specify
ownership, use, and disposition of property and its maximum retention limits for landowners. In 1987,
increments. President Corazon Aquino issued E.O. No. 228,
declaring full land ownership in favor of the
beneficiaries of PD 27 and providing for the valuation
(sanction restrictions and use of property for purposes of still unvalued lands covered by the decree as well
of agrarian reform as a means of achieving social as the manner of their payment. In 1987, P.P. No.
justice) 131, instituting a comprehensive agrarian reform
program (CARP) was enacted; later, EO 229
AGRARIAN REFORM THROUGH provising the emchanics for its PP131's
EXPROPRIATION implementation, was aslo enacted. Afterwhich is the
enactment of R.A. No. 6657, Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law in 1988. This law, while
Section 4, Article XIII: The State shall, by law,
considerably changing the earlier mentioned
undertake an agrarian reform program founded on
enactments, nevertheless gives them suppletory
the right of farmers and regular farmworkers who
effect insofar as they are not inconsistent with its
are landless, to own directly or collectively the
provisions.
lands they till or, in the case of other farmworkers,
to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this
[Two of the consolidated cases are discussed below]
end, the State shall encourage and undertake the
G.R. No. 78742: (Association of Small Landowners
just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to
vs Secretary)
such priorities and reasonable retention limits as
the Congress may prescribe, taking into account
The Association of Small Landowners in the
ecological, developmental, or equity
Philippines, Inc. sought exception from the land
considerations, and subject to the payment of just
distribution scheme provided for in R.A. 6657. The
compensation. In determining retention limits, the
Association is comprised of landowners of ricelands
State shall respect the right of small landowners.
and cornlands whose landholdings do not exceed 7
The State shall further provide incentives for
hectares. They invoke that since their landholdings
voluntary land-sharing
are less than 7 hectares, they should not be forced
to distribute their land to their tenants under R.A.
Section 22, Article XVIII: At the earliest possible 6657 for they themselves have shown willingness to
time, the Government shall expropriate idle or till their own land. In short, they want to be exempted
abandoned agricultural lands as may be defined by from agrarian reform program because they claim to
law, for distribution to the beneficiaries of the belong to a different class.
agrarian reform program
G.R. No. 79777: (Manaay vs Juico)
Nicolas Manaay questioned the validity of the
(use of expropriation as a means to implement agrarian reform laws (PD 27, EO 228, and 229) on
agrarian reform) the ground that these laws already valuated their
lands for the agrarian reform program and that the
specific amount must be determined by the
HOW IS AGRARIAN REFORM A VALID Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR). Manaay
EXERCISE OF STATE POWERS? averred that this violated the principle in eminent
domain which provides that only courts can
ASSOCIATION OF SMALL LANDOWNERS V. determine just compensation. This, for Manaay, also
SECRETARY OF DAR G.R. NO. 78742 14 JULY violated due process for under the constitution, no
1989 property shall be taken for public use without just
compensation. Manaay also questioned the
These are four consolidated cases questioning the provision which states that landowners may be paid
constitutionality of the Comprehensive Agrarian for their land in bonds and not necessarily in cash.
Reform Act (R.A. No. 6657 and related laws i.e., Manaay averred that just compensation has always
Agrarian Land Reform Code or R.A. No. 3844). been in the form of money and not in bonds.
RULING is in cash, then the government will not have
1. There was no violation of the equal protection sufficient money hence, bonds, and other securities,
clause. The Association had not shown any proof i.e., shares of stocks, may be used for just
that they belong to a different class exempt from the compensation.
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 POWERS OF THE STATE
same particulars. To be valid, it must conform to the Police Power
following requirements: (1) it must be based on Eminent Domain
substantial distinctions; (2) it must be germane to the Taxation
purposes of the law; (3) it must not be limited to
existing conditions only; and (4) it must apply equally POLICE POWER
to all the members of the class. Equal protection Court says Agrarian Reform is Peculiar
simply means that all persons or things similarly
situated must be treated alike both as to the rights It is not only an exercise of eminent domain; it is an
conferred and the liabilities imposed. The exercise of eminent domain in relation to acquisition
Association have not shown that they belong to a of land from private ownership but at the same time it
different class and entitled to a different treatment. is an exercise of Police Power because it restricts
The argument that not only landowners but also ownership of land to a maximum area, and this is what
owners of other properties must be made to share we call Retention Limit
the burden of implementing land reform must be
rejected. There is a substantial distinction between EMINENT DOMAIN
these two classes of owners that is clearly visible Deprives private persons of their private properties
except to those who will not see. There is no need to
elaborate on this matter. In any event, the Congress Agrarian Reform is for public use and common good
is allowed a wide leeway in providing for a valid (Philippines will benefit in the long run) and protection
classification. Its decision is accorded recognition of those in weaker society (farmers)
and respect by the courts of justice except only
where its discretion is abused to the detriment of the There is a just compensation for parcels of land
Bill of Rights. In the contrary, it appears that
Congress is right in classifying small landowners as Objections on Eminent Domain
part of the agrarian reform program. 1. There is a violation of Separation of
Powers (fixing of just compensation is NOT
2. There was no violation of due process. It is true done by the court, but by DAR)
that the determination of just compensation is a
power lodged in the courts. However, there is no law
which prohibits administrative bodies like the DAR 2. Prescribes payment to land owners other
from determining just compensation. In fact, just than money; non-monetary payment is NOT
compensation can be that amount agreed upon by a just compensation; money is the only mode
the landowner and the government even without of payment for it to be just compensation
judicial intervention so long as both parties agree.
The DAR can determine just compensation through
3. There is outright change of ownership
appraisers and if the landowner agrees, then judicial
intervention is not needed. What is contemplated by before payment; this is illegal
law however is that, the just compensation
determined by an administrative body is merely SC Says:
preliminary. If the landowner does not agree with the 1. There is no violation of separation of
finding of just compensation by an administrative powers; Under framework of CARL and PD
body, then it can go to court and the determination 27, courts are not deprived to determine fixed
of the latter shall be the final determination. This is just compensation; courts still have the last
even so provided by RA 6657: Section 16 (f): Any say in determination of just compensation;
party who disagrees with the decision may bring the this process is only administrative and
matter to the court of proper jurisdiction for final
preliminary in nature; it is still the land owner
determination of just compensation.
who agrees to the amount so there is still just
3. Just compensation, under the agrarian reform compensation
program, not necessarily be in terms of cash.
Money as [sole] payment for just compensation is 2. Under CARL there are Land Bank of PH
merely a concept in traditional exercise of eminent bonds, securities paid in lieu of money; let’s
domain. The agrarian reform program is a
take into consideration the resources of the
revolutionary exercise of eminent domain. The
program will require billions of pesos in funds if all government, this is a revolutionary kind of
compensation have to be made in cash if everything eminent domain; it is a nationwide program of
acquiring land; Government has to be given a Laws are not in the books. Laws are not in the
certain kind of margin of appreciation how to internet. Laws are in reality and laws are created for
best pay off this huge undertaking; this is human beings specifically laws which applies social
justice, economical forces and real life forces with the
already considered a revolutionary kind of
end in mind of producing equilibrium in the society.
eminent domain we have to allow other
payments other than money Social justice as even defined in the case and
jurisprudence is supposedly general and broad in
nature since it will have to adjust depending on the
3. There is no outright change of ownership; times and era of the humanity history.
payment by government is still required
Such that, what may not be constituted as common
good in the past may be constituted as common good
SPECIFICS OF AGRARIAN REFORM in the present or in the future.
NOTE: In this discussion, Atty. summarized Module – 1 and i.e. Socialize housing
answered the Padlet comments
THE RELATIONSHIP OF EQUALITY AND
IMPLEMENTATION AND EFFECTIVENESS EQUITY
How effective is the law? Why is there inequality Equality is the equal treatment regardless of need.
despite the law? Equity is the difference in treatment depending on
need.
Unfortunately, as a scope and delimitation of the Equality Equity
subject, what we will seek and prioritize to learn are (goal) (means)
the basics, the content of the law, and the ability to
integrate them into applying the law and
communicating the contents of the law.
THE TRIPARTITE SETUP OF AGRARIAN
THE PROCESS REFORM
1. Learn the Basics
we learn the contents of law, how the law works
within its framework.
2. Integrate
we integrate the basics in our minds to enable us
to apply it to situations and communicate it.
3. Reflect
reflect on the real-life impact and effectiveness
contents of the law and their application.
Here, the government breaks the contact between the

SOCIAL JUSTICE AND COMMON GOOD farmer and landowner by dealing with them one by
one.
Unfortunately, there is no black-and-white definition of
social justice and common good. First, the government will deal with the landowner
through acquisition of the land.
Philosophically, social justice and common good are
inherently broad as notions. They are inherently Then to the farmer through facilitating the transfer or
general in nature. redistribution of the acquired land from the landowner.
However, we have discussed the definition of social
justice and common good under our jurisprudence. AGRARIAN REFORM AS AGIRCULTURAL
Social Justice in a legal point is defined in the case of POLICY
Calalang vs. Williams. In that case, social justice was
defined in a manner which takes into consideration all
the existing objections against social justice and
contextualizing the definition in terms of how social
justice is done within the framework of the Philippine
Government and within the framework of laws.
In that case, social justice was defined as the

humanization of laws.
OTHER CLARIFICATIONS IN THE NATURE OF
AGRARIAN REFORM
1. Continuing Positive Act in terms of

Acquisition, Distribution, and Classification of
Lands
2. It is both an exercise of Eminent Domain and
People Power. Lands taken need not be
noxious.
3. When covered, agrarian reform is mandatory.
Landowners are still protected by law.
LEASEHOLD ARRANGEMENTS UNDER THE
AGRICULTURAL LAND REFORM ACT OR KNOWN
AS REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3844
(Module 2)
TENANCY
one of the first attempts to recognize a form legally

sanctioned agricultural arrangements that grant some Ownership has any attributes, a person who enjoys
sort of protection to the farmworkers. ownership also enjoys its attributes. Such attributes
are possession and use of property
How do we recognize a Share tenancy? If you are the owner of the car, the you enjoy the use,
possession and right to dispose the car. You may also
Elements: transfer this possession and use to another but not
1. AGREEMENT ON JOINT UNDERTAKING; the ownership.
- It is a contract
Owner now becomes a lessor and the “another” will
become the lessee.
2. ONE FURNISHES LAND; In this context, agricultural leasehold is a form of rent.
- Landowner furnishes the land Lessor owns a land and transfers possession and use
to the lessee for in consideration of payment of rent,
3. ONE FURNISHES LABOR; and while lessor maintains ownership.
4. EQUAL DIVISION OF FRUITS How do we recognize an agricultural leasehold?

- 50-50 is the minimum standard.
- Landowner may go beyond 50 but that is Elements:
1. LAND BELONGING TO A PERSON;
rare
- Not anymore, a joint undertaking
However, under the framework of share tenancy, the
land owner may validly circumvent the equal division 2. LAND IS POSSESSED AND CULTIVATED
of fruits since he has the right to exclude others from BY ANOTHER
the right to use the land for some reasons. Thus, this
framework was only good for a time. 3. POSSESSION AND CULTIVATION IS WITH
CONSENT; AND
What happened to Share Tenancy?
4. THERE IS PAYMENT OF RENT
In Ganzon v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 136831,
July 30, 2002, the Court recognized that “with the
enactment of RA 3844 … the system of agricultural
share tenancy was abolished for being contrary to FEATURES- Why switch to leasehold?
public policy.”
1. PROTECTED TENURIAL STATUS;
Physical possession and all those transferred

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3844 – AGRICULTURAL
LEASEHOLD attributes of ownership are guaranteed to the
agricultural lessee while the agricultural leasehold
Current law that grants the minimum benefits for the subsists
farmworkers
2. PHYSICAL POSSESSION GUARANTEED;
AND
Share Tenancy Agricultural Leasehold 3. CONTINUITY OF RELATIONS ASSURED
There is succession even the farmworker is already

dead.
Abolished shared tenancy and put agricultural
Leasehold in the stead of share tenancy, the system
of agricultural leasehold was recognized as the
preferred mode of agrarian reform system. Lands Covered
1. Tenanted Areas
2. Landed Estates
3. Public Lands
Not all lands are covered by the law because not all
lands serve the same purpose. LANDED ESTATES
Mandatory imposition of leasehold on huge tracts of
TENANTED AREAS land identified as landed estates
Conversion ipso jure of all tenancy agreements into
leasehold agreements Section 74 et. seq., RA 3844
Section 74. Creation - To finance the acquisition
Section 4 & 5, RA 3844 by the Government of landed estates for division
Section 4. Abolition of Agricultural Share Tenancy and resale to small landholders, as well as the
- Agricultural share tenancy, as herein defined, is purchase of the landholding by the agricultural
hereby declared to be contrary to public policy and lessee from the landowner, there is hereby
shall be abolished: Provided, That existing share established a body corporate to be known as the
tenancy contracts may continue in force and effect "Land Bank of the Philippines", hereinafter called
in any region or locality, to be governed in the the "Bank", which shall have its principal place of
meantime by the pertinent provisions of Republic business in Manila. The legal existence of the Bank
Act Numbered Eleven hundred and ninety-nine, as shall be for a period of fifty years counting from the
amended, until the end of the agricultural year date of the approval hereof. The Bank shall be
when the National Land Reform Council proclaims subject to such rules and regulations as the Central
that all the government machineries and agencies Bank may from time to time promulgate.
in that region or locality relating to leasehold
envisioned in this Code are operating, unless such
contracts provide for a shorter period or the tenant PUBLIC LANDS
sooner exercise his option to elect the leasehold Identified lands of the public domain that are
system: Provided, further, That in order not to conductive to agricultural activities
jeopardize international commitments, lands
devoted to crops covered by marketing allotments Section 51(5), RA 3844
shall be made the subject of a separate Section 51. Powers and Functions - It shall be
proclamation that adequate provisions, such as the the responsibility of the Authority:
organization of cooperatives, marketing xxx
agreements, or other similar workable (5) To recommend to the President, from time to
arrangements, have been made to insure efficient time after previous consultation with the Secretary
management on all matters requiring of Agriculture and Natural Resources, what portion
synchronization of the agricultural with the of the alienable or disposable public lands shall be
processing phases of such crops: Provided, reserved for settlement or disposition under this
furthermore, That where the agricultural share chapter;
tenancy contract has ceased to be operative by
virtue of this Code, or where such a tenancy
contract has been entered into in violation of the PARTIES- Who are the parties to an agricultural
provisions of this Code and is, therefore, null and leasehold?
void, and the tenant continues in possession of the
land for cultivation, there shall be presumed to exist 1. Agricultural Lessor
a leasehold relationship under the provisions of this
2. Agricultural Lessee
Code, without prejudice to the right of the
landowner and the former tenant to enter into any 3. Government
other lawful contract in relation to the land formerly
under tenancy contract, as long as in the interim AGRICULTURAL LESSOR
the security of tenure of the former tenant under May be juridical or natural person, who is the owner,
Republic Act Numbered Eleven hundred and civil law lessee, usufructuary
ninety-nine, as amended, and as provided in this
Code, is not impaired: Provided, finally, That if a It may be the:
lawful leasehold tenancy contract was entered into Owner - Has all attributes of ownership by default
prior to the effectivity of this Code, the rights and
obligations arising therefrom shall continue to Civil Law Lessee and Usufructuary:
subsist until modified by the parties in accordance - not considered as “owners”
with the provisions of this Code - possess some rights which have been
transferred by the owner to them through by
Section 5. Establishment of Agricultural Leasehold virtue of contract
Relation - The agricultural leasehold relation shall - possession, use, and entitlement of the fruits
be established by operation of law in accordance are transferred, but not the ownership;
with Section four of this Code and, in other cases, ownership is retained by the owner
either orally or in writing, expressly or impliedly
.
NOTE: NO AUTHORITY
A civil law lease, while listed in the definition of an
Civil Law Lessee vs Usufructuary Civil Law Lease agricultural lessor, cannot constitute an agricultural
- There is payment of rent lessee if there is no specific authority from owner
Usufruct - No payment of rent Th civil law lessee cannot transfer any further the
rights and privileges over the land which was
transferred by the owner himself without specific
authority.
AGRICULTURAL LESSEE
A natural person who cultivates the land of the NO CONSENT
agricultural lessor Thus, without consent from the owner, a civil law
lessee does not have the power to constitute an
GOVERNMENT agricultural lessee
the 3rd party raising contact between lessor and
lessee If there is no consent or authority then civil law lessee
cannot constitute as an agricultural lessor
Government is here by virtue of law, but as so far as
agricultural leasehold, there are only 2 parties EXERCISE OF OWNERSHIP
(agricultural lessor and lessee) This is because constituting an agricultural lessee on
a particular land is an exercise of ownership
Case Study: Crisostomo V Victoria G.R. No. When you have a civil law lessee, only the right to use
15098, 26 August 2015 to the possession and to the entitlement to the fruit
thereof are transferred – right of the ownership itself
Facts: is not transferred (otherwise it would be a sale or
1. There is a property belonging to a land owner donation)
2. The land owner constituted a civil law lease
with in favor of one person PERSONAL IN NATURE
3. Civil law lessee leased same property to an Lessor-lessee relationship is, by default; personal in
nature
agricultural lessee
4. Upon death of Civil Law lessee, agricultural Land owner themselves must contract to another
lessee invoked their rights as agricultural person who wants to be a lessee
lessee in the property
In the case of Crisostomo, there was no personal
nature because land owner transferred rights to a civil
In the case, the owner did not have knowledge or did law lessee and that civil law lessee to an agricultural
not give the consent to the civil law lessee that an lessee
agricultural lease is permissible; Land owners want
the land back, wants to eject those agricultural CIVIL LAW LESSEE AGRICULTURAL
lessees LESSEE
Governed by the Civil Governed by the Land
Question: Code, specifically on Reform Act. Actions
Can those persons who contracted with the Civil Lease. Actions on Lessee are
Law Lessee by virtue of Agricultural Leasehold be against Lessee may governed by the Land
considered as Agricultural Lessees to the land? be unlawful detainer Reform
Can they be validly ejected if they are not?
Answer:
Under the definition of Agricultural Lessor, under the CREATION- How is a leasehold relationship
law, a Civil Law Lessee is identified as one of the created? How does it arise?
persons who may be considered as agricultural
lessor; A civil law lessee may be considered as an Review: ObliCon
agricultural lessor; law states that agricultural lessor
may be an owner, civil law lessee, or usufructuary Statute of Frauds: Lease arrangements for more
than 1 year must be in writing. Otherwise, such
Court said people who claim to be agricultural arrangement shall be unenforceable in courts.
lessees may be ejected from the land; you may be
ejected from the land because you are not considered Question: Should agricultural lease agreements
as agricultural lessees. always be reduced into writing (by virtue of statute
of frauds)?
Reasons of the Court
NO. Because an agricultural leasehold, although its The reason why there has to be deposit of copy with
concept is lease, it is not primarily governed by the the municipal court and municipal treasurer is to
civil code. It is not a civil law lease, it is an preserve the copies which are crucial evidence of the
agricultural lease. And therefore, it is governed by existence of leasehold contract. They become public
R.A. 3844. documents hence, can easily be retrieved.
TERM / DURATION - For how long is the

relationship? What is the duration of the
Two ways in which an agricultural leasehold leasehold arrangement?
may be created or may arise under R.A. 3844:
Under RA 3844, as a rule, an agricultural leasehold
relationship lasts for an indefinite period.
1. By operation of law
2. By express contract One of the features that makes an agricultural
leasehold arrangement better from shared tenancy
agreement is that the tenurial security is secured. All
BY OPERATION OF LAW the rights pertaining to the leasehold are guaranteed.
One of the groups covered under RA 3844 are And even if the lessor/lessee dies, there is still
tenanted areas. RA 3844 does not only abolish continuity of relationship.
shared tenancy and replace shared tenancy with
leasehold agreements, it also converts ipso jure Right to Security of Tenure
tenancy relationships into agricultural leases.
Therefore, at the time of the effectivity of RA 3844, all The lessee will have the right to possess, use, and
shared tenancy contracts, ipso jure, were converted cultivate the property as long as the relationship
into agricultural leasehold arrangements. subsists. The lessee will have the right to possess,
use, and cultivate of the property until the relationship
In all those instances, there need not be a written is extinguished for some cause or another.
contract. Notwithstanding the absence of a written
contract, there is still an agricultural leasehold that is Under RA 3844, the possession of the agricultural
valid and enforceable in courts. Because, again, it is lessee shall not be disturbed unless the relationship
not governed by the statute of frauds but by RA 3844, is terminated or the lessee is dispossessed of the
which recognizes agricultural leasehold property - there are grounds of termination of the
arrangements which were converted from shared relationship.
tenancy agreement by mere operation of law.
Termination and Dispossession
BY EXPRESS CONTRACT
After converting the shared tenancy agreements into TERMINATION
agricultural leasehold arrangements, RA 3844 allows Three Modes of Extinguishing an Agricultural Lease
subsequent contracts or leasehold arrangements to Relationship under RA 3844:
be created by express contract. 1. Abandonment
2. Voluntary Surrender
If an agricultural leasehold arrangement is created by 3. Absence of a Successor
express contract, under RA 3844, the contract must
follow the prescribed format under the law.
ABANDONMENT
Requirements for Written Agricultural Lease Abandonment of the landholding without the
(primarily for the protection of the lessee): knowledge of the agricultural lessor. (Sec. 8(1), RA
3844)
1. the contract must be executed in four copies
(quadruplicate) - lessee, lessor, municipal Abandonment is willful failure of the agrarian reform
court, municipal treasurer beneficiary, together with his farm household, to
2. the contract must be signed or thumb-marked cultivate, till, or develop his land to produce any crop,
by both parties or to use the land… for a period of two calendar years.
3. the contract must be in a language or dialect (Gua-an v. Quirino, G.R. No. 198770, 12 Nov. 2012)
known to the lessee
4. as a matter of formality, the contract must be Caveat by Atty. Felongco: The definition of
acknowledged or notarized before the abandonment in this jurisprudence will not be adopted
municipal court having jurisdiction over the with regards the period. Because this case mainly
property subject of the leasehold contract involves an abandonment under PD 27. We just lift
5. two witnesses must be present the definition of abandonment in relation to its
6. the contract must be registered with the characterization being a “willful act”.
municipal treasurer
Such adherence to the definition of abandonment as
a “willful act” is bolstered in examining the case of
Coderias v. Chioco (G.R. No. 180475, 26 June 2013), What Are The Grounds For Dispossession?
in this case the matter of abandonment was not 1. Owner will cultivate or convert the land
defined but the reasoning of the court in determining 2. Substantial breach of contract
that there was no abandonment on the part of the 3. Substantial Damage to Land or improvement
agricultural lessee seems to point to the due to negligence
understanding that abandonment must be willful. 4. Nonpayment of rental
5. Subleasing the property
The agricultural lessee cannot be said to have
abandoned the landholding when the landowner
forcibly ejected him from the property through
OWNER WILL CULTIVATE OR CONVERT THE
threats and intimidation. (Coderias v. Chioco, G.R.
LAND
No. 180475, 26 June 2013)
Question:
Therefore, the SC seems to allude to the
Is it possible that an agricultural lessor will say:
characterization of abandonment as something that is
“Lessee please get out of the property because I
willful and voluntary. So, even if it is not willful and
will cultivate or convert the land.”
voluntary, even without knowledge of the agricultural
lessor, that is not considered as abandonment. Most
Answer:
especially if it is the lessor him/herself that makes it
POSSIBLE but there are consequences and
impossible for the lessee to stay on the land.
requirements under the law.
Situation:
VOLUNTARY SURRENDER
Owner will say to lessee:
Voluntary surrender of the landholding by the
“Okay, lessee, please vacate the property because I
agricultural lessee, written notice of which shall be
will cultivate the property for myself or I will convert
served three months in advance. (Sec. 8(2), RA
the property to a residential use.”
3844)
1. EFFECT
Here, the land owner is notified of the lessee’s desire
Will depend on the size of landholding:
to terminate the relationship. Therefore, upon the
effectivity of the voluntary surrender, the leasehold IF More than 5 IF 5 hectares or less
relationship will be considered as extinguished. hectares
(leased to agricultural no disturbance
ABSENCE OF A SUCCESSOR lessee) Agricultural compensation; 1-year
Sec. 9, RA 3844 provides that in case of death or lessee is entitled to notice prior to filing to
incapacity of the lessee, the lease subsists provided disturbance the court
the following successors are present: compensation; under
1. Surviving spouse the law there is
2. Eldest direct descendant by consanguinity prescribed
3. Next eldest descendants in the order of their age computation;
compensation is in
After the lessee dies and none of the successors form of money; it is a
enumerated under Sec. 9 RA 3844 are present, then must for lessee must
it shall be considered as Absence of a Successor. have already made
Therefore, the leasehold arrangement will be investments already
considered as terminated. to the property
If the eldest direct descendant is survived by his/her

spouse, the latter shall NOT be considered as a NOTE:
successor. There must be a court case. Landowner should
specify his plans with the land, whether personal
The law is clear. The successors must either be the cultivation or conversion
spouse [or the descendants] by blood […]
Consanguinity is not affinity. If no other persons in
the list exists, the leasehold relationship is 2. TIME LIMIT
extinguished. (Velasquez v. Sps. Cruz, G.R. No. IF Personal Conversion
191479, 12 Sept. 2015) Cultivation Ground
Within 3 years from Must be done within 1
DISPOSSESSION grant of year from grant of
Also a mode of extinguishing the agricultural dispossession dispossession
leasehold arrangement.
DISPOSESSION NOTE:
If lessor will not comply of the time limit, lessor have same must be made in a willful and deliberate
acted in bad faith; lessee who was deprived of manner. For a valid ouster or ejectment of a
agricultural leasehold may demand for re-possession farmer-tenant, the willful and deliberate intent
and payment of damages not to pay lease rentals and/or share can be
ascertained when there is a determination of
Conversion in RA 3844 means conversion prior to the will not to do a certain act.
effectivity of CARL as amended; Prior to CARL,
conversion has separate rules, but after, there are Mere failure of a tenant to pay the landholder's
new set of rules for conversion share does not necessarily give the latter the
right to eject the former when there is lack of
Under RA 3855, prior to effectivity of CARL owner deliberate intent on the part of the tenant to
may invoke conversion as ground of dispossession; pay. This ruling has not been overturned.
conversion must be done within 1 year.
The term "deliberate" is characterized by or
Dispossession is something invoke within aid of results from slow, careful, thorough calculation
courts. Must be invoked in a case filed in court and and consideration of effects and
grounds must be proven. consequences.44 The term "willful," on the
other hand, is defined as one governed by will
Question: without yielding to reason or without regard to
Is it possible that governmental agencies will reason.45
reclassify an agricultural land into residential,
industrial, etc.? We agree with the findings of the DARAB that
it was not the fault of petitioner that the lease
Answer: rentals did not reach the respondents because
YES. (Refer to case below) the latter chose to ignore the notices sent to
them.
DAVAO NEW TOWN VS SALIGA
NOTE: Willful and deliberate nonpayment lawful
Ruling: City council of Davao has the authority rental must’ve lasted at least 2 years.
to adopt zoning resolutions and ordinances.
Under Sec 3 of RA 2264 (then LGC) municipal INVOLVES LAWFUL RENTAL AMOUNT
and/ or city officials are specifically empowered
to “adopt zoning and subdivision ordinances or HEIRS OF TAN VS POLLESCAS, G.R. NO.
regulations in consultation with the National
145568, 17 NOVEMBER 2005
Planning Commission”
The power of the LGU to reclassify or conert In this case, the Tans seek ejectment of
lands to non-agricultural uses is not subject to Reynalda from the Land due to non-payment
the approval of FAR of lease rental. In order for non-payment of
the lease rental to be a valid ground to
dispossess the agricultural lessee of the
landholding, the amount of the lease rental
Question:
What constitutes breach of contract? must first of all be lawful. If the amount of lease
rental claimed exceeds the limit allowed by
Answer: law, non-payment of lease rental cannot be a
1. Failure to Comply with the terms ground to dispossess the agricultural lessee of
2. Deviation from agreed crops and use the landholding. Section 34 of RA 3844 as
3. Failure to adopt proven farm practices amended mandates that not x x x more than
25% of the average normal harvest shall
constitute the just and fair rental for leasehold.
NON-PAYMENT OF RENTAL MUST BE:
1. Willful and Deliberate In this case, the Tan Heirs demanded
2. Involves Lawful rental amount Reynalda to deliver 2/3 of the harvest as lease
rental, which clearly exceeded the 25%
maximum amount prescribed by law.
WILLFUL AND DELIBERATE Therefore, the Tan Heirs cannot validly
dispossess Reynalda of the landholding for
STA. ANA VS SPS. CARPO, G.R. NO. non-payment of rental precisely because the
164340 lease rental claimed by the Tan Heirs is
unlawful
It is a fundamental rule in this jurisdiction that
for non-payment of lease rentals to warrant the
dispossession and ejectment of a tenant, the
NATIVIDAD V MARIANO, G.R. NO. 179643, No court approval is Requires court order
3 JUNE 2013, CITING SECTION 2 PD NO. needed. Done either and, therefore, must
816 as voluntary act or act be proven with
of God sufficient evidence
Non-payment of the lease rentals whenever
they fall due is a ground for the ejectment of an
agricultural lessee under paragraph 6, Section OTHER RELEVANT RIGHTS
36 of R.A. No. 3844.56 In relation to Section 2
of Presidential Decree (P.D.) No. What are the other rights vested under RA 3844?
816,57deliberate refusal or continued refusal 1. Right to Home Lot
to pay the lease rentals by the agricultural 2. Right to Acquire the Landholding
lessee for a period of two (2) years shall, upon
3. Right to Pre-emption and Redemption
hearing and final judgment, result in the
cancellation of the CLT issued in the
agricultural lessee's favor.
RIGHT TO HOME LOT
The agricultural lessee's failure to pay the An agricultural lessee shall have the right to have
lease rentals, in order to warrant his specific portions of the area for residential purpose.
dispossession of the landholding, must be This is considered as included in the area leased.
willful and deliberate and must have lasted for
at least two (2) years. The term "deliberate" is
characterized by or results from slow, careful, RIGHT TO ACQUIRE THE LANDHOLDING
thorough calculation and consideration of Agricultural lessees may file a petition in writing with
effects and consequences, while the term the Land Reform Authority (now DAR)
"willful" is defined, as one governed by will
without yielding to reason or without regard to
reason.58Mere failure of an agricultural lessee RIGHT TO PRE-EMPTION AND REDEMPTION
to pay the agricultural lessor's share does not
necessarily give the latter the right to eject the
former absent a deliberate intent on the part of
the agricultural lessee to pay.
In the present petition, we do not find the

respondents' alleged non- payment of the
lease rentals sufficient to warrant their
dispossession of the subject property. The Question: Will the leasehold be terminated?
respondents' alleged non-payment did not last Answer: No. Because the leasehold subsists and, in
for the required two-year period. To reiterate addition, the lessee shall have the rights to
our discussion above, the respondents' rental preemption and redemption.
payments were not yet due and the
respondents were not in default at the time
Ernesto filed the petition for ejectment as Preemption vs. Redemption
Ernesto failed to prove his alleged prior verbal
demands. Additionally, assuming arguendo Preemption under RA 3844, as amended by RA
that the respondents failed to pay the lease 6389
rentals, we do not consider the failure to be
deliberate or willful. The receipts on record Requirements:
show that the respondents had paid the lease 1. Landowner notifies DAR and the lessees of
rentals for the years 1988-1998. To be the intended sale;
deliberate or willful, the non-payment of lease 2. If Lessee wishes to preempt, notice shall give
rentals must be absolute, i.e., marked by notice of intention ;
complete absence of any payment. This 3. If more than one lessee, preemption limited to
cannot be said of the respondents' case. respective actually cultivated area; and
Hence, without any deliberate and willful - To be determined by the court with the
refusal to pay lease rentals for two years, the
help of DAR.
respondents' ejectment from the subject
4. Exercised within 180 days from notice
property, based on this ground, is baseless
and unjustified. General Flow of Preemption:
TERMINATION DISPOSSESSION
Both are means of extinguishing tie between
agricultural lessor and agricultural lessee
In Castro v. Mendoza, Sr., G.R. No. 212778, April
Notice of
Intention to
26, 2017, the court held that an offer to redeem is
Preempt to validly effected through: a) a formal tender with
Landowner consignation, or b) a complaint filed in court coupled
with consignation of the redemption price within the
prescribed period. […] Tender or consignation is an
indispensable requirement to the proper exercise of
right of redemption.
Tender Payment
or Present
Certificate from
Land Bank
LEGAL STATUS OF RA 3844
Is it still effective?
Notice of
Intention to
preempt to In Reyes v. Reyes, G.R. No. 140164, September
landowner 6, 2002, the Court declared that the governing law
is RA, 3844, which, except for Section 35 thereof,
was not specifically repealed by the passage of the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 (RA
6675) but was intended to have suppletory effect to
Redemption under RA 3844, as amended by RA the latter law
6389
.
Requirements: Leasehold can only exist now in the following
1. Leased land was sold without knowledge of circumstances:
lessee; 1. Leased areas which are retained by
2. Exercised within 180 days from notice by landowner;
vendee; 2. Farmer-Beneficiary leases land awarded to
3. Entirety of the land must be redeemed, unless him; and
there more than lessee; and 3. Farmer’s cooperatives lease the land
4. Initiated by a Petition or request filed in DAR awarded to them to agricultural corporations
or in Court
In Po, et. al. v. Dampal, G.R. No. 173329,

December 21, 2009, the court held that the
admitted lack of written notice on [the lessee] and
the DAR thus tolled the running of the
prescriptive period. [The contention] of
constructive knowledge […] fails in light of the
express requirement for notice to be in writing.
General Flow of Redemption
Notice of
Intent to At the option of
Redeem the lessee, Land Consignation
Bank may
Filling a finance, subject
Petition for to amortization
Redemption
TENANT EMANCIPATION UNDER PRESIDENTIAL even if such land may involve rice and corn
DECREE NO. 27 crops however it is only incidental or seasonal
(Module 3) in nature, such land is outside the operation
of PD 27.
The agricultural leasehold agreements was one of the
first step towards granting some form of protection to 3. Under a Share-Crop or Lease-Tenancy
farmers. - In the private agricultural land which is
primarily devoted to rice and corn there must
be a share-crop agreement (tenancy) or a
Recap:
Tenancy Agreement -> Agricultural Leasehold
lease-tenancy agreement (leasehold
Arrangement -> Tenant Emancipation Decree arrangement.
- Do not get confused with the use of “share-
crop” and “lease-tenancy”, these
terminologies have been loosely used. When
Tenancy Emancipation Decree is considered a step we say “tenancy” we refer to our discussion
forward because aside from restricting and regulating on the elements of tenancy and when we say
land ownership, the State is also sanctioned to “leasehold arrangements” or “lease-tenancy”
acquire private property for the benefit of identified we refer to the discussion of the previous
beneficiaries. module.
The Sate’s acquisition of land is no longer optional If all these three elements are present in a property,
under the framework, as long as it is covered under then that specific property is considered as covered
the tenant emancipation decree, then it is considered under PD 27.
as a private property that must be acquired by the
State for distribution to the identified beneficiaries. Who are covered under the decree?
The State is now sanctioned to use its fundamental
power of eminent domain. Only tenant farmers of private agricultural lands
primarily devoted to rice and corn under a system of
NOTE: RA 3844 and PD 27 are not the main current share-crop or lease-tenancy.
frameworks of Agrarian Reform Law. It is the
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), which
was passed after PD 27. OPERATION OF PD 27
Through the law, a government program dubbed as

COVERAGE OF PD 27 “Operation Land Transfer” or “OLT” was initiated.
Limited in coverage, does not cover all agricultural Preamble of PD 27

lands
In as much as the old concept of land ownership by
Tenant Emancipation Decree was issued pursuant to a few has spawned valid and legitimate
the legislative powers possessed by the President, grievances that gave rise to violent conflict and
which took effect on Oct. 21, 1972. social tension,
“This shall apply to tenant farmers of private The redress of such legitimate grievances being
agricultural lands primarily devoted to rice and corn one of the fundamental objectives of the New
under a system of share-crop or lease-tenancy, Society,
whether classified as landed estate or not.” (PD 27)
Since Reformation must start with the
PD 27 is limited in nature. Although a step forward emancipation of the tiller of the soil from his
from tenancy agreements to leasehold arrangements, bondage
this law is admittedly wanting which resulted into the
passage of another subsequent law on agrarian
reform which is RA 6657.
The old concept of ownership, specifically of land
What are covered under the decree? holdings, has spawned valid and legitimate
grievances coming from farmers, such that these valid
1. Private Agricultural Lands and legitimate grievances are calling for reform
- Even if a land is classified as an agricultural because the system does not work for them or the
land, if it is public, it is outside the operation system is wanting and needs the adjustment.
of PD 27. Because of this, PD 27 proclaims that it is the start of
that reformation. PD 27 recognizes that the start of
2. Primarily Devoted to Rice and Corn reformation is through emancipation of the
- Even if it is a private agricultural land but such farmers/tillers, from their bondage which was
land does not yield rice and corn crops or created by the status quo/historical developments that
contribute to that old concept of ownership that also
contribute to that set-up which perpetuate inequality. Issue:
In this case, the Supreme Court had the occasion
to resolve whether or not the issuance of the
• “Operation Land Transfer”, initiated by virtue of PD Emancipation Patents is valid. – No, the
27, is for the purpose of emancipating Emancipation Patents are not valid.
farmers/tillers.
• The law references to that aspect of emancipation Whether or not the subject lands were excluded by
which sets free the farmer/tiller from the bondage of virtue of the reclassification in 1973. – Yes, they
the status quo or from the land owner. This law were excluded
operates as some form of liberation.
• By virtue of this law, the farmers are now set free Held:
from the land owners by making them as the land Between the time the land was covered by PD
owners themselves who cultivate the land that was 27 in 1972, and the time of transfer,
awarded to them. reclassification may operate to exclude the
land from the law.
What does the law do? - “Transfer”
In this case, reclassification was done in after the
The law authorizes the government to take private land was covered by PD 27. In effect, the land was
property (provided it is covered) and give it to a excluded from the operation of PD 27.
covered beneficiary.
Other reasons as to the decision of the Court:
The tenant farmer, whether in land classified as 1. The reclassification in 1973 and the
landed estate or not, shall be deemed owner of a certifications in 1983 was done by gov’t
portion constituting a family-size farm of five (5) agencies with expertise on the matter.
hectares if not irrigated and three (3) hectares if 2. The coverage under the law was not
irrigated; proven by the tenant-farmers.
3. the “deemed owner phrase” does not
The covered tenant farmer with a share-crop lease- mean that the tenant-farmers
tenancy in a private agricultural land which is primarily automatically become owners of the lands
devoted to rice and corn shall be deemed owner of a they occupy. At best, they are considered
portion that is considered as a family-sized farm. as eligible beneficiaries, who do not have
real ownership rights on the lands. They
Two kinds of family-sized farm: merely have inchoate rights.
1. If non-irrigated, farmer is entitled to an area of 5 4. Emancipation patents issued on lands not
hectares covered by the law are null and void
2. If irrigated, farmer is entitled to an area of 3 5. Between overage and transfer,
hectares reclassification may operate to exclude
from the law
MEANING OF “DEEMED OWNERS” UNDER PD
27
“Deemed owners” is a term that refers to tenant-
Perhaps it’s helpful to understand what this phrase farmers, who do not have real ownership over the
means by examining this timeline: lands they cultivate, being considered as eligible
beneficiaries of the same land.
CABRAL VS. HEIRS OF ADOLFO, GR NO
191615 , AUGUST 2 2017 It is not construed as an automatic conferment of
ownership rights by virtue of operation of law.
Before 1972 - Tenant-Farmers or Farmer-Lessees At best, the tenant-farmers have mere inchoate
occupied the land. rights over the landholding.
October 21, 1972 - PD 27 took effect. The term is strictly construed against the state and
liberally in favor of the landowner, so that “deemed
1973 - The lands occupied by the tenant-farmers owners” would mean that tenant-farmers are eligible-
was reclassified from agricultural land to another beneficiaries instead of being actual owners of the
classification (residential, industrial). landholding.
1983 - The reclassifications were certified by So how does one get from merely having
government agencies. inchoate rights to having real rights over the
landholding?
1988 - Emancipation Patents were issued.
Present - The issuance of Emancipation Patents GENERAL PROCEDURE WITH REGARDS TO

was cancelled. TRANSFER OF OWNERSHIP
chance to pay the reimbursement
1. Identification of the land and beneficiaries while being able to set aside money
- Government agencies will determine for his daily living.
a certain land area is a private-
agricultural land, and whether such NOTE: During this time, from the time of identification
land is devoted primarily rice and and up to the issuance of Emancipation Patents,
reclassification may still be constituted by the
corn, and whether there is a share-
landowner. In effect, the reclassification may
crop or lease tenancy arrangement in
operate to exclude the landholding from the
that land. operation of PD 27 as the beneficiaries therein
- Tenant-farmers (the beneficiaries) have mere inchoate rights.
are identified
2. Identification of boundaries Summary: “deemed owners”

- Boundaries must be determined to in
order for the government agencies to Supreme Court construe the phrase to mean that the
be certain that they are not covering law does not automatically confirm ownership
another person’s land not covered by over the covered tenant farmers of covered
the law. lands, rather it's a recognition that they are
qualified beneficiaries that the land is covered
and that the necessary things have been
3. Issuance of Certificate of Land Transfer identified and that it recognizes nearly in
- The Certificate of Land Transfer is inchoate rights. Under the law these are not yet
not the basis for the issuance of a right that may be enjoyed and exercise by the tenant
Certificate of Title. farmworkers until after compliance with the
- The former is just a preparatory requirements in general procedure that are
document which identifies the land, undertaken under the law.
its boundaries and the beneficiaries.
- Therefore, if a farmer issued a
Certificate of Land Transfer,
ownership is not transferred. CERTIFACTION OF LAND TRANSFER vis a vis
EMANICPATION PATENT
4. Valuation of the land There’s a general procedure of how a covered tenant
farmer is able to progress from the and inchoate right
- Rules of the valuation of the land are
to a real right. This procedure mention two of
under PD 27.
some documents that are issued in relation to the
- The purpose of the valuation of the implementation of this law, PD 27:
land is for the government to set an
amount for just compensation. 1. Certificate of Land Transfer:
2. Emancipation Patent
5. Payment of just compensation
6. Issuance of Emancipation Patent DELA CRUZ V. DOMINGO, ET AL., GR 210592

NOV. 2017
- The issuance of this patent is
evidence that ownership is
In this case court was called to distinguish and to
transferred from the landowner to clarify what's the difference between an
government, and from the latter to the emancipation patent and a certificate of land.
beneficiary.
Certificate of Land Transfer is misleading and
7. Payment to the Land Bank by the confusing to some and order to clarify court had to
beneficiary distinguish this in the case:
- The government merely finances the
acquisition of the land by the
As To Stage
beneficiary and redistributes it.
- The beneficiary will have to pay for Certificate of Land Transfer is issued in the
the redistribution thru the Land Bank preparatory stage of transfer; does not operate to be
of the Philippines as reimbursement the basis of transfer; in this stage all preliminary things
for the government. must have been identified first; only a preparatory
- The reimbursement is done by document not a basis of transfer
amortization so that the whole costs
are spread out to a longer period of Emancipation Patent issued in the conclusion stage
time, giving the beneficiary more of transfer; it is the last document issued and basis for
transfer; document which grants rights, emancipation
of farmer
As To Requirement
Certificate of Land Transfer requires that the land,

character of the land, and the identify of the
beneficiaries have been identified; since issued in
preparatory stage then CLT requires that all
preparatory things/ matters been complied with:
1. identification of covered land

2. identification of covered beneficiaries
3. boundaries of the land
Only after all these can a Certificate of Land Transfer

be issued
Emancipation Patent requires that a Cert of Land Title

has been issued and that valuation and payment of
just compensation have been made; basis for transfer
of ownership; requires:
1. Valuation of Land
2. Payment of that Valuation constituting just
compensation
There must be a just compensation before private

property is taken
As To Effects
Certificate of Land Transfer is not an evidence of title.

It merely signifies that land and beneficiary have been
identified pursuant to PD 27; these beneficiaries have
inchoate rights, not real rights yet
Emancipation Patent serves as a valid basis for the

issuance of Certificate of Title, as it conclusively
entitles the beneficiary the rights of absolute
ownership over the subject land; is not the certificate
of title; is like sale patents, need to be registered in
registry of deeds; become basis of issuance of
certificate of title; conclusively entitles beneficiary of
ownership
NOTE: An area of a family sized farm will have to vary

depending on whether it is non irrigated or irrigated
CERTIFICATION OF LAND TRANSFER EMANCIPATION PATENT
Preparatory stage Conclusion stage
STAGE does not operate to be the basis of it is the last document issued and basis for
transfer; in this stage all preliminary things transfer; document which grants rights,
must have been identified first; only a emancipation of farmer
preparatory document not a basis of
transfer
1. identification of covered land 1. Valuation of Land

2. identification of covered 2. Payment of that Valuation
beneficiaries constituting just compensation
3. boundaries of the land
REQUIREMENT requires that a Cert of Land Title has
requires that the land, character of the been issued and that valuation and
land, and the identity of the beneficiaries payment of just compensation have been
have been identified made; basis for transfer of ownership
There must be a just compensation before

private property is taken
is not an evidence of title. It merely serves as a valid basis for the issuance of
signifies that land and beneficiary have Certificate of Title, as it conclusively
EFFECTS been identified pursuant to PD 27; these entitles the beneficiary the rights of
beneficiaries have inchoate rights, not real absolute ownership over the subject land;
rights yet is not the certificate of title; is like sale
patents, need to be registered in registry
of deeds; become basis of issuance of
certificate of title; conclusively entitles
beneficiary of ownership
RETENTION RIGHTS given the chance by law to retain some of the land
holding
PD 27 essentially adopts the notion/concept of
transfer of ownership from land owner to covered In order to exercise the retention rights, the
beneficiaries it is necessary for this law to create landowner must:
balance; depriving one of his or her property is
prejudicial to a person; to balance the interests and 1. Express intention to exercise right by
for the common good of society; retention rights application
placed in this law because in here there is deprivation 2. The application must be filed on or before the
of ownership and property. deadline (August 27, 1986)
- File application to DAR; After the
In RA 3844 and Tenancy Law. There is no such thing deadline, as a general rule - before
as retention rights here, because the primary mode of
CARP- if land owner fails to apply for
implementing Agrarian reform is not through transfer
retention rights, land owner considered to
of ownership, just restriction on ownership, on
conduct or arrangements of parties. have waived retention rights
If a land owner has a landholding that is covered by

But in PD 27 here since it involves acquisition of lands PD 27 that land owner will have the right of retention,
and redistribution of lands there has to be form of a chance to remain portion of land not more than 7
protection and mitigation to effects of agrarian reform hectares; This right may be waived.
RA 6657 has rules on retention rights; court seems to
In all cases, the landowner may retain an area of favor the construction that within this RA those land
not more than 7 hectares if such landowner is owners whose lands were covered by PD 27 but failed
cultivating such are or will not cultivate it. to submit application on the deadline may still be
entitled to retention rights, but is already covered by
this RA, and only gives owners 5 hectares
DIGAN V MALINES G.R. NO. 183004, 6 Basic Requirements for the Exercise of the
DECEMBER 2017 Right to Retention
Retention right is the mechanism of the law to 1. Actual Direct Cultivation

mitigate the effects of compulsory land 2. Actual Indirect Cultivation (there are
acquisition, to strike a balance between the right of authorized representatives; ex: heirs of
the landowners and the tenant owner)
3. Intended cultivation
In this case, respondents could not be the
landowner referred to in P.D. No. 27 From the NOTE: ANY of these three may suffice as basis
wordings of P.D. No. 27, the "landowner" referred
to pertains to a person identified to be the owner of Who can exercise the right of retention?
tenanted rice or corn land as of 21 October 1972. Basically, it is the land owner who has the right of
This is only logical considering that tenanted rice retention
and corn lands were deemed acquired by the
Government in favor of the tenant-farmers as of the SAGUINSIN V LIBAN, ET AL., G.R. NO.
date of the issuance of P.D. No. 27, and any 189312, 11 JULY 2016
transfer of ownership thereof is void. As such, it
would not be possible to have a new "landowner" 1. Original Owner (Deceased)
after 21 October 1972, except if such land was 2. Current Owner (Buyer after 1972)
acquired by hereditary succession. 3. Heirs of the Original Owner
Thus, under P.D. No. 27, the right of retention may OG owner before he died he was bale to sell an
only be claimed and exercised by the landowner agricultural land primarily devoted to rice and
identified to be such as of 21 October 1972, and/or corn to Buyer- the Current Owner.
any of his heirs who inherited such agricultural
lands after the said date. Consequently, Issue: Who between the current owner and the
respondents, who were neither the owners of the heirs can exercise right of retention?
subject land when P.D. No. 27 was issued nor were
the heirs of the landowner thereof, could not claim Ruling:
the right of retention. In the case, the court needed to examine if
Current Owner had the right to exercise retention
right.
NOTE: By virtue of retention rights the land owner is
not deprived of all of the land holdings. Only deprived Buyer who bought the land after 1972, after PD
of part or huge part of land holding and he or she is 27 took effect, buyer cannot exercise right of
retention:
LEGAL STATUS OF PD 27
1. The sale, being in violation of the law is
void (the buyer is not considered a land Section 75, RA 6657, as amended:
owner because in the first-place sale is The provisions of {…} PD 27 not inconsistent with
void). Under PD 27 prohibits owners from this act shall have suppletory effect.
selling their agricultural lands primarily
on rice and corn
JUST COMPENSATION
2. The buyer is not a buyer in a good faith
(the fact that the land is tenanted it could
PD 27 RA 6657
have been easily ascertained by buyer to
basis for just is more complex,
examine first the physical status of the
compensation is more because there are
land, etc. buyer failed to examine due
simplistic. i.e., 2 ½ several factors, i.e., cost
diligence)
times the average of 3 of acquisition, current
normal crop years benchmarked value,
immediately preceding actual use and income,
Since buyer cannot exercise right of retention.,
the promulgation of the etc.
and since original land owner is dead, it is the
decree
heirs who may exercise the original landowner’s
right to retention if they can prove that the
decedent had no knowledge of OLT Coverage
Question:
over the subject property. As such, the intent
There is a land covered by PD 27. Subsequently RA
must be proven by the heirs seeking to exercise
6557 takes effect. Even when covered by PD 27 its
the right.
whole process is incomplete. Just Compensation will
be based by on PD 27 or RA 6657?
Answer:
PROHIBITION AGAINST TRANSFER
In PD 27 there is a prohibition against transfer.
LAND BANK V HEIRS OF CRUZ, GR NO 175175,
29 SEPTEMBER 2008
Title to land acquired pursuant to this decree or
land reform program of the government shall not
In such a case where the process of agrarian
be transferable except by hereditary
reform is still incomplete, and the process was
succession or to the Government…”
overtaken by the passage of RA 6657, the
evaluation must now be based mainly on Ra 6657
This prohibition is not absolute. There are exceptions: because the more complex basis is in the interest
1. Hereditary succession – passing land from and protection of the landowner which can give rise
decedent to the heirs to a more meaningful just compensation.
2. Transfer back to the government – if the
But it won’t be SOLELY based on RA 6657, just
beneficiary cannot continue to be the owner
MAINLY. PD 27 applies suppletory.
of land, beneficiary may sell back property to
government “The application of the process of agrarian reform
was still incomplete thus, the court held therein that
with the passage of RA No 6657 before its
ESTOLAS V MABALOT, G.R. NO. 133706, 7 completion, the process should now be completed
MAY 2006 under RA No 6657, with PD 27 {…} applying only
suppletory.”
In this case, according to the court, the
rationale for the emancipation is to give
beneficiaries the rights to possess or cultivate
and enjoy landholdings for themselves as
owner cultivators. These rights were granted
by the government because they’re tillers of
the land.
Thus, in order to ensure all these ideals of the

law, there is a restriction imposed so these
beneficiaries may not be tempted to transfer to
any persons property for money and go back
to the state before they were awarded by the
land
INTRODUCTION TO CARL, as amended
(R.A. 6657, as amended)
(MODULE 4-A) SCHEMA OF AMENDMENTS (R.A. 6657 - 9700)
HOW IS IT “COMPREHENSIVE”? R.A. 6657 - the original CARL

Features or Characteristics of CARL, as - signed on June 10, 1988
amended, which justifies it being called - effective on June 15, 1988
“COMPREHENSIVE”:
R.A. 7881 - 1995
1. Not limited to riceland and cornland
- clarified the meaning of
Coverage has been expanded to “agricultural lands”
without regard to the primary crops therein. “agriculture” and “agricultural
activity”
“agricultural lands” includes both private and public - added restrictions in the
agricultural lands. conversion of lands to fishpond
and prawn
2. Not mere land transfer
After land transfer, farmers are not left on their own. R.A. 7905 - 1995
They will be aided and trained on how to fully and - created the Support Services
efficiently use human and natural resources. Office, recognizing that support
services to the farmer
Compare to P.D. 27 (Tenant Emancipation beneficiaries must be reinforced
Decree) and strengthened to project the
farmers to success
Coverage of landholdings to be covered under P.D.
27:
- considered as a major reform in
1. Private agricultural lands 1995
2. which are primarily devoted to rice and corn R.A. 8532
3. in which there are share tenancy arrangements
- 1998
being implemented - extended the implementation of
CARP until the year 2008
(nicknamed as CARPER)
- because R.A. 6657 had a
3. Keeping up with the times deadline which unfortunately
Recognizing the impact of technology and was not met
development on agriculture, agro-industrialization is a
recognized component of agrarian reform. R.A. 9700 - 2009
The law recognizes that the Government should
- among other provisions, R.A.
provide some forms of technology, and training and 9700 extended the
education on these technologies that will help these implementation of acquisition
farmer beneficiaries to sustain their agricultural and distribution of lands to until
activities. June 30, 2014
- because upon assessment of
4. Women’s rights recognized the Phil. gov’t, the law was still
To address anecdotal reports of sex discrimination, not fully implemented
the law expressly recognizes the inherent and - (NOTE: deadline is still not met)
independent right of women to own and control lands.
They experience discrimination because allegedly, Does this deadline make these laws functus
male farmers are more favored in the granting of lands oficio?
and in the identification of farmer beneficiaries. Not really because the nature of the deadline is to
provide for the gov’t to act in accordance with the
5. Dispute resolution mechanism timeline identified by the congress.
Addressing concerns over dispute resolution
mechanism in the past, the law establishes a dispute This deadline of June 3, 2014 does not abolish the
resolution mechanism particularly applicable to DAR nor does it prohibit the gov’t from further taking
agrarian disputes. agrarian reform programs beyond the deadline.
6. Environment and ecology

Agricultural activities have environmental and
ecological implications which are now recognized and
addressed under the law.
GOVERNMENT OFFICES INVOLVED IN The Provincial Agrarian Reform Coordinating
AGRARIAN REFORM Committee is not a rule-making body, it just
coordinates and proposes policy for the PARC to
consider.
Illustration under PARC:
3. Dispute Resolution
Carried out by the quasi-judicial bodies within the
framework of CARL
Agrarian disputes are first lodged in the Provincial

Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board (PARAB). Next,
appeals are to be filed in the Regional Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board (RARAB) and ultimately,
further appeals are filed in the Department of Agrarian
Reform Adjudication Board (DARAB).
Source: Department of Agrarian Reform Official Website Illustration under DARAB:

(https://www.dar.gov.ph/about-us/org-structure/)
Three-Pronged Approach
1. Implementation
Carried out by the Central Office (OSEC) and the
Field Offices (Regional, Provincial, City or Municipal)
the OSEC together with its sub-offices cater to the

different needs, situations, and circumstances per
region, province, city, and municipality, there are Land Bank of the Philippines
localized Field Offices excluding ARMM
The Three Pronged-Approach is found within the
2. Rule-Making Power framework of DAR. BUT there’s also an aspect of
an exercise of quasi-legislative powers granted to an agrarian reform which needs to be addressed by a
executive office because of its expertise and separate governmental entity/institution because its is
specialization on the matter. (limited rule-making a specialized aspect which requires a more specific
ability) expertise which is the financing side for the
purpose of payment of just compensation.
Carried out by the Presidential Agrarian Reform
Council (PARC), which is chaired by the President of Land Bank is the official financial intermediary for
the Philippines and its Vice-President is the Secretary the operation of Agrarian Reform.
of the DAR. The PARC’s Secretariat is headed by the
Office of the Secretary of the DAR. Agrarian reform involves the exercise of eminent
domain, because there is acquisition of private
PARC promulgates rules and regulations pertaining to property there must be just compensation. LBP was
the implementation of agrarian reform. (NOTE: it is created to address this.
the president who is the chairman of the PARC)
Davao Fruits Corp. v. Land Bank of the
Philippines (G.R. No. 181566, Mar. 9, 2011)
“Once an expropriation proceeding for the

acquisition of private agricultural lands is
commenced by the DAR, the indispensable role
of the LBP begins, because it is the one ordered
to pay the landowner. It can agree or disagree with
the valuation of DAR, and in case of the latter, it
can revoke the judicial power of determination of
just compensation
COVERAGE UNDER RA 6557 COMPREHENSIVE The intention was: agrarian reform would be limited
AGRARIAN REFORM LAW to agricultural activities involving cultivation of soil
(Module 4 – B ) and land and whatever is planted in the land; agro-
farming and agricultural activities pertaining to
cultivation of land are two dissimilar things, they do
NOTE: Although RA 6557 is comprehensive relative not involve same activities or principles or how they
to the scope of PD 27, still, the coverage of RA 6577 work
is delineated; does not apply to all lands in
Philippines; there are rules and criteria before a 2. Constitutional deliberations show that
particular land will be covered by RA 6577; there are the term “agricultural” was adopted to
specific exemptions and exclusions mean excluding “piggery, poultry, and
livestock”
“AGRICULTURE” AND “AGRICULTURAL
ACTIVITY”
Lex Specialis Definition
NOTE: Once declared unconstitutional then it is
General rule in StatCon is that in construing a law we stricken down in the law; In RA 6557 it should only
must apply the ordinary and plain meaning as default. mean cultivation of soil without the phrase raising of
livestock poultry or fish; but the same was already
Although, there are some cases that need to be addressed in the amendment via RA 7881
specially defined. Such is the case for these two
terms RA 7881
(b) Agriculture, Agricultural Enterprise or
Unamended phrase of the definition of Agricultural Activity means the cultivation of the
agriculture/agriculture enterprise/agricultural activity soil, planting of crops, (growing of fruit trees,
in RA 6557, Section 3, Paragraph B: including the harvesting of such farm products, and
other far activities and practice performed by a
(b) Agriculture, Agricultural Enterprise or farmer in conjunction with such farming operations
Agricultural Activity means the cultivation of the done by persons whether natural or judicial.
soil, planning of cops, growing of fruit trees, raising
of livestock, poultry or fish including harvesting Question:
of such farm products, and other farm activities and Why is the definition of “agriculture” and “agricultural
practices performed by a farmer in conjunction activity” important?
which such farming operations done by persons
whether natural or juridical Answer:
HOLY TRINITY REALTY V. DELA CRUZ, ET
Not only is Agricultural activity cultivation, it also AL., G.R. NO. 200454, 22 OCTOBER 2014
involves raising of livestock, poultry or fish
The spirit of agrarian reform laws is not to distribute
LUZ FARMS V. HONORABLE SECRETARY OF lands per se, but to enable the landless to own
DAR, ET. AL, G.R. NO. 86889, 4 DECEMBER land for cultivation. This is why the basic
1990 qualification laid down for the intended beneficiary
is to show the willingness, aptitude and ability to
Raising of livestock or poultry is added to cultivate and make the land as productive as
agricultural activity; this part was questioned in the possible. This requirement conforms with the
case; 2 years after the effectivity of RA 6557, this policy discretion set in the 1987 Constitution to the
particular inclusion of “raising of livestock our effect that agrarian reform laws shall be founded
poultry or fish” was unconstitutional according to on the right of the landless farmworkers to own,
petitioners, because it was not in the meaning of directly, or collectively the lands they till.
agrarian reform in the constitution; SC had to dig
for reasons for deliberations in order to discover Agrarian reform law is not just to distribute lands for
what is the intent behind the term Agrarian Reform the sake of distributing lands; the deeper purpose of
and Agricultural activity ; was the intent to include this law is to distribute lands and subsequently enable
raising poultry or fish and livestock? Because if landless farmers to own land for themselves; ultimate
yes, then it is not unconstitutional since it is in line hope objective is to grant them land for cultivation,
with the intent of the constitution, BUT if the intent and in order to be given land for cultivation, lands
is to exclude them, then it is unconstitutional. need to be susceptible for cultivation, agriculture or
agricultural activities or enterprise
RULING: “raising of livestock, poultry or fish”
is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. More specifically the term agriculture, agricultural
activities, agricultural enterprise together with their
1. The intention was to exclude agro- common meaning have something to do with how we
farming activities from agrarian reform determine a land to be covered under the law,
under the constitution
because when determining coverage there are criteria
or rules NOTE: Issuance of notice of coverage will have to be
based by law and by facts
COVERAGE: CRITERIA AND RULES
Necessary Link in Construing the Law Question:
What is the Manner of Determination of
Agricultural Land (covered under RA 6557)? :
1. Coverage:
Agricultural Lands (private or public; Answer:
specifically defined under the law; we have to We will not go to the step by step process but instead
link this provision to definition of agricultural go to the Indispensable items recognized by
jurisprudence
land; plain meaning rule will not apply,
because agricultural land has specific REPUBLIC V. SALVADOR LOPEZ AGRI-
meaning withing framework of RA 6557) BUSINESS CORP., G.R. NO. 178895, 10
January 2011
2. Definition:
Lands deemed to Agricultural activities, as The Court, without diving into the
defined in the law, and not classified as technicalities recognized whether a land is
an agricultural land needs factual basis.
otherwise (lands are considered agricultural
Court laid down that DAR must:
lands if devoted to agricultural activities and
not classified as mineral, as forest, etc.) 1. On Site Ocular Inspection
Affords DAR the opportunity to collect facts
3. Lex Specialis Definition: that will serve as basis whether land is
Agriculture or Agricultural Activity has a agricultural or not
special definition under the law (holds the key
2. Actual Investigation
to determining whether a land is agricultural
The surrounding circumstances such as
or within coverage of RA 6557) documents, testimonies, etc. gathered by
DAR; all evidences will be collated
RULES ON COVERAGE All the evidence collected from 1&2 must be

2 Elements of Agricultural Land based from the collated
meaning of law (whether private or public):
3. Conclusion based on Confluence
and Totality of Factual
1. Lands devoted to Agricultural Activities Circumstances
2. Non-Classified of Mineral forests, Residential gathered from step 1 and 2 and also supported
Commercial or Industrial Land by them
Once a land has these 2 elements then it is covered

by the operation of law, either voluntary or CLASSIFICATION, RECLASSIFICATION, AND
compulsory; then notice of coverage will be CONVERSION
issued: (Part 2)
General Procedure of COMPULSORY NOT WITHIN THE COVERAGE OF THE RA6657

COVERAGE (DAR A.O NO. 7-2011)
“Not Classified as Mineral, Forest, Residential,
Industrial, or Commercial Land.”
Database and Listing Lands classified as such cannot be disposed of or
(list of DAR; if not in list, alienated by the State.
Issuance of Notice of
then not considered of Coverage
agricultural land within
meaning of RA 6557) -Dumo v. Republic, G.R. No. 218269, 6 June 2018
• Fundamentally, mineral and forest cannot be
alienated by the State.
• Residential, industrial, or commercial land are
lands not susceptible to agricultural activities and
beyond the ambit of RA 6657.
Series of Notice of
Posting and Publication
Coverage This is important because it delineates the kinds of
land classified under RA 6657.
RECLASSFICATION
Not necessarily because after the effectivity of RA
It is the act of the State in changing the classification 6657, there can still be reclassification but there must
of the land by some governmental act and it is a valid be an additional governmental act done in order for
State power. the land be outside the operation of the law. This is
called conversion.
Example:
CONVERSION
Reclassification + After the effectivity of RA 6657 +

Agricultural Industrial Conversion = Landholding outside of the operation of
law
Conversion, which can only be done by DAR, must be

added in order to put the landholding outside the
Rules on Classification operation of law.
Difference between Reclassification and

Was the reclassification done by an authorized Conversion
person?
In Ross, et al. v. DAR, et, al., G.R. No. 132477, 31
This needs examination of charter or pertinent rules August 2005:
whether the government entity has the power to
reclassify RECLASSIFICATION CONVERSION
Can be done by Can only be done by
NOTE: We will not focus so much on authority. In the government agencies the DAR
exam it will just be stipulated if the government entity authorized by law to
has the power to classify or not. reclassify
An official government An official government
When was the land reclassified? act specifying how act of changing the
We must know if it is before or after the effectivity of agricultural lands shall current use of a piece
RA 6657 be utilized for non- of agricultural land into
agricultural uses. some other use.
Before Effectivity
If before effectivity plus reclassification alone will
result to taking a landholding outside of the operation CREBA V. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN
of the law – meaning its no longer an agricultural land REFORM, G.R. NO. 183409, 18 JUNE 2010
Reclassification alone + Before the effectivity of RA As a result, if a land was reclassified only after the
6657 = Takes a landholding outside of the operation effectivity of CARP, mere reclassification does not
of the law. automatically allow a landowner to change its use.
The landowner must undergo to the process of
conversion before he/she is permitted to use the
HEIRS OF LUNA V. AFABLE, ET. AL., G.R. NO.
agricultural land for other purposes and, therefore
188299, 23 JANUARY 2013
ALANGILAN REALTY V. OFFICE OF THE

PRESIDENT, G.R. NO. 180471, 26 MARCH 2010
CREBA V. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN
REFORM, G.R. NO. 183409, 18 JUNE 2010
The exclusive jurisdiction to classify and
identify landholdings for coverage under CARP
It bears stressing that the said date of effectivity of
is reposed in the DAR Secretary. The matter of
Republic Act No. 6657 served as the cut-off period
coverage, […] is strictly part of the administrative
for automatic reclassifications or rezoning of
implementation of the CARP, a matter well within
agricultural lands that no longer require any DAR
the competence of the DAR Secretary
conversion clearance or authority
NOTE: A pending proceeding for conversion does
not bar the coverage of a parcel of land. -Section 10,
After Effectivity
DAR A.O. No 7-2011
Reclassification alone + After the effectivity of RA
6657 = Does not take a landholding outside of the
operation of the law. Section 10: Conversion Proceeding Not a bar to
Coverage: Absent any final order granting
Does that mean therefore that no more conversion, no act or attempt directed to changing
reclassification are allowed after the effectivity of the use of the land from agricultural to non-
RA 6657?
agricultural, shall affect the land’s coverage
pursuant to the CARP
EXEMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
Example:
Section 10, RA 6657
Which of the properties of Pedro is covered by
CARL, as amended?
Section 10: Exemptions and Exclusions: Lands
actually, directly and exclusively used and found
to be necessary for parks, wildlife, forest reserves,
Lot 1 Lot 2 reforestation, fish sanctuaries and breeding
Reclassified as Reclassified as
grounds, watersheds, and mangroves, national
residential on 20 June residential on 25 defense, school sites and campuses including
1965 by the National November 1993 by a experimental farm stations operated by public or
Housing Authority Presidential private schools for educational purposes, seeds
Proclamation and seedlings research and pilot production
centers, church sites and convents appurtenant
How would DAR determine and approve thereto, mosque sites and Islamic centers
conversion? appurtenant thereto, communal burial grounds and
cemeteries, penal colonies and penal farms
In Roxas and Co., Inc. v. Court of Appeals, G.R. actually worked by the inmates, government and
No. 127876, 17 December 1999, there are two private research and quarantine centers and all
indispensable requirements or procedures that the lands with eighteen percent (18%) slope and over,
DAR has to undertake in order to validly approve an except those already developed shall be exempt
application of reclassification: from the coverage of this Act.
1. Investigation / Ocular Inspection

NOTE: Atty does not expect us to memorize all of the
To gather facts as to the physical status of the land enumeration. He just wants us to remember the
requirement under the “actually, directly, and
- exclusively used”
2. Conference with the Occupants of the
Land Statement of the Rule
1. State-owned agricultural lands are excluded
To gather pieces of evidences from testimony
by reclassification
GONZALO PUYAT AND SONS, INC. V. 2. Through Presidential Proclamations alone
ALCAIDE, G.R. NO. 167952, 1 FEBRUARY 2020, 3. Provided that the land is actually, directly
ET. SEQ. and exclusively used for the purpose
indicated
The importance of conducting an ocular
inspection cannot be understated, since it is one NOTE: Regardless of the Date of Reclassification
of the steps designed to comply with the
requirements of administrative due process
Example:
Which of the properties of the State is covered by
Atty: I have a question that I will be asking in the CARL, as amended?
assessments. I wont be answering this here
We have a LGU wanting to expropriate Lot no 1 Lot 1 Lot 2

(Agricultural land) in order to utilize it as a Road or Reclassified as Reclassified as
Highway project. school site by school site by
Presidential Presidential
There will now be a change of actual use Proclamation on 12 Proclamation on 11
June 1988 and is June 1988 and is a
Under RA 6657, reclassification will not efect
being used as a vacant lot
automatically current use school site
Will LGU need conversion before it can expropriate
for road or highway project? Lot 2. Provided that it is devoted to agricultural land.
AFCL: No, in the case of Fortich vs. Corona G.R.

No. 131457, August 19,1999 it was ruled that Local CENTRAL MINDANAO UNIVERSITY V. THE
Government Units need not obtain the approval of DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM
the DAR to convert or reclassify lands from ADJUDICATION BOARD, G.R. NO. 100091, 22
agricultural to non-agricultural use OCTOBER 1992
As to the determination of when and what lands However, this was altered by DILLENA V.
are found to be necessary for use by the CMU, the ALCARAZ, ET. AL., G.R. NO. 204045, 14
school is in the best position to resolve and DECEMBER 2017.
answer the question and pass upon the
problem of its needs in relation to its avowed Tenants here are also under RA 3844 and own
objectives for which the land was given to it by the prawn farms.
State. Neither the DARAB nor the Court of Appeals
has the right to substitute its judgment or discretion In this case, the Court held that:
on this matter, unless the evidentiary facts are so 1. Existing workers or tenants in fishponds
manifest as to show that the CMU has no real for enjoy rights under other laws (perhaps
the land labor laws), not under agrarian laws
2. Leasehold arrangements under RA 3844
DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM V. cannot be said to operate in fishponds and
DECS, G.R. NO. 158228, 23 MARCH 2004 prawn farms
3. RA 7881, insofar as it excludes fish ponds
The importance of the phrase "actually, directly, from agrarian law, also supersedes RA
and exclusively used and found to be necessary"
3844
cannot be understated, as what respondent DECS
would want us to do by not taking the words in their The above pronouncement means that tenants and
literal and technical definitions. The words of the workers in prawn farms and fish ponds will not
law are clear and unambiguous. Thus, the "plain enjoy the rights of RA 3844 but enjoys rights on
meaning rule" or verba legis in statutory some other laws such as labor laws.
construction is applicable in this case. Where the
words of a statute are clear, plain and free from
ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and Lands Devoted to Raising Livestock Poultry or
applied without attempted interpretation Swine
Section 10, RA 6657, as amended by RA 7881 Conditions

LUZ FARMS V. SECRETARY OF DAR, G.R. NO.
b) Private lands actually, directly and exclusively 86889, 4 DECEMBER 1990, and the amendment
used for prawn farms and fishponds shall be in RA 7881
exempt from the coverage of this Act: Provided,
That said prawn farms and fishponds have not The court held that the following conditions must
been distributed and Certificate of Land Ownership concur:
Award (CLOA) issued to agrarian reform 1. Land must have been used for raising
beneficiaries under the Comprehensive Agrarian livestock, poultry, or swine before the
Reform Program effectivity of CARL
2. It is still being used at present as a land
SANCHEZ V. MARIN, G.R. NO. 171346, 19 for raising livestock, poultry, or swine
OCTOBER 2007
unless utilized for other purposes not
agricultural in nature
Before the exemption of prawn farms and fish
farms, there were already vested rights granted to
tenants (especially if they are under RA 3844). The
later exemption cannot be retroactively applied to
them.
HEIRS OF ARCE, SR. V. DAR, G.R. NO. 228508,
25 JULY 2018
Supreme Court held that:
[The] subject lands remained to be non-
1. RA 3844 and RA 6657 (unamended) both
agricultural, despite the fact that they were being
cover prawn and fish farms.
used, not only as a grazing pasture, but as a
2. Due to coverage, vested rights have been
production area where napier grass were grown to
bestowed to tenants in fishponds and
supply food for the livestock maintained in the
prawn farms
subject lands and in the Novaliches property.
3. Later exemption cannot impair the vested
rights under RA 3844 "Feedlot operation", the method adopted by the
petitioners in rearing their livestock, was
Indubitably, despite the amendments to Section 10
recognized by the DAR, in Administrative Order
of Republic Act No. 6657, the petitioner’s right to
tenancy and security of tenure over the subject No. 01, Series of 2004 (AO No. 01-04).”
fishpond must still be honored.
Who has jurisdiction to declare exemption?
[It] is the DAR Secretary who is vested with such
jurisdiction and authority to exempt and/or exclude a
property from CARP coverage based on the factual
circumstances of each case and in accordance with
law and applicable jurisprudence. (Milestone Farms,
Inc. v. Office of the President, G.R. No. 182332, 23
February 2011)
LAND ACQUISITIION UNDER CARL, AS Originally there are 3 modes (but now reduced to 2):
AMENDED 1. Voluntary Offer for Sale
(MODULE 4-C) 2. Voluntary Land Transfer
3. Compulsory Land Acquisition
NOTE: It states that land owner must register in
accordance of provisions of RA 6557 within 180
days of effectivity of the law (must register at DAR)
“Voluntary”
REGISTRATION land owners themselves willingly parted with their
Land Owner property; not anymore, a coerced or forced transfer
or transaction; does not technically fall under
the one who should register eminent domain; because eminent domain deals
with forced acquisition
the one who owns agricultural lands or who claims to
own agricultural lands (within 180 days from Voluntary Offer for Sale
Effectivity of the Law)
Means that land owner offers a portion of the
Land Owner Could be: covered lands to DAR for voluntary sale; only a
1. Natural Person “portion” because there’s a land to be retained by the
land owner:
2. Juridical Person
1. Offers portions of covered lands to DAR for
3. Government Entity
voluntary sale; it is DAR who buys property
2. Offer is revocable, unless accepted by DAR
NOTE: Registration must not only involve identity of
land owner but also other relevant information or data 3. Landowner gets incentives (additional 5%
concerning the agricultural land cash payment)
Question: Why choose “Voluntary offer of sale”?

“within 180 days from Effectivity of the Law” Answer: Voluntary offer for sale only needs a
voluntary owner, acceptance from DAR, execution of
Question: Is it disabling law, because of the short documents, and voluntarily surrender of deeds and
period given? titles
Answer: No.
Illustration
Purpose of Registration
Registration as required under RA 6557 is to

encourage land owners to give the necessary
information to the government for the purposes of
agrarian reform. It will be easier for the government to
receive data than go out there and conduct
investigation and etc.
This will be an opportunity for land owner to help

government for the identification. Registration within
the 180 day will entitle the land owner to incentives
NOTES:
• Effect of Registration is equivalent to incentives,
as determined by PARC
• Entitlement to incentives is only for within that
180-day period Voluntary Land Transfer
1. Voluntary Agreement with Qualified

Question: If the land owner does not register will he Beneficiaries
or she still be covered by the law? 2. Direct Transfer Form Landowner to qualified
Answer: YES. It is not the registration which makes beneficiary, but DAR supervises
you covered by the law; it is the provisions of the law 3. Does not involve payment of money by the
that determines coverage state, except when beneficiary applied for
loan with LBP
NOTE: Effect of Non-Registration DOES NOT MEAN
Non-Coverage
Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) is mandated to
MODES OF ACQUISITION finance transactions/transfers under RA 6557; may
extend loans to qualified beneficiaries; proceeds of
loan have to be directly given to land owners; B. Landowner
beneficiaries will have to pay in amortization basis The owner of the land must also be identified with
particularity, whether voluntary or compulsory, to
Illustration ascertain to whom payment is done.
C. Beneficiary
To whom the acquired lands are to be awarded.
2. Notice of Coverage (First Notice)

Informs the landowner that a specific land that he/she
owns is considered as covered by the DAR based on
the definition of agricultural land under RA 6657.
Nature of the Two-Notice Requirement:
Part of the administrative due process in compulsory
acquisition.
Purpose:
Affords the landowner the opportunity to (1) contest
coverage and (2) exercise retention rights within the
time limit.
3. Public Hearing, Investigation, and Inspection

NOTE: All voluntary land transfers will still be Field Investigation (Sec. 68, DAO 07-11)
considered valid before June 30, 2008. After that date • DAR will have to make a confirmatory procedure to
then considered invalid already. confirm the coverage of the land by conducting
public hearing, further investigation and further
inspection.
Compulsory Acquisition
Purpose:
1. Involuntary Upon service of the Notice of Coverage, DAR has
2. Forced already conducted an ocular inspection of the land.
3. Coerced And After, in order to confirm the data acquired
through identification by recognized geodetic
NOTE: practices (e.g. use of “mojon” - cylindrical marks), a
• It is compulsory in a sense that it is involuntary, field investigation is further conducted.
forced, and coerced against the will of the
landowner. The data of the DAR - size, location, metes and
• It is the State who acquires the property against the bounds, land itself, etc.- is confirmed by the field
will of the landowne . investigation.
• The State exercises its fundamental power of
eminent domain and police power. Parties Invited:
• Eminent Domain is involved here. Landowners and beneficiaries are invited in the field
investigation for clarification of the data gathered by
Process the geodetic engineers in behalf of DAR.
(see pg. 36 for picture illustration for the flow chart) 4. Notice of Valuation and Acquisition (Second
Notice)
Caveat (by Atty. Felongco): Signifies that the subject land was issued a Notice of
• This is a simplified flow chart for purposes of it to be Coverage and confirmatory procedures have been
a digestible presentation of the general procedure done and upon perusal of the available data by the
based on DAR A.O. No. 07, s. of 2011 DAR has been initially valued by the latter as what
• We shall discuss the general procedures and appears in the Notice of Valuation and Acquisition
matters of jurisprudence and important principles. which consists of an offer.
1. Identification GR: Notice of Valuation and Acquisition must be
The whole process has to start somewhere and the personally served to the landowner.
process cannot proceed without knowing who should
be involved, what should be involved, and to whom XPN: If despite due diligence and substantial
the process is being undertaken. investigation on the part of the government to
ascertain the landowner, the latter still cannot be
Ascertain the following: ascertained, the DAR may resort to service by
A. Land publication.
Technical descriptions, including the metes and
bounds. The address, location, etc. of the land.
In addition to service, there must also be posting of Landowner is given 30 days within which to respond
the Notice of Valuation and Acquisition posted in to the Notice of Valuation and Acquisition.
designated conspicuous places. (NOTE: Under the
rules, these “designated conspicuous places” are Forwarded to the LBP:
specifically enumerated. i.e. Hall of Justice, Brgy. Whether landowner responds or not, the matter is
Hall, etc.) forwarded to LBP, as the next phase will involve
money. This is where the indispensable role of the
IMPORTANCE (of valuation): LBP begins because the LBP is the identified and
Under the rules, the portion of the initial value in the designation financial intermediary of the government
Notice of Valuation and Acquisition is considered as in the implementation of agrarian reform
the initial offer of the DAR to purchase your land.
6.1 Offer was Accepted
Therefore, value is indispensable in the Notice of LBP shall pay the landowner and in turn, the
Valuation and Acquisition because without the landowner must execute the necessary documents in
valuation there is no initial offer. And without an initial favor of the government.
offer, the landowner will not have a basis for his reply.,
either accepting or contesting it. Hence, making the 6.2 Offer was Declined
process irregular. Forwarded to the LBP:
The government will have to deposit the initial
EFFECT OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE TWO- valuation through consignment in the court to be able
NOTICE REQUIREMENT to proceed with the process.
• 1999: Non-compliance of or irregularity in the two-
notice requirement are just characterized as purely NOTE: It is important that in these phases there is
procedural and results into remand of the case already available money or amount to be deposited or
for DAR to correct its mistakes because these paid because deposit or payment is a pre-requisite to
requirements are found under the Rules of possession.
Procedure in Administrative Cases. Therefore, this
will not result into a declaration of nullity of the whole Payment or Deposit: Pre-requisite to Possession
proceeding. (Roxas & Co. v. CA, G.R. No. 127876, This initial valuation must be deposited for purposes
17 Dec. 1999) of enabling the DAR to possess the property.
• 2011: The case of Roxas & Co. v. CA is no longer In the framework of R.A. 6657, in order that this
the controlling rule. The SC held that non- precedent of just compensation is satisfied, there
compliance of or irregularity in the two-notice must be payment or deposit.
requirement is not just a procedural violation
because the two-notice requirement are put in place Initial Valuation:
in oder to afford the affected landowner with due The amount to be deposited must be based on the
process of law. It is a violation of due process initial valuation by the DAR, not the valuation in the
because there is an administrative law/process that summary administrative proceeding. (LBP v. Heirs of
must be adhered to, otherwise there will be a Trinidad, G.R. No. 161834, 11 Aug. 2010)
violation of the due process clause.
Requirement:
• Non-compliance is a violation of the The deposit is required in order for land acquisition
constitutional right to due process. The whole under RA 6657 to be confiscatory and consistent with
proceeding is null and void. (Heirs of Deleste v. the principle of eminent domain.
LBP, G.R. No. 169913, 8 June 2011)
NOTE: Valuation through summary administrative
5. Landowner Did Not Reply proceeding will have to come after payment or
Landowner will be deemed to have waived the deposit.
opportunity to reply and therefore, it automatically
proceeds to the next phase which is the deposit by the Deposited amount may be withdrawn
government of the initial valuation in the LBP. (NOTE: immediately. (LBP v. DARAB, G.R. No. 183279, 25
deposit is done through consignment in the court) Jan. 2010)
Upon payment of the value of that property, DAR can If the landowner does not reply or if he/she replied but
now immediately take possession of the property. declined, the government will not be taken hostage by
the actions of the landowner. Agrarian reform will
NOTE: When you become lawyers, it is important to have to proceed regardless of what the landowner
advise your clients to make a reply. does. Therefore, in this case, payment is deposited in
the LBP in favor of the landowner. Landowner may
6. Landowner Replied withdraw the amount deposited even during the
Landowner’s Response (Sec. 76, DAO 07.11) pendency of the process, even when there is question
on the initial valuation, even when it reaches the court
Time Limit:
for judicial determination of just compensation, even
when the landowner rejects the initial offer.
• Withdrawable even when landowner questions or

rejects the initial offer.
• Because the landowner is already deprived of the
property.
• To hold otherwise would sustain an oppressive
exercise of eminent domain.
7. DAR Takes Immediate Possession of the

Property
It is important that the matter is forwarded to the LBP
because after the reply of the landowner or lack
thereof, the LBP will have to pay. And this payment,
whether direct or through deposit, will now warrant the
immediate possession of the property by the DAR.
DAR takes immediate possession of the property

because just compensation is considered to have
been paid.
Immediate Possession: Conditioned on Payment

Deposit of Payment:
When landowner does not respond or rejects the
valuation, DAR can take possession by deposit of the
valuation amount. When landowner accepts.
Forwarded to LBP:
Whether landowner responds or not, the matter is
forwarded to LBP, as the next phase will involve
money.
8. DAR Requests RD to Cancel TCT and Issue

New TCT to the Republic
Request to cancel the existing TCT is done after the
DAR takes possession of the property.
The RD does no require the DAR to present the

owner’s duplicate copy in the cancellation of the old
TCT and in the issuance of a new TCT in favor of the
Republic.
Cancellation of TCTs and Issuance of New Ones:

Culmination of Acquisition
Deviation:
Considered as an involuntary dealing, acquisition
under RA 6657 does not require the surrender of the
owner’s duplicate copy.
GR: In order that for the TCT to be cancelled and a

new one to be issued, the owner’s duplicate copy
should be surrendered.
The general rule does not apply in proceedings for

compulsory acquisition because this is an involuntary
dealing.
New Owner:
When the existing TCT is cancelled, a new one is
issued under the name of the Government. The
lands acquired then become subject to re-distribution
Illustration of the Proces
Go directly to the court.
SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS TO
PRELIMINARILY DETERMINE JUST Appeal to RARAD or DARAB in grievance against
COMPENSATION administrative determination (merely preliminary) of
just compensation is within the original jurisdiction of
In Association of Small Landowners v. Sec. of the Special Agrarian Court. (Section 57, RA 6657, as
DAR, G.R. No. 78742, 14 July 1989 (see module 1 amended & LBP v. Spouses Chu, G.R. No. 192345,
for case digest) 29 March 2017)
Not Final as a Rule Just Compensation

Determination of Just Compensation by DAR is not Rules and Jurisprudence
final – unless accepted by the parties – and therefore,
not in violation of the judicial prerogative to fix just In Association of Small Landowners v. Sec. of
compensation. DAR, G.R. No. 78742, 14 July 1989, “Just”
compensation is:
- Full and fair
Agrarian Dispute
- Real and substantial
When any interested party does not agree with the
- Equivalent of the property
administrative determination of just compensation, an
-
agrarian dispute arises cognizable by the regular
How do we know if the amount is “full and fair”, “real
courts.
and substantial” and the “equivalent of the property”?
Determination is first done by DAR. When landowner How do we measure if the amount corresponds to just
replies to Notice of Valuation and Acquisition and compensation?
declines the offer, the LBP deposits amount still but
matter will be referred to adjudication branch of DAR DAR and the courts may ascertain it through facts.
for administrative determination of just compensation. However, these facts must be based to some factors
Adjudication branch of DAR are the quasi-judicial under the law.
bodies which will facilitate the summary proceedings
or primarily determine just compensation. Question:
Determination here is NOT final since determination Property was taken under PD 27 under Operation
of just compensation is a judicial prerogative. It is only Land Transfer but due to some factors, acquisition
final if accepted by parties and thus, does not was not completed even after June 15, 1998 or when
encroach their judicial prerogative RA 6657 became effective. Thus during process of
acquisition, there is no payment nor determination of
If landowner disagrees with determination just just compensation. What law should govern the
compensation through summary proceedings, they factors?
can still go to regular court to settle agrarian dispute.
Answer:
Who determines? Factors under RA 6657 govern.
• Using the factors under RA 6657 rather than
If initial valuations is > P10m
under PD 27, would result into the full, fair,
It is Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD)
and complete value.
• Applicable only to those lands which have
If initial valuations is P10m-P50m
been acquired under PD 27 but the process
It is the Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator
remains to be completed after the effectivity
(RARAD)
of RA 6657.
• This retroactive application is justified on
If initial valuations is < P50m
equitable considerations. (LBP v. Dumlao
It is the Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication
2008 case)
Board (DARAB)
Importance of these factors
For administrative Determination
NOTE: This hierarchy is only for the distribution of
tasks to manage the case loads. This should NOT be
• Mandatory
construed as a hierarchy for appeal. Since if you still
disagree with the administrative determination of just • Valuation is invalid if not followed
compensation, then the courts are still granted the • Invalidity of Valuation does not invalidate the
judicial prerogative to handle these cases no matter proceedings
where you started (i.e. in PARAD, RARAD, or
DARAB) *Spouses Lee, et. al v. LBP, G.R. No. 170422, 7
March 2008
Hierarchy not for Appeal For Judicial Determination

• Adhering to the factors is, as a rule, payment is made in shares of stock, LBP bonds,
mandatory other properties or assets, tax credits, and other
• Deviation is allowed in the exercise of judicial things of value equivalent to the amount of just
discretion, so long as it is supported by compensation.”
reasoned explanation grounded on evidence
found on record (Alfonso vs. LBP, G.R. No.
181912, 29 November 2016) RETENTION RIGHTS
• Without such explanation, the deviation is
considered tainted with grave abuse of Sec. 2, RA 6657
discretion amounting to lack or excess of In no case shall retention by the landowner
jurisdiction which would result to the exceed five (5) hectares. Three (3) hectares may
determination being null and void (LBP v. be awarded to each child of the landowner,
Honeycomb Farms, Corp., G.R. No. 169903, subject to the following qualifications: (1) that he
29 February 2012) is at least fifteen (15) years of age; and (2) that he
is actually tilling the land or directly managing the
Question:
farm
RA 6657 already took effect and all lands are now
covered. However, example this agricultural land is
reclassified to residential. BUT remember that lands Character of Retention Rights
reclassified after effectivity of RA 6657 must also be
coupled with order of conversion by DAR, Considered as constitutionally agreed but legislatively
reclassification alone is not enough. Since no determined.
conversion yet, then land was acquired under DAR
notwithstanding the reclassification. Is the land Balances the effect of compulsory acquisition since it
valued as residential land for purposes of just has adverse effects on the landowner
compensation? Important to note that residential
lands are usually more expensive than agricultural Waivable right
lands.
Retention ≠ Exemption
Answer:
Basis is still agricultural land since it is still covered by Retention presupposes that the land is covered, but a
RA 6657. “The potential use of a property should not specific area is retained by landowner
be the principal criterion for determining just
compensation for this will be contrary to the well- Exemption or exclusion entails that the entirety of the
settled doctrine that the fair market value of an land is altogether outside the scope of the law
expropriated property is determined by its character
and its price at the time of taking, not its potential Daez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 133507, 17
February 2000
uses. If at all, the potential use of the property or its
FACTS:
‘adaptability for conversion in the future is a factor, not
Eudosia Daez, now deceased, was the owner of a
the ultimate in determining just compensation” (LBP
4.1685-hectare riceland in Barangay Lawa,
v. Livioco, G.R. No. 170685, 22 September 2010)
Meycauayan, Bulacan which was being cultivated
by respondents Macario Soriente, Rogelio
Forms of Just Compensation
Macatulad, Apolonio Mediana and Manuel Umali
under a system of sharetenancy. The said land
Traditionally it is in cash but jurisprudence states that
was subjected to the Operation Land Transfer
other forms are allowed such as:
(OLT) Program under Presidential Decree (P.D.)
- LBP and other GOCC shares of stocks /
No. 27 as amended by Letter of Instruction (LOI)
equity business instruments No. 474. Thus, the then Ministry of Agrarian
- LBP Bonds / debt instruments Reform acquired the subject land and issued
- Tax credits which are amounts credited Certificates of Land Transfer (CLT) on December
against your tax due 9, 1980 to private respondents as beneficiaries.
- However, private respondents signed an affidavit,
Association of Small Landowners v. Sec. of allegedly under duress, stating that they are not
DAR, G.R. No. 78742, 14 July 1989 share tenants but hired laborers. Armed with such
document, Eudosia Daez applied for the exemption
[…]payment of the just compensation is not always of said riceland from coverage of P.D. No. 27 due
to non-tenancy as well as for the cancellation of the
required to be made fully in money, […] No less
CLTs issued to private respondents.
importantly, the government financial instruments
making up the balance of the payment are In their Affidavit, Eudosia Daez and her husband,
"negotiable at any time." The other modes, which Lope, declared ownership over 41.8064 hectares
are likewise available to the landowner at his of agricultural lands located in Meycauayan,
option, are also not unreasonable because Bulacan and fourteen (14) hectares of riceland,
sixteen (16) hectares of forestland, ten (10)
hectares of "batuhan" and 1.8064 hectares of landowners to apply for exemption or retention
residential lands in Peñaranda, Nueva Ecija. under PD 27 and those who failed to file their
Included in their 41.8064-hectare landholding in applications/petitions are deemed to have waived
Bulacan, was the subject 4.1685- hectare riceland their rights.
in Meycauayan.
RULING:
DAR Undersecretary Jose C. Medina issued an YES.
Order denying Eudosia Daez's application for It is incorrect to posit that an application for
exemption upon finding that her subject land is exemption and an application for retention are one
covered under LOI No. 474, petitioner being owner and the same thing. Being distinct remedies,
of the aforesaid agricultural lands exceeding seven finality of judgment in one does not preclude the
(7) hectares. subsequent institution of the other. There was,
thus, no procedural impediment to the application
Eudosia Daez wrote a letter to DAR Secretary filed by Eudosia Daez for the retention of the
Benjamin T. Leong requesting for reconsideration subject 4.1865-hectare riceland, even after her
of Undersecretary Medina's order. But Secretary appeal for exemption of the same land was denied
Leong affirmed the assailed order upon finding in a decision that became final and executory.
private respondents to be bona fide tenants of the
subject land. Secretary Leong disregarded private Petitioner heirs of Eudosia Daez may exercise their
respondents' May 31, 1981 affidavit for having right of retention over the subject 4.1685 riceland.
been executed under duress because he found The right of retention is a constitutionally
that Eudosia's son, Adriano, who was then the guaranteed right, which is subject to qualification
incumbent Vice-Mayor of Meycauayan, pressured by the legislature. It serves to mitigate the effects
private respondents into signing the same. of compulsory land acquisition by balancing the
rights of the landowner and the tenant and by
Undaunted, Eudosia Daez brought her case on implementing the doctrine that social justice was
February 20, 1992 to the Court of Appeals via a not meant to perpetrate an injustice against the
petition for certiorari. The Court of Appeals, landowner. A retained area, as its name denotes,
however, sustained the order of Secretary Leong is land which is not supposed to anymore leave the
in a decision. Eudosia pursued her petition before landowner's dominion, thus sparing the
this court but we denied it in a minute resolution. government from the inconvenience of taking land
only to return it to the landowner afterwards, which
We also denied her motion for reconsideration would be a pointless process.
Meantime, on August 6 and 12, 1992, the DAR In the landmark case of Association of Small
issued Emancipation Patents (EPs) to private Landowners in the Phil. , Inc. v. Secretary of
respondents. Thereafter, the Register of Deeds of Agrarian Reform, we held that landowners who
Bulacan issued the corresponding Transfer have not yet exercised their retention rights
Certificates of Title (TCTs). Exemption of the under P.D. No. 27 are entitled to the new
4.1685 riceland from coverage by P.D. No. 27 retention rights under R.A. No. 6657. We
having been finally denied her, Eudosia Daez next disregarded the August 27, 1985 deadline
filed an application for retention of the same imposed by DAR Administrative Order No. 1,
riceland, this time under R.A. No. 6657. DAR series of 1985 on landowners covered by OLT.
Region III OIC-Director Eugenio B. Bernardo However, if a landowner filed his application for
allowed Eudosia Daez to retain the subject retention after August 27, 1985 but he had
riceland but he denied the application of her previously filed the sworn statements required
eight (8) children to retain three (3) hectares by LOI Nos. 41, 45 and 52, he is still entitled to
each for their failure to prove actual tillage of the retention limit of seven (7) hectares under
the land or direct management thereof as P.D. No. 27. Otherwise, he is only entitled to retain
required by law. Aggrieved, they appealed to the five (5) hectares under R.A. No. 6657.
DAR. Then DAR Secretary Ernesto D. Garilao, set
aside the order of Regional Director Bernardo in a Sec. 6 of R.A. No. 6657, which provides, viz.:
Resolution. Eudosia Daez filed a Motion for SECTION 6. Retention Limits — xxx The right to
Reconsideration but it was denied. She appealed choose the area to be retained, which shall be
Secretary Garilao's decision to the Office of the compact or contiguous, shall pertain to the
President which ruled in her favor. Aggrieved, landowner. Provided, however, That in case the
private respondents sought from the Court of area selected for retention by the landowner is
Appeals, a review of the decision of the Office of tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to
the President. The said Decision of the Office of the choose whether to remain therein or be a
President was reversed. Hence, this petition. beneficiary in the same or another agricultural
land with similar or comparable features. In
ISSUE: case the tenant chooses to remain in the
WON the CA erred when it ruled/opined that there retained area, he shall be considered a lease
was a cut-off date (August 27, 1985) for holder and shall lose his right to be a
beneficiary under this Act. In case the tenant Thus, we had, in the past, sustained the
chooses to be a beneficiary in another nullification of a certificate of title issued pursuant
agricultural land, he loses his right as a lease to a homestead patent because the land covered
holder to the land retained by the landowner. was not part of the public domain and as a result,
Xxx the government had no authority to issue such
patent in the first place. Fraud in the issuance of
Defines the nature and incidents of a landowner's the patent, is also a ground for impugning the
right of retention. For as long as the area to be validity of a certificate of title. In other words, the
retained is compact or contiguous and it does not invalidity of the patent or title is sufficient basis for
exceed the retention ceiling of five (5) hectares, a nullifying the certificate of title since the latter is
landowner's choice of the area to be retained, must merely an evidence of the former.
prevail. Moreover, Administrative Order No. 4, In the instant case, the CLTs of private
series of 1991, which supplies the details for the respondents over the subject 4.1685-hectare
exercise of a landowner's retention rights, likewise- riceland were issued without Eudosia Daez having
recognizes no limit to the prerogative of the been accorded her right of choice as to what to
landowner, although he is persuaded to retain retain among her landholdings. The transfer
other lands instead to avoid dislocation of farmers. certificates of title thus issued on the basis of those
Without doubt, this right of retention may be CLTs cannot operate to defeat the right of the heirs
exercised over tenanted land despite even the of deceased Eudosia Daez to retain the said
issuance of Certificate of Land Transfer (CLT) to 4.1685 hectares of riceland.
farmer-beneficiaries.
WHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby
What must be protected, however, is the right GRANTED.
of the tenants to opt to either stay on the land
chosen to be retained by the landowner or be a When to exercise retention rights
beneficiary in another agricultural land with
similar or comparable features.
Voluntary Offer of Compulsory Acquisition
Land awards made pursuant to the government's Sale
agrarian reform program are subject to the
exercise by a landowner, who is so qualified, of his Simultaneously with At any time before
right of retention. the Offer for Sale. You receiving Notice of
only offer the area you Coverage or
Under P.D. No. 27, beneficiaries are issued CLTs do not want to retain Within 60 days from receipt
to entitle them to possess lands. Thereafter, they of the notice of coverage.
are issued Emancipation Patents (EPs) after Failure to do so within the
compliance with all necessary conditions. Such time period is considered a
EPs, upon their presentation to the Register of waiver of rights.
Deeds, result in the issuance of the corresponding
transfer certificates of title (TCT) in favor of the
beneficiaries mentioned therein. Who can exercise
1. Landowner whose land is covered under RA
Under R.A. No. 6657, the procedure has been 6657
simplified. Only Certificates of Land Ownership
Award (CLOAs) are issued, in lieu of EPs, after 2. Landowner whose land previously covered by
compliance with all prerequisites. Thereafter, upon PD 27 and his other lands are covered by RA
presentation of the CLOAs to the Register of 6657
Deeds, TCTs are issued to the designated NOTE:
beneficiaries. CLTs are no longer issued. • GR: is that if you are a landowner who has
The issuance of EPs or CLOAs to beneficiaries
availed of retention rights under PD 27, then
does not absolutely bar the landowner from
retaining the area covered thereby. Under you are disqualified from availing of additional
Administrative Order No. 2, series of 1994, an EP retentions right under RA 6657 on the same
or CLOA may be cancelled if the land covered is land.
later found to be part of the landowner's retained • XPN is when landowners who have other
area. lands not covered by PD 27 and now covered
by RA 6657, then you may exercise retention
A certificate of title accumulates in one document a
comprehensive statement of the status of the fee rights under RA 6657 on those other lands
held by the owner of a parcel of land. As such, it is BUT it is not in addition to 7 hectares but in
a mere evidence of ownership and it does not lieu of previously retained lands under PD 27.
constitute the title to the land itself. It cannot confer Which means you forfeit your previously
title where no title has been acquired by any of the retained lands under PD 27.
means provided by law.
Land Retained must be Compact or Contiguous

It must not be “chop-chop”
Retention Rights may be waived
• Failure to timely manifest intention to retain

o Time limit depends if voluntary or
compulsory
• Execution of documents expressly waving the
right
• Estoppel by laches, warranting a presumption
that he abandoned his right
NOTE: Homestead Patent Grantees may exercise

retention rights as long as they are also landowners.
Agrarian Reform laws cannot defeat the purpose of
CA 141 which was enacted for the welfare of the
protection of the poor (Alita v. CA)
• BUT ONLY when the following conditions

exist:
o Original homestead owners or
grantees are still owners of the
original homestead land at the time of
the CARL took effect
They continue to cultivate the homestead land for

themselves (Alemero v. Heirs of Pacquing)
7. Those who have sold, disposed or
Land Distribution under CARL, as amended abandoned the lands awarded to them by the
(Module 4-D) government
QUALIFIED BENEFICIARIES
Possess all the qualifications + Suffers none of
the disqualifications = Qualified Beneficiary
Sec. 22 RA 6657
The lands covered by the CARP shall be Sec. 22, RA 6657
distributed as much as possible to landless
residents of the same barangay, or in the absence The lands covered by the CARP shall be
distributed as much as possible to landless
thereof, landless residents of the same municipality
residents of the same barangay, or in the absence
thereof, landless residents of the same municipality
Landless residents
Keyword above is “as much as possible” which makes
Special definition means that “a landless beneficiary
it permissible to not adhere to it if not possible under
is one who owns less than three (3) hectares of
circumstances since land under RA 6657 might be
agricultural land” Sec. 25, RA 6657. This may include
limited in some areas.
those who have none at all, who have less than three
hectares, or who have lands that are not agricultural
“As much as possible”
but have other lands.
Same barangay → same municipality → other lands,
Being landless alone is only one of the qualifications
at QB’s option outside barangay or municipality as
of the law.
long under RA 6657
General Qualifications of a Beneficiary
Law does not want to displace beneficiaries. Priority
according to Sec. 43(a), DAE AO No. 7, s. 2011
is to award lands to beneficiaries in the same area if
• A farmer/ tiller who owns less than three
possible to minimize displacement.
hectares of agricultural land
• Filipino citizen Order of Priority in section Sec. 22
o Prohibition in constitution that
foreigners cannot own agricultural 1. Lessees and share tenants
lands 2. Regular farm workers
• A resident of the barangay or municipality* 3. Seasonal farm workers
• At least 15 years old at the time of the 4. Other farm workers
identification, screening, and selection 5. Actual tillers of public agricultural lands
o Should be 15 years old at these three 6. Collectives / cooperatives
stages 7. Others working directly on the land
• Willing, able, and equipped with the aptitude
ESSENTIALS OF DISTRIBUTION
to cultivate and make the land productive
o Subjective qualification that is why in Identification
selection, identification, and Important for DAR to know that person exists and
screening there is the assessment for that they possess qualifications and none of the
this disqualifications.
But possessing all of these qualifications DOES NOT Registration → Landowner’s Attested List →
automatically make them a qualified beneficiary. They Preliminary List
should not also have any disqualifications.
Registration
Disqualifications for the purpose of developing an independent data
(no need to memorize these) bank of potential beneficiaries based on voluntary
1. Waived their right to be beneficiaries for registration. Does not automatically make him a
compensation beneficiary but so DAR can consider him as potential
2. Misrepresentation of facts in basic one (DAR AO No. 3-2008)
qualifications
3. Landowner of covered lands Landowner’s Attested List
4. Those who have been dismissed for cause submitted by the landowner under oath listing all the
5. Adjudged guilty of forcible entry or unlawful farmers and tenants in his land after receiving Notice
detainer over the property / squatters of Coverage.
6. Those who have retired or resigned
If landowner does not include farmers or tenants
purposely and done in bad faith, then the former might
be prosecuted for perjury (since it is done under oath).
Sometimes, potential beneficiaries might not know

about this program or is stopped from doing so by
another person (DAR AO No. 07-2011)
Preliminary List
list prepared by MARO based on available data (both
independent and from landowner) which is to be
posted and displayed in public (DAR AO No. 07-2011)
List of potential beneficiaries only. Does not mean that Award Ceiling and Allocation Rules
Sec. 23, RA 6657
person is already chosen or qualified beneficiary
No qualified beneficiary may own more than three
since there is still screening after. (3) hectares of agricultural land
Concha et al v. Rubio et al (2010) Ceiling will have to depend on resulting total land
holding of the qualified beneficiary. It is not uniform for
It must be stressed that a tenant of a parcel of land, everybody since “landless resident” may have
which is later declared to be under the coverage of different circumstances. Ceiling is just the maximum
CARP, is not automatically chosen; nor does he landholding since there might be cases where
have absolute entitlement to be identified as the beneficiary is awarded less than 3 hectares of land.
farmer beneficiary thereof
Rules of Allocation / three possible scenarios
Registration → Landowner’s Attested List →
Preliminary List → Master List Remember the priority list below.
Master List “Order of Priority in section Sec. 22”

this list contains all the screen and selected 1. Lessees and share tenants
beneficiaries in a land subject to provisions RA 6657 2. Regular farm workers
3. Seasonal farm workers
This is certified by the BARC under oath (DAR AO 4. Other farm workers
No. 07-2011) which means that public officials task 5. Actual tillers of public agricultural lands
with this master list, they are discouraged from 6. Collectives / cooperatives
committing fraud in this master list because they may 7. Others working directly on the land
be tried for perjury
Land area is sufficient
This list is still open for inclusion and exclusion Land area subject for distribution is sufficient to be
proceedings or subject to dispute distributed to the lessees, share tenants, and regular
farm workers.
Concha et al v. Rubio et al (2010)
These are the first two on the priority list who have a
Since the identification and selection of CARP resulting aggregate landownership of not more than 3
beneficiaries are matters involving strictly the hectares, then land area is sufficient
administrative implementation of the CARP, it
behooves the court to exercise great caution and This is not the usual case though
substituting its own determination of the issue,
unless there is grave abuse of discretion
committed by the administrative agency Land area is insufficient
Landholding shall be divided equally among them
Primary administrative agency to implement RA 6657 (referring to lessees, share tenants, and regular farm
is DAR and any exercise of discretion of DAR must be workers)
respected by the court through executing great
caution in substituting it with its own determination. Provided that all beneficiaries shall get at least 1,000
Absence of grave abuse of discretion amounting to square meters. This is the minimum landholding
lack or excess of jurisdiction, the courts should
respect the findings of the DAR in phases of
identification, selection, and registration.
BUT IF not feasible to give all beneficiaries at least 6. Collectives / cooperatives
1,000 square meters each, DAR shall rank the 7. Others working directly on the land
qualified beneficiaries
• DAR will list all the lessees, share tenants, NOTE: The distributed land must be contiguous
and regular farm workers and rank according (whether one tract or several parcels of land) or else
it would be susceptible to abuse by the landowner.
to total aggregate tenure.
• STEP 1: Ranked from most aggregate time of
lease or employment to least aggregate time
of employment
• STEP 2: DAR awards 1,000 sqm from the top
of the list down until the area left is less than
1,000 sqm
• STEP 3: The remaining area is equally
divided into those who were given at least
1,000 sqm*
o *those not given and are displaced
may still qualify and beneficiaries in
other lands covered under CARP
i.e. Five identified beneficiaries about the area to be

distributed it just 4,800 sqm. Considering these facts,
the DAR will result to ranking since if 4,800 / 5 = each
will not get at least 1,000 sqm. Since it is not feasible
to award them with 1,000 sqm of land each, then the
DAR will resort to ranking. Refer to photo below
STEP 1: DAR ranking them based on aggregate

tenure since ranking will determine who will the 1,00
sqm be given.
STEP 2: Award 1,000 sqm from top of list to bottom of
list until remaining area is less than 1,000 sqm. After
this, there is 800 sqm.
STEP 3: Remaining area of 800 sqm has to be divided
equally to those who have at least 1,000 sqm are
given equal portions of the land.
The fifth qualified beneficiary is considered to be

displaced and may still qualify as beneficiary in other
land holdings covered under CARP. Preferred to be in
same barangay or municipality or if none, somewhere
else but with consent of beneficiary.
Land area is in excess

Land is already distributed and the lessees, share
tenants, and regular farm workers have all been
awarded lands which is 3 hectares each and there is
still land to be distributed, then it should be distributed
equally to the rest on the list of priority (those
underlined below)
They can only be considered as beneficiaries if the

land is in excess
1. Lessees and share tenants

2. Regular farm workers
3. Seasonal farm workers
4. Other farm workers
5. Actual tillers of public agricultural lands
Award and Issuance of CLOA 3. Pay amortization

- NOTE: DAR AO No.5-2019 released
CLOs/EPs to farmer beneficiaries pending Payment by Beneficiaries
amortization. Amortization is payment through installments or else
it would be burdensome to pay upfront.
Cancellation of CLOA (DAR AO No. 03-2009)
- Specified grounds under Sec. 4 of AO No.3 Sec. 26, RA 6657
but that is too many to memorize Lands awarded pursuant to this Act shall be paid
- Secretary of DAR has jurisdiction for by the beneficiaries to the LBP in thirty (30)
annual amortizations at six percent (6%) interest
per annum
Indefeasibility
- Under RA 6657, CLOA will be indefeasible
Thus, it is payable in 30 years / 30 annual
after one year from registration thereof
amortizations.
- Registration alone of CLOA does not make it Start of Amortization
automatically indefeasible
- A lapse of one year from registration is Date of registration of the CLOA or Date of actual
required for it to be indefeasible. occupancy, if occupancy took place after registration
- Pending the CLOA achieving indefeasibility, - such as because land is not ready for
the DAR may still cancel the CLOA based on occupancy or there are people who
the grounds in Sec. 4 above. resist the installation of the
- However, when CLOA achieves beneficiary
indefeasibility, then DAR loses its jurisdiction Failure to Pay an Aggregate of 3 Annual
to cancel it Amortizations
- Indefeasibility means that a
certificate or title is conclusive proof Note use of “aggregate” and not consecutive
of ownership but subject only to
Awarded land maybe foreclosed by the LBP
direct attack and not collateral. It is
now under the courts and not DAR.
The foreclosed land is distributed to other qualified
beneficiaries
Award to Beneficiaries
Sec. 24, RA 6657
Defaulting beneficiary becomes permanently
The rights and responsibilities of the beneficiary
shall commence from the time the DAR makes an disqualified
award of the land to him, which award shall be
completed within one hundred eighty (180) days Corporate Farms and Stock Distribution
from the time the DAR takes actual possession of Option (SDO)
the land GR: Lands must be distributed directly
XPN: When it is not economically feasible and sound
Responsibilities to divide the land based on discretion of DAR
implementing agrarian reform, it shall be distributed
1. Exercise diligence in the use and cultivation indirectly. Beneficiaries here will own the land
of the land collectively called corporate farms.
- Expected to use and cultivate the
Sec. 4, Art. 13, 1987 Constitution
land and use them diligently so as
The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian
not to destroy the land or without reform program founded on the right of farmers and
value regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own
directly or collectively the lands they till
2. Pay real property taxes
- Even if beneficiary has not obtained Stock Distribution Option (Sec. 31, RA 6657)
a certificate of title, they should still
pay the taxes
i.e.. Owner of agricultural land is an individual Before the amendment of Sec. 27, the prohibition only
landowner/natural person, land is surrendered and applied to lands acquired under RA 6657 while those
subject to distribution. Here only land is transferred. lands acquired under PD 27 has no 10 year period
BUT RA 9700 amending RA 6657 now reads:
On the other hand, if the landowner is a corporation
(artificial or juridical entity created by fiction of law) Sec. 27, RA 6657, as amended by RA 9700
composed of natural persons who are shareholders. Lands acquired by beneficiaries under this Act or
Their interests are represented through their shares other agrarian reform laws may not be sold,
of stocks. Corporations may own properties or transferred or conveyed except through hereditary
agricultural land apart from shareholders. Corporation succession, or to the government, or to the LBP, or
has the option to distribute lands or to distribute to other qualified beneficiaries through the DAR for
shares of stocks to farmer beneficiaries. They may do a period of ten (10) years
these voluntarily.
Further, the transfer to other qualified beneficiaries is
Case of Hacienda Luisita not direct from one to the other but should have DAR’s
participation. And now, 10 year period applies to
Transferred shares of stock to farmer lands acquired under PD 27.
beneficiaries. The transfer of stocks was through
SDO agreement which was later invalidated by Prohibition of transfer to a private person that
presidential agrarian council (PARC). In the SC, it will make his total ownership of agricultural
was argued that SDO was void on different land more than 5 hectares (DAR AO No.6-2016)
grounds. Specifically, it was argued that Sec. 31
was unconstitutional for being in violation of the Transfer of ownership of all agricultural lands to a
spirit of agrarian reform which is to transfer lands private person whose total ownership of
and ownership to beneficiaries and not just stocks. agricultural lands after the transactions exceed 5
However, the SC stated that the matter was moot hectares is prohibited except via and intestate
and academic since Sec. 31 has been superseded succession, transfer of legitimes to compulsory
through amendments of RA 9700 which limits heirs, and consolidation of ownership after period
modes acquisition to just voluntary offer for sale of redemption has lapsed
and compulsory acquisition; it omitted voluntary
land transfer. Since voluntary land transfer was no This is not absolute. Exceptions do not apply to
longer allowed, then Sec. 31 is deemed to have intestate succession or hereditary succession,
been superseded. Thus at present, SDO is no transfer of legitimes (guaranteed shares) to
longer allowed compulsory heirs, and consolidation of ownership
after period of redemption has lapsed.
Transferability of Awarded Lands
When transacting agricultural lands, the rules provide
Types of prohibitions that a transfer clearance must be procured from the
1. Prohibition of transfer within 10 years from DAR. Certification by the DAR that the transfer
award to other persons except by hereditary involving agricultural land is not restricted or covered
succession, to the government, to LBP, or to by the prohibition and the DAR does not object to the
other qualified beneficiaries (Sec. 27, RA transfer. Thus, transfer is clear to proceed (Sec. 10,
6657) DAR AO No.6-2016). Since legal issues might arise
when the transaction is in violation of the prohibition
a. Regardless of resulting prohibition
above.
2. Prohibition of transfer to a private person that
will make his total ownership of agricultural
land more than 5 hectares (DAR AO No.6-
2016)
a. Prohibition to any private person
Prohibition of transfer within 10 years from

award to other persons (Sec. 27, RA 6657)
DISPUTE RESOLUTION UNDER RA 6657, AS Belongs to executive branch (DAR) – not the judicial
AMENDED (Module 4-E) branch.
Power to adjudicate, resolve, interpret the law just like
QUASI-JUDICIAL POWERS IN RELATION judicial power but the one exercising such power does
TO RA 6657 not belong to the judiciary
Sec. 50 RA 6657 Vested by Law

Section 50. Quasi-Judicial Powers of the The DAR is granted the power to “adjudicate” matters
DAR. — The DAR is hereby vested with the of agrarian reform
primary jurisdiction to determine and
adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall Although the law uses DAR, it is specific powers
have exclusive original jurisdiction over all within the framework of DAR that exercises these
matters involving the implementation of powers
agrarian reform except those falling under the
exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of DAR are not converted to courts or given general
Agriculture (DA) and the Department of jurisdiction unlike RTC
Environment and Natural Resources (DENR).
Limited in nature
It shall not be bound by technical rules of Some aspects of agrarian reform may, however fall
procedure and evidence but shall proceed to into other agencies’ jurisdiction, such as DA and
hear and decide all cases, disputes or DENR (even if such subject is of agriculture)
controversies in a most expeditious manner,
employing all reasonable means to ascertain Not bound by Technical Rules
the facts of every case in accordance with Although DAR is granted the power to adjudicate, it is
justice and equity and the merits of the case. not bound by the Rules of Court in the conduct of its
Toward this end, it shall adopt a uniform rule of proceedings
procedure to achieve a just, expeditious and
inexpensive determination for every action or This is simply because they are not part of the
proceeding before it. framework of judiciary
It shall have the power to summon witnesses, Delegation of Quasi- Judicial Functions
administer oaths, take testimony, require These offices are the ones delegated and exercising
submission of reports, compel the production quasi-judicial powers because they form part of DAR
of books and documents and answers to
interrogatories and issue subpoena, and 1. DARAB - Department of Agrarian Reform
subpoena duces tecum, and enforce its writs Adjudication Board
through sheriffs or other duly deputized 2. RARAD - Regional Agrarian Reform
officers.t shall likewise have the power to Adjudication Division
punish direct and indirect contempts in the 3. PARAD – Provincial Agrarian Reform
same manner and subject to the same Adjudicator
penalties as provided in the Rules of Court.
Responsible farmer leaders shall be allowed to AGRARIAN DISPUTE

represent themselves, their fellow farmers, or Section 3 (d) Agrarian Dispute - refers to any
their organizations in any proceedings before controversy relating to tenurial arrangements,
the DAR: provided, however, that when there whether leasehold, tenancy, stewardship or
are two or more representatives for any otherwise, over lands devoted to agriculture,
individual or group, the representatives should including disputes concerning farmworkers'
choose only one among themselves to associations or representation of persons in
represent such party or group before any DAR negotiating, fixing, maintaining, changing, or
proceedings. seeking to arrange terms or conditions of such
tenurial arrangements.
Notwithstanding an appeal to the Court of
Appeals, the decision of the DAR shall be It includes any controversy relating to
immediately executory compensation of lands acquired under this Act
and other terms and conditions of transfer of The rules presuppose that it may be amicably settled
ownership from landowners to farmworkers, before it going to a full-blown case
tenants and other agrarian reform XPN: (Sec. 1 Rule III, 2009 DARAB RULES) there
beneficiaries, whether the disputants stand in are 3 scenarios where you won’t need to undergo a
the proximate relation of farm operator and prior mediation:
beneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor 1. One of the Parties is a corporation
and lessee. 2. Direct Referral by the Secretary of
The law does not give an all-encompassing meaning the DAR to the DARAB
of Agrarian Dispute, rather it defines it by example of 3. Non-existence of or Failure to
by identifying the kinds of cases that may come into Convene by the BARC – usually
the notion of agrarian dispute. seen in places where Barangays are
3 kinds of cases under-manned
1. Controversies involving tenurial
arrangements over lands devoted to Beside the Barangay Agrarian Reform Committee
agriculture (Tenurial Arrangement (BARC) is the Presidential Agrarian Reform
Controversies) Committee (PARC), but there is no arrow directly
2. Controversies relating to compensation of pointing BARC to PARC. In fact, PARC arrow is
lands acquired under RA 6657 (Just pointing to Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator
compensation controversies) (PARAD) instead.
3. Criminal Offenses relating to Matters
Question:
provided under CARL
Why is it like that?
Why is PARC beside BARC?
TENURIAL ARRANGEMENT Is BARC appealable to PARC?
CONTROVERSIES Or is PARC an alternative venue for BARC?
We refer to disputes on tenure of farmers,
beneficiary, of an agricultural lessee or a shared Answer:
tenant NO. Within the framework of RA 6657 the PARC is
not a substitute to BARC. As a general rule when it
Illustration of Procedure comes to tenurial arrangement controversies (Section
3-d RA 6657)
the requirement is that there must be prior mediation
and conciliation. Mediation and conciliation are best
evidenced by a certification issued within 30 days,
and this is issued by BARC. If indeed there was a
failure to amicably settle the case therefore this will
be forwarded to the quasi-judicial bodies of DAR.
There are cases wherein conciliation was done, but

no certification is issued within 30 days by BARC. If
this happens strictly after 30 days with no certification
then PARC can issue certification even without
waiting for BARC.
This is important because there are some cases that

the cause of action of a farmer or agricultural lessee
may be unduly suppressed by the mere failure or
refusal of BARC to issue certification. Because case
will not be accepted by PARAD without certification
because this is the best evidence of mandatory
mediation and conciliation proceedings were
1. Starts with Barangay Reform Committee conducted. In order for the cause of action to be not
held hostage for the failure of issuing certification by
GR: There must be a Prior mediation and certification BARC, then PARC will come in to issue certification
by the BARC (Sec. 1 Rule III DARAB Rules). in favor of person with cause of action.
Person who has undergone the mandatory mediation Exclusive:

and conciliation does not go to PARC for purposes of No other court or tribunal shall take cognizance of
appeal. It is not an appeal. It is just a mechanism in Agrarian Dispute
order to address that possibility in some cases or
remote cases wherein BARC certification is withheld Secretary of DAR has the power to bypass or endorse
after 30 days of mediation and conciliation the case to the PARAD
proceedings.
In order for PARAD to be satisfied that indeed

condition precedent had been complied, certification
is needed.
2. Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator

(PARAD)
PARAD insofar as tenurial controversies are

concerned has exclusive and original jurisdiction over
agrarian disputes. The jurisdiction of the PARAD is
with express boundaries. Even though this is the case
or matter may be agrarian reform related, if this matter
is expressly outside the boundaries of jurisdiction of
PARAD, then PARAD has no jurisdiction to touch or
adjudicate on that matter.
Several items/matters which may arise from an

agrarian dispute which may be an issue attached to a
tenurial arrangement controversy but they are
expressly excluded PARAD will have no jurisdiction
to these matters:
1. Adjudication of Ownership
(within jurisdiction by courts; PARAD has no
jurisdiction even though if it arises from an
agrarian dispute)
2. Adjudication of Right of Way
(belongs to regular courts)
3. Retention or Exemption Issues
(not within jurisdiction of quasi-judicial
bodies; these are on the matter of
implementation of law; jurisdiction is within
the implementation wing part of DAR)
4. Reclassification and Conversion (jurisdiction
is within the implementation wing part of
DAR)
5. Identification and Selection of Beneficiaries
(jurisdiction is within the implementation wing
part of DAR)
Exclusive and Original Jurisdiction Effects

Original:
Filed in the First Instance
Cases involving tenurial arrangement controversies
must be filed first in the PARAD
Illustration
A case is filed in MTC. An agrarian dispute is raised, further to Supreme Court via Rule 45 – Civil
so the MTC will forward it to DAR who will not Procedure
determine whether there is or there is no agrarian (DARAB is a quasi-agency)
dispute. DAR has 15 days to determine. If DAR
determines that there is no agrarian dispute then case Power To Issue A Writ Of Preliminary Injunction
will go back to MTC. If there is an agrarian dispute In Agrarian Disputes
then the matter will be forwarded to the PARAD
because a case with agrarian dispute and in so far as DARAB has power to enjoin the PARAD and RARAD
that agrarian dispute is concerned PARAD has
exclusive and original jurisdiction.
DARAB can issue Writ of Injunction against PARAD
The determination of DAR as to the existence or
nonexistence of Agrarian Dispute is appealable. DARAB can also issue TRO or Writ of Preliminary
Appeal will have to depend on who or what court or Injunction against RARAD
office referred the case to the DAR:
CA or RTC have jurisdiction to issue Writ of
1. IF MTC referred the matter to the DAR, then
Preliminary Injunction even against government
you appeal to RTC
2. IF RTC referred the matter to the DAR then offices BUT because there is a prohibition in the law;
you appeal to CA to question the CA or RTC do not have the power to enjoin DARAB,
determination of agrarian dispute determined PARAD, or even the RARAD
by DAR Exception:
Supreme Court can overcome the prohibition of law
3. Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator and may validly issue a writ of preliminary injunction
(RARAD) against DARAB, PARAD or RARAD; SC has the
power to enjoin DARAB, PARAD or RARAD
Jurisdiction of RARAD is likewise original, but it is
limited. It has limited quasi-judicial powers. Higher
than PARAD when it comes to administrative matters. DARAB, PARAD, and RARAD belong to the
Not Appellate, merely Administrative. framework of RA 6657
Jurisdiction (Cases) JUST COMPENSATION CONTROVERSIES

1. RARAD may decide cases when PARAD (flow diagram at P.54)
cannot hear the case due to disqualification,
inhibition, or absence. Unlike a tenurial arrangement controversy, just
2. When the case involves matters such as compensation disputes does not require require prior
mediation or conciliation. A just compensation dispute
complexity and sensitivity that the decision
will be cognizable by the offices exercising quasi-
would constitute an important precedent
judicial functions within the framework of DAR even
affecting regional interest without prior mediation and conciliation.
3. When the conduct of Hearing on Application
for the issuance of Writ of Preliminary When the landowner rejects the initial valuation/offer
Injunction or TRO, as assigned by DARAB by the DAR, the proceedings will have to move to the
administrative determination of just compensation
4. Department Of Agrarian Reform Adjudication done either by the provincial or regional adjudicator or
Board (DARAB) by the DARAB itself.
Jurisdiction:
1. Has Appellate Jurisdiction over Decisions of
PARAD or RARAD
2. DARAB’s decision is Appealable to CA via
Rule 43 – Civil Procedure – Provides appeals
against quasi-judicial bodies; There is no
more above DARAB then DARAB’s decision
will be appealed to CA and will be appealed
1. Preliminary Determination of Just

Compensation in a Summary Proceeding either
by the PARAD, RARAD, or DARAB.
Existence of the provincial or regional adjudicator or

the DARAB, for purposes of administrative
determination of just compensation, is not some sort
of hierarchy for purposes of appeal. Their existence is
delineated by the amount of initial valuation that they
are allowed to administratively determine.
The fact that the law gives these administrative The case that is filed with the RTC is an original case
bodies the power to determine just compensation and not an appeal. It is filed in the first instance even
does not make RA 6657 unconstitutional, because though there has already been prior determination by
RA 6657, although it grants these administrative the PARAD, RARAD, or DARAB.
agencies (PARAD, RARAD, DARAB) the power to
determine just compensation, that grant is not It being not an appeal, it is not governed by the
exclusive and consequently it does not deprive the reglementary period provided for under the DARAB
courts of their judicial prerogative to determine just rules of a 15-day period.
compensation.
The decision of the Court is ALSO promulgated in its
Association of Small Landowners vs. Sec. of original jurisdiction.
DAR
NOTE: There are two modes for appeals from the
The fact that the PARAD, RARAD, and DARAB are RTC to the CA:
given the power to determine just compensation A. ordinary appeal - Rule 41
does not mean that the judicial prerogative of the resorted to from the decision of the RTC if the
courts are already impaired. In fact the decision was promulgated in the exercise of the
determination of the PARAD, RARAD, and DARAB RTC’s original jurisdiction. Meaning, the RTC decided
are just preliminary in nature and not binding to the in a case before it in the first instance.
court. Therefore, the courts are not deprived of B. petition for review - Rule 42
their judicial prerogatives. resorted to if the decision appealed was
promulgated by virtue of the RTC’s appellate
jurisdiction. In which case, the RTC decided on an
In so far as these administrative agencies are appeal from the MTC.
concerned, the factors under RA 6657 must be, at all
times, followed. They do not enjoy the same kind of NOTE: Even if the decision of the RTC sitting as an
judicial prerogatives that are vested in courts, they SAC was promulgated by virtue of its original
being creatures and creations of the law. They are jurisdiction, we do not go to the CA by ordinary mode
vested with quasi-judicial power to preliminarily of appeal. Because insofar as the RTCs sitting as
determine just compensation. SACs are concerned, there is a third kind of appeal
from the RTC sitting as an SAC insofar as their
1. Court Proceeding decisions and the appeal from their decisions are
concerned - appeal the RTCs decision to the CA via
After the preliminary determination of just Rule 43.
compensation in a summary proceeding by the
administrative bodies, the proceeding will now move Atty: It is important to distinguish the three modes of
to the courts. appeal to the CA because they all have different or
varying procedural requirements.
NOTE: It does not go to the courts in an appellate
manner. It does not go the court by way of appeal Question: Why do we resort to Court of Appeals via
because the courts, specifically the RTC sitting as a Rule 43?
Special Agrarian Court (SAC), will have original and Answer:
exclusive jurisdiction, NOT appellate. In Land Bank v. De Leon, G.R. No. 143275, 10
September 2002, Supreme Court held that an
appeal from the decision in the RTC sitting as an
SAC will have to be in the Court of Appeals via a

petition of review under Rule 43 for the following
reasons:
1. SAC is not enumerated under Rule 43
2. Enumeration under Rule 43 is not
exclusive
3. Section 60 prescribes appeal from SAC is
through “Petition for Review”
4. So far, there is no rule disallowing this
procedure
Illustration of Just Compensation Procedure
CRIMINAL VIOLATION
Section 57
Section 57. Special Jurisdiction. — The Special
Agrarian Courts shall have original and exclusive
jurisdiction over all petitions for the determination
of just compensation to landowners, and the
prosecution of all criminal offenses under this Act.
The Rules of Court shall apply to all proceedings
before the Special Agrarian Courts, unless
modified by this Act.
The Special Agrarian Courts shall decide all

appropriate cases under their special jurisdiction
within thirty (30) days from submission of the case
for decision.
Illustration of Procedure under DOJ Circular No. 40-

2010

Midterms Notes AgraLaw Atty - Felongco UPVTCxUSC

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Midterms Notes AgraLaw Atty - Felongco UPVTCxUSC

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Agrarian Reform Law & Social Legislation | A.Y. 2020-2021 | Atty. N.C.

NATURE AND SUBJECT OF AGRARIAN REFORM AGRARIAN REFORM AS A PIECE OF SOCIAL

POSITIVE ACT OF THE STATE CALALANG VS WILLIAMS 70 PHIL 726

the common denominator between social legislation

Social Justice is enshrined in the 1987 Philippine

Social justice means the promotion of the welfare of

“Social Justice is the humanization of laws and the

Testimonial evidence became prima facie evidence to

Landowner now must present countervailing evidence

SOCIAL JUSTICE “CONSTITUIONALIZED”

Legislation and arguments in favor of social justice

TRANSFERRED TO ANOTHER PERSION AGRARIAN REFORM AS EQUITABLE

GOVERNMENT IS REIMBURSED Section 1, Article XII: The goals of the national

Taking into account the requirements of

Here, the government breaks the contact between the

In that case, social justice was defined as the

1. Continuing Positive Act in terms of

one of the first attempts to recognize a form legally

4. EQUAL DIVISION OF FRUITS How do we recognize an agricultural leasehold?

1. PROTECTED TENURIAL STATUS;

Physical possession and all those transferred

There is succession even the farmworker is already

TERM / DURATION - For how long is the

If the eldest direct descendant is survived by his/her

In the present petition, we do not find the

LEGAL STATUS OF RA 3844

In Po, et. al. v. Dampal, G.R. No. 173329,

General Flow of Redemption

Through the law, a government program dubbed as

Limited in coverage, does not cover all agricultural Preamble of PD 27

Present - The issuance of Emancipation Patents GENERAL PROCEDURE WITH REGARDS TO

2. Identification of boundaries Summary: “deemed owners”

6. Issuance of Emancipation Patent DELA CRUZ V. DOMINGO, ET AL., GR 210592

Certificate of Land Transfer requires that the land,

1. identification of covered land

Only after all these can a Certificate of Land Transfer

Emancipation Patent requires that a Cert of Land Title

There must be a just compensation before private

Certificate of Land Transfer is not an evidence of title.

Emancipation Patent serves as a valid basis for the

NOTE: An area of a family sized farm will have to vary

CERTIFICATION OF LAND TRANSFER EMANCIPATION PATENT

Preparatory stage Conclusion stage

1. identification of covered land 1. Valuation of Land

There must be a just compensation before

If a land owner has a landholding that is covered by

Retention right is the mechanism of the law to 1. Actual Direct Cultivation

Thus, in order to ensure all these ideals of the

HOW IS IT “COMPREHENSIVE”? R.A. 6657 - the original CARL

6. Environment and ecology

Agrarian disputes are first lodged in the Provincial

Source: Department of Agrarian Reform Official Website Illustration under DARAB:

the OSEC together with its sub-offices cater to the

“Once an expropriation proceeding for the

RULES ON COVERAGE All the evidence collected from 1&2 must be

Once a land has these 2 elements then it is covered

General Procedure of COMPULSORY NOT WITHIN THE COVERAGE OF THE RA6657

Reclassification + After the effectivity of RA 6657 +

Conversion, which can only be done by DAR, must be

Difference between Reclassification and

ALANGILAN REALTY V. OFFICE OF THE

1. Investigation / Ocular Inspection

We have a LGU wanting to expropriate Lot no 1 Lot 1 Lot 2