AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 1 of 31 I.BASIC PRINCIPLES OF AGRARIAN REFORM A. DEFINITION OF ESSENTIAL TERMS AgrarianReformredistributionoflands, regardless of crops or fruits produced to farmers andregularfarmworkerswhoarelandless, irrespective of tenurialarrangement, to include thetotalityoffactorsandsupportservices designedtolifttheeconomicstatusofthe beneficiariesandallotherarrangements alternativetothephysicalredistributionof lands, such as production or profit-sharing, labor administration, and the distribution of shares of stocks, which will allow beneficiaries to receive a just share of the fruits of the lands they work Agriculture,AgriculturalEnterpriseor AgriculturalActivitycultivationofthesoil, plantingofcrops,growingoffruittrees,raising oflivestock,poultryorfish,includingthe harvesting of such farm products, and other farm activities and practices performed by a farmer in conjunctionwithsuchfarmingoperationsdone by person whether natural or juridical Agricultural Land land devoted to agricultural activity as defined in this Act and not classified as mineral,forest,residential,commercialor industrial land AgrarianDisputereferstoanycontroversy relatingtotenurialarrangements,whether leasehold,tenancy,stewardshiporotherwise, overlandsdevotedtoagriculture,including disputesconcerningfarmworkers'associations orrepresentationofpersonsinnegotiating, fixing,maintaining,changing,orseekingto arrangetermsorconditionsofsuchtenurial arrangements Itincludesanycontroversyrelatingto compensationoflandsacquiredunderthisAct andothertermsandconditionsoftransferof ownershipfromlandownerstofarmworkers, tenants and other agrarian reform beneficiaries, whetherthedisputantsstandintheproximate relationoffarmoperatorandbeneficiary, landowner and tenant, or lessor and lessee. Farmerreferstoanaturalpersonwhose primarylivelihoodiscultivationoflandorthe productionofagriculturalcrops,eitherby himself,orprimarilywiththeassistanceofhis immediate farm household, whether the land is ownedbyhim,orbyanotherpersonundera leaseholdorsharetenancyagreementor arrangement with the owner thereof Farmworkernaturalpersonwhorenders service for value as an employee or laborer in an agriculturalenterpriseorfarmregardlessof whetherhiscompensationispaidonadaily, weekly,monthlyor"pakyaw"basis.Theterm includes an individual whose work has ceased as aconsequenceof,orinconnectionwith,a pendingagrariandisputeandwhohasnot obtainedasubstantiallyequivalentandregular farm employment RegularFarmworkernaturalpersonwhois employedonapermanentbasisbyan agricultural enterprise or farm SeasonalFarmworkernaturalpersonwhois employedonarecurrent,periodicor intermittentbasisbyanagriculturalenterprise orfarm,whetherasapermanentoranon-permanent laborer, such as "dumaan", "sacada", and the like Other Farmworker farmworker who does not fall under paragraphs Is Agrarian Reform confined to distribution of lands to landless?No.Thereareotheralternativemodesmentionedin the CARL. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 2 of 31 WhatarethealternativemodesofAgrarianReform mentioned in the CARL aside from land distribution? (LPS) a)Labor Administration b)Profit sharing c)Stock distribution Who are the qualified beneficiaries of the CARL? a)Landless farmers b)Landless farmworkers Does CARL applicable to all lands in the Philippines? No. The CARL applies only to Agricultural lands. It does not apply to lands classified as residential, commercial, industrial, mineral or forest land. WhatarethosedisputesclassifiedasAgrarian Dispute under the CARL? (TACT) a)Controversy relating to Tenurial arrangements b)Disputesconcerningfarmworkers Associations or representation of personsc)ControversyrelatingtoCompensationof agricultural landsd)Conditions of Transfer of ownership under the agrarian law B. CONSTITUTIONAL BASIS Article XII, Section 4-6, 1987 constitution Section 2, CARL, as amended under RA no. 9700 Section4.TheStateshall, bylaw,undertake anagrarianreformprogramfoundedonthe right of farmers and regular farmworkers who are landless, to own directly or collectively the landstheytillor,inthecaseofother farmworkers,toreceiveajustshareofthe fruitsthereof.Tothisend,theStateshall encourage and undertake the just distribution ofallagriculturallands,subjecttosuch priorities and reasonable retention limits asthe Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental, or equity considerations,andsubjecttothepaymentof justcompensation.Indeterminingretention limits,theStateshallrespecttherightofsmall landowners.TheStateshallfurtherprovide incentives for voluntary land-sharing. Section 5. The State shall recognize the right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, as well ascooperatives,andotherindependent farmers'organizationstoparticipateinthe planning, organization, and management of the program,andshallprovidesupportto agriculture through appropriate technology and research,andadequatefinancial,production, marketing, and other support services. Section 6. The State shall apply the principles of agrarianreformorstewardship,whenever applicableinaccordancewithlaw,inthe dispositionorutilizationofothernatural resources, including lands of the public domain underleaseorconcessionsuitableto agriculture,subjecttopriorrights,homestead rightsofsmallsettlers,andtherightsof indigenouscommunitiestotheirancestral lands.TheStatemayresettlelandlessfarmers and farmworkers in its own agricultural estates whichshallbedistributedtotheminthe manner provided by law. "SEC.2.DeclarationofPrinciplesandPolicies. ItisthepolicyoftheStatetopursuea ComprehensiveAgrarianReformProgram (CARP). The welfare of the landless farmers and farmworkerswillreceivethehighest considerationtopromotesocialjusticeandto movethenationtowardsoundrural developmentandindustrialization,andthe establishment of owner cultivatorship of AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 3 of 31 ofeconomic-sizefarmsasthebasisof Philippineagriculture."TheStateshall promoteindustrializationandfull employmentbasedonsoundagricultural developmentandagrarianreform,through industriesthatmakefullandefficientuseof human and natural resources, and which are competitiveinbothdomesticandforeign markets:Provided,Thattheconversionof agriculturallandsintoindustrial,commercial orresidentiallandsshalltakeintoaccount, tillers'rightsandnationalfoodsecurity. Further,theStateshallprotectFilipino enterprises against unfair foreign competition and trade practices. "The State recognizes that there is not enough agricultural land to be divided and distributed toeachfarmerandregularfarmworkerso that each one can own his/her economic-size family farm. This being the case, a meaningful agrarianreformprogramtoupliftthelives and economic status of the farmer and his/her childrencanonlybeachievedthrough simultaneousindustrializationaimedat developingaself-reliantandindependent nationaleconomyeffectivelycontrolledby Filipinos."Tothisend,theStatemay,inthe interestofnationalwelfareordefense, establish and operate vital industries. "A more equitable distribution and ownership of land, with due regard to the rights of landowners to justcompensation,retentionrightsunder Section6ofRepublicActNo.6657,as amended, and to the ecological needs of the nation,shallbeundertakentoprovide farmersandfarmworkerswiththe opportunitytoenhancetheirdignityand improvethequalityoftheirlivesthrough greater productivity of agricultural lands. "The agrarianreformprogramisfoundedonthe rightoffarmersandregularfarmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or, in the caseofotherfarmworkers,toreceiveajust shareofthefruitsthereof.Tothisend,the State shall encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to the priorities and retention limits set forth in thisAct,takingintoaccountecological, developmental,andequityconsiderations, andsubjecttothepaymentofjust compensation.TheStateshallrespectthe rightofsmalllandowners,andshallprovide incentiveforvoluntaryland-sharing."As muchaspracticable,theimplementationof theprogramshallbecommunity-basedto assure,amongothers,thatthefarmersshall havegreatercontroloffarmgateprices,and easier access to credit. "The State shall recognize the right of farmers, farmworkersandlandowners,aswellas cooperatives and other independent farmers' organizations,toparticipateintheplanning, organization,andmanagementofthe program,andshallprovidesupportto agriculturethroughappropriatetechnology andresearch,andadequatefinancial, production,marketingandothersupport services."TheStateshallrecognizeand enforce,consistentwithexistinglaws,the rightsofruralwomentoownandcontrol land,takingintoconsiderationthe substantiveequalitybetweenmenand women as qualified beneficiaries, to receive a justshareofthefruitsthereof,andtobe representedinadvisoryorappropriate decision-making bodies. These rights shall be independentoftheirmalerelativesandof theircivilstatus."TheStateshallapplythe principles of agrarian reform, or stewardship, whenever applicable, in accordance with law, inthedispositionorutilizationofother naturalresources,includinglandsofthe publicdomain,underleaseorconcession, suitable to agriculture, subject to prior rights, AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 4 of 31 Whataretherightsoflandlessfarmersand farmworkers?a)to own directly or collectively the lands they till (for famers and regular farmworkers only) b)to receive a just share of the fruits of the lands theywork(forfarmersandallkindsof farmworkers) Whatarethelimitationsoftakingintheland mentioned in the constitution? a)Priorities and reasonable retention limits to be prescribed by the Congress b)Payment of just compensation Who are the persons whose rights shall be respected by the state in the determination of retention limits? Small landowners What right of farmers, farmworkers, and landowners, aswellascooperatives,andotherindependent farmers'organizationsshallberecognizedinthe agrarian reform as provided by the constitution? Right to participate in the planning, organization, and management of the program How can the state provide support to the agriculture? Throughappropriatetechnologyandresearch,and adequatefinancial,production,marketing,andother support service. C. CONSTITUTIONALITY OF THE CARL Association of Small Landowners v. DAR, 175 SCRA 343 What are the inherent powers of the state? a)Police Power homesteadrightsofsmallsettlersandthe rightsofindigenouscommunitiestotheir ancestrallands."TheStatemayresettle landlessfarmersandfarmworkersinitsown agricultural estates, which shall be distributed to them in the manner provided by law. "Bymeansofappropriateincentives,the Stateshallencouragetheformationand maintenance of economic-size family farms to be constituted by individual beneficiaries and small landowners. "The State shall protect the rightsofsubsistencefishermen, especially of localcommunities,to the preferentialuseof communal marine and fishing resources, both inland and offshore. It shall provide support to suchfishermenthroughappropriate technology and research, adequate financial, productionandmarketingassistanceand otherservices.TheStateshallalsoprotect, developandconservesuchresources.The protectionshallextendtooffshorefishing groundsofsubsistencefishermenagainst foreignintrusion.Fishworkersshallreceivea just share from their labor in the utilization of marine and fishing resources. "The State shall beguidedbytheprinciplesthatlandhasa socialfunctionandlandownershiphasa socialresponsibility.Ownersofagricultural landhavetheobligationtocultivatedirectly orthroughlaboradministrationthelands theyownandtherebymaketheland productive."TheStateshallprovide incentivestolandownerstoinvestthe proceedsoftheagrarianreformprogramto promoteindustrialization,employmentand privatizationofpublicsectorenterprises. Financialinstrumentsusedaspaymentfor lands shall contain features that shall enhance negotiabilityandacceptabilityinthe marketplace. "The State may lease undeveloped lands of the public domain to qualified entities for the developmentofcapital-intensivefarms,and traditionalandpioneeringcropsespecially those for exports subject to the prior rights of the beneficiaries under this Act." AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 5 of 31 b)Power of Eminent Domain c)Power of Taxation Power of Eminent Domain Inherentpowerofthestatethatenablesittoforcibly acquireprivatelandsintendedforpublicuseupon payment of just compensation What are the requirements for the proper exercise of the power of eminent domain? a)Public useb)Just compensation What are the elements of Police Power? a)Lawful meansb)Lawful subject

Canthestateexercisetwoinherentpowersatthe same time? Yesbyminglingthetwoinherentpowers.Inthe mingling of the police power and the power of eminent domain, the latter is being used as an implement of the former. Distinctions between the police power and the power of eminent domain a)Thepropertycondemnedunderthepolice powerisnoxiousorintendedfornoxious purpose while in the power of eminent domain, the property is wholesome and intended for a public use. b)The confiscation of property in the exerciseof policepowerisnotcompensable,unlikethe taking of property under the power of eminent domain,whichrequiresthepaymentofjust compensation to the owner. Whatinherentpowerdidthestateexercisedinthe CARL? Power of eminent domain or police power? Both.Themeasuresunderchallengemerelyprescribe retention limits for landowners, there is an exercise of the police power for the regulation of private property in accordance with the constitution. But where, to carry outsuchregulation,itbecomesnecessarytodeprive such owners of whatever lands they may own in excess of the maximum area allowed, there is definitely taking under the power of eminent domain for which payment of just compensation is imperative. Sincethepowertodeterminejustcompensationis vestedincourts,wasthejustcompensation determinedundertheCARLaviolationofthe constitution? No.Itistruethatthedeterminationofjust compensationisapowerlodgedinthecourts. However,thereisnolawwhichprohibits administrativebodiesliketheDARfromdetermining justcompensation.Infact,justcompensationcanbe thatamountagreeduponbythelandownerandthe governmentevenwithoutjudicialinterventionso long as both parties agree. The DAR can determine just compensation through appraisers and if the landowner agrees, then judicial intervention is not needed. What iscontemplatedbylawhoweveristhat,thejust compensation determined by an administrative body is merelypreliminary.Ifthelandownerdoesnotagree withthefindingofjustcompensationbyan administrativebody,thenitcangotocourtandthe determinationofthelattershallbethefinal determination. This is even so provided by RA 6657 Intheimplementationoftheagrarianreform,what arethemodesofcompensationprovidedunderthe CARL? a)Cash payment Landsabove50hectares25%cash, 75%govtfinancialinstruments negotiable at any timeLandsabove24hectares&upto50 hectares30%cash,70%govt financialinstrumentsnegotiableat any time Lands 24 hectares & below 35% cash, 65%govtfinancialinstruments negotiable at any timeb)Shares of stock in GOCC, LBP preferred shares, physicalassetsorotherqualifiedinvestments in accordance with guidelines set by the PARC AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 6 of 31 c)Tax credits which can be used against any tax liability d)LBP bonds Were the modes of compensation provided under the CARL unconstitutional? No. It cannot be denied that the traditional medium for thepaymentofjustcompensationismoneyandno other.Howeveragrarianreformisnotatraditional exerciseofthepowerofeminentdomain.Itisnotan ordinaryexpropriationwhereonlyaspecificproperty ofrelativelylimitedareaissoughttobetakenbythe Statefromitsownerforaspecificandperhapslocal purposebutarevolutionarykindofexpropriation.It includesallagriculturallandsnationwideanditwill involvenotmeremillionsofpesos.Thecostwillbe tremendous and it may bankrupt the government. For thisreason,theframersoftheCARLonlychosethe more practical method. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 7 of 31 II.SCOPE OF THE CARL Section 4, CARL, as amended by RA No. 9700 A.AS TO COVERED LANDS What are the lands covered by the CARP a)Allalienableanddisposablelandsofthepublic domain devoted to or suitable for agriculture. b)Alllandsofthepublicdomaininexcessofthe specific limits as determined by Congressc)AllotherlandsownedbytheGovernment devoted to or suitable for agriculture d)Allprivatelandsdevotedtoorsuitablefor agricultureregardlessoftheagricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon What are the lands not covered by the CARP a)Ancestrallandsofeachindigenouscultural community b)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedfor parks, wildlife, forest reserves, reforestation, fish sanctuariesandbreedinggrounds,watersheds and mangroves c)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedfor prawn farms and fishpondsd)Lands with at least 18% slope e)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedan found to be necessary fornational defense school sites and campuses experimental farm stations operated for educational purposes seedsandseedlingresearchandpilot production center church sites and convents mosque sites and Islamic centers communalburialgroundsand cemeteries penal colonies and penal farms govtandprivateresearchand quarantine centers f)landholdingsof landowners with a total area of five (5) hectares and below g)lands devoted to the raising of livestock, poultry and swine [Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR] h)lands obtained through homestead patent [Alita v. CA] SEC.4.Scope.TheComprehensiveAgrarian ReformLawof1988shallcover,regardlessof tenurialarrangementandcommodity produced,allpublicandprivateagricultural landsasprovidedinProclamationNo.131and ExecutiveOrderNo.229,includingotherlands ofthepublicdomainsuitableforagriculture: Provided, That landholdings of landowners with a total area of five (5) hectares and below shall notbecoveredforacquisitionanddistribution toqualifiedbeneficiaries.IHAcCS"More specifically,thefollowinglandsarecoveredby the CARP: "(a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public domain devoted to or suitable for agriculture.Noreclassificationofforestor minerallandstoagriculturallandsshallbe undertakenaftertheapprovalofthisActuntil Congress,takingintoaccountecological, developmental and equity considerations, shall havedeterminedbylaw,thespecificlimitsof thepublicdomain;"(b)Alllandsofthepublic domaininexcessofthespecificlimitsas determinedbyCongressinthepreceding paragraph;"(c)Allotherlandsownedbythe Governmentdevotedtoorsuitablefor agriculture; and "(d) All private lands devoted to orsuitableforagricultureregardlessofthe agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon. "A comprehensive inventory system in consonance with the national land use plan shall beinstitutedbytheDepartmentofAgrarian Reform(DAR),inaccordancewiththeLocal GovernmentCode,forthe purposeofproperly identifying and classifying farmlands within one (1)yearfromeffectivityofthisAct,without prejudicetotheimplementationoftheland acquisition and distribution." AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 8 of 31 EXCEPTION:landsobtainedthrough homesteadpatentthatarenotbeing personallycultivatedbyoriginal homesteadgranteesortheirdirect compulsory heirs [Paris v. Alfeche] CASES: 1.Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR Section2ofRA6657whichincludesprivate agriculturallandsdevotedtocommerciallivestock, poultryandswineraisinginthedefinitionof commercialfarmsisinvalid.Transcriptsofthe deliberationsoftheConstitutionalCommissionof 1986onthemeaningofthewordagricultural,clearlyshowthatitwasnevertheintentionofthe framersoftheConstitutiontoincludelivestockand poultryindustryinthecoverageofthe constitutionally-mandatedagrarianreformprogram of the Government. 2.Alita vs. CA ThePhilippineconstitutionrespectsthesuperiority ofthehomesteadersrightovertherightsofthe tenantsguaranteedbytheAgrarianReformstatute. InpointisSection6ofArticleXIIIofthe1987 Constitution which provides that the state shall apply theprinciplesofAgrarianReformorstewardship, wheneverapplicableinaccordancewithlaw,inthe dispositionorutilizationofothernaturalresources, includinglandsofpublicdomainunderleaseor concessionsuitabletoagriculture,subjecttoprior rights,homesteadrightsofsmallsettlers,andthe rightsofindigenouscommunitiestotheirancestral lands. Additionally, it is worthy of note that the newly promulgated Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1998orRA6657likewisecontainsaproviso supportingtheinapplicabilityofPD27tolands covered by homestead patents. Section 6 of RA 6657 providesthatoriginalhomesteadgranteesortheir directcompulsoryheirswhostillowntheoriginal homestead at the time of the approval of this Act shall retainthesameareasaslongastheycontinueto cultivate said homestead. 3.Paris v. Alfeche As an exception to the rule laid down in the case of Alitavs.CA,homesteadgranteesortheirdirect compulsoryheircanownandretaintheoriginal homesteadsonlyforaslongastheycontinueto personallycultivatethem.Thatparcelsoflandare covered by homestead patents will not automatically exempt them from the operation of land reform. It is thefactofcontinuedpersonallycultivationbythe original grantees or their direct compulsory heir that shallexempttheirlandsfromlandreformcoverage. In the case at bar, the petitioner herself admitted that thesubjectparcelsarefullytenanted,thussheis clearlynotcultivatingthem,norwillshepersonally cultivate any part thereof. Therefore, she has no right to retain any portion of her landholdings. B.AS TO CONTROVERSY What are the matters that fall under the jurisdiction of the DAR/DARAB?a)Adjudicationofallmattersinvolving implementationofagrarianreform[Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil.] b)Resolutionofagrariandisputesanddisputes arisingfromtenurialarrangements[Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil.] c)Approvalanddisapprovaloftheconversion, restructuringorreadjustmentofagricultural landsintoresidential,commercial,industrial andothernon-agriculturaluses.[Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil.] d)Disputes arising from joint venture agreements [Cubero v. Laguna West] e)Disputes relating to the rights and obligations oftwojuridicalpersonsengagedinthe management,cultivationanduseof agriculturallandsacquiredthroughCARP [Islanders CARP-Farmers v. Lapanday] AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 9 of 31 Whatarethemattersnotfallingunderthe jurisdiction of the DAR/DARAB?a)Cases involving breaches of contract and the parties have no tenurial, leasehold, or any other agrarian relationship [Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil.] b)Criminal cases even if it involves agricultural land and the relation over this land [People v. Vanzuela] c)Cases involving action for recovery of possession and juridical tie of landownership and tenancy are not present [DEARBC v. Sangunay] What isthebasisinthedetermination of whether a matter falls under the jurisdiction of DARAB?Agricultural land and the relationship over this land WhatarethosedisputesclassifiedasAgrarian Dispute under the CARL? (TACT) 1)Controversy relating to Tenurial arrangements 2)Disputesconcerningfarmworkers Associations or representation of persons3)ControversyrelatingtoCompensationof agricultural lands4)Conditions of Transfer of ownership under the agrarian law Whataretheindispensableelementsfortenancy relationship to exist? [Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Phil. & Mendoza v. Germino] Partiesarethelandownerandthetenantor agricultural lessee Subjectmatteroftherelationshipisan agricultural land Thereisconsentbetweenthepartiestothe relationship Thepurposeoftherelationshipistobring about agricultural production There is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lesseeThe harvestis shared between the landowner and the tenant or the agricultural lessee Whataretheimportantrequisitesinorderthata courtmayacquirecriminaljurisdiction?[Peoplev. Vanzuela] a)Jurisdiction over subject matter b)Jurisdictionoverterritorywheretheoffense was committedc)Jurisdiction over the person of the accused

CASES: 1.Stanfilco Employees v. Dole Philippines Thecontroversyinvolvedinthiscasedoesnotfall under the jurisdiction of DARAB.Under RA 6657 and itsimplementingrules,agriculturallandsandthe relationship over this land serves as the basis in the determinationofwhetheramatterfallsunderthe jurisdictionofDARAB.Thepartiesinthiscasehave notenurial,leasehold,oranyotheragrarian relationship that could bring their controversy within theambitofagrarianreformlawsandwithinthe jurisdiction of the DARAB. The resolution of this case would involve the application of civil law on breaches of contract rather than agrarian reform principles. 2.People v. Vanzuela The crime of stafa committed by a tenant or lessee doesnotfallunderthejurisdictionofDARAB. Jurisdiction ofa tribunalover thesubjectmatterof an action is conferred by law. It is determined by the material allegations of the complaint or information and the law at the time the action was commenced. EO 229 vested the DAR with quasi-judicial powers to determineandadjudicateagrarianreformmatters; andjurisdictionovermattersinvolvingthe implementationofagrarianreform,exceptthose falling under the exclusive original jurisdiction of the DAandDENR.UnderRA6657,theDARretains jurisdiction over all agrarian reform matters. Clearly thelawisdeafeninglysilentontheconfermentof anycriminaljurisdictioninfavoroftheDARAB.No lawhasconferredtheDARABofthejurisdictionto try criminal cases even if it involves agricultural land AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 10 of 31 and the relation over this land. Therefore the DARAB has no authority to try criminal cases at all. 3.Mendoza vs. Germino Jurisdiction over the subject matter is determined by theallegationsinthecomplaint.Itisdetermined exclusively by the constitution and the law. It cannot beconferredbythevoluntaryactoragreementof thepartiesoracquiredthroughawaived,enlarged or diminished by their act or omission, nor conferred by the acquiescenceof the court. Under Section 50 ofRA6657,aswellasSection34ofEO129-A,the DARABhasprimaryandexclusivejurisdiction,both original and appellate, to determineand adjudicate all agrarian disputes involving the implementation of theComprehensiveAgrarianReformProgram,and other agrarian laws and their implementing rules and regulations.AndunderBP129,asamendedbyRA 7691,theMTCshallhaveexclusiveoriginal jurisdiction over cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer.ThereforeMTChasthejurisdictionsince thelawexclusivelyconferredittheauthoritytotry cases involving forcible entry. Furthermore, although respondentaverredtenancyasanaffirmative defenseinhisanswer,thisdidnotautomatically divesttheMTCofjurisdictiontodisposeofthe ejectmentsuitonitsmeritsbecauseallegationof tenancy does not divest the MTC of jurisdiction. 4.DEARBC v. Sangunay and Labunos Controversyinthiscasedoesnotfallunderthe jurisdictionofDARAB.Jurisdictionoftribunal, includingaquasi-judicialofficeorgovernment agency,overthenatureandsubjectmatterofa petitionorcomplaintisentitledtoanyorallsuch reliefs.Sec.50ofRA6657providesthatDARABis vestedwiththeprimaryjurisdictiontodetermine andadjudicateagrarianreformmattersandshall havetheexclusivejurisdictionoverallmatters involving the implementation of the Agrarian Reform Program. Only the DARAB can adjudicate all agrarian disputes,cases,controversiesandmattersor incidents involving the implementation of the CARP. All that DEARBC prayed for was the ejectment of the respondentsfromtherespectiveportionsofthe subjectlandstheyallegedlyenteredandoccupied illegally.Clearlynoagrariandisputeexistbetween theparties.Theabsenceoftenurialarrangements whetherleasehold,tenancy,stewardshipor otherwisecannotbeoverlooked.Inthiscase,no juridicaltieoflandownershipandtenancywas allegedbetweenthepartieswhichwouldso categorize the controversy as an agrarian dispute. It is clearly an action for recovery of possession and not an agrarian dispute. 5.Islanders CARP-Farmers v. Lapanday Controversy in this case falls under the jurisdiction of DARAB. Sec. 50 of RA 6657 and sec. 17 of EO 229 vest intheDARtheprimaryandexclusivejurisdiction, bothoriginalandappellate,todetermineand adjudicate all matters involving the implementation ofagrarianreform.ThroughEO129-A,DARABwas created to assumethe powers and functions of the DARpertainingtotheadjudicationofagrarian reform cases. Moreover Revised Rules of the DARAB provides that the DARAB shall have the primary and exclusive jurisdiction, both original and appellate to determineandadjudicateallagrariandisputes involvingtheimplementationoftheCARPandits implementingrulesandregulation.Citingthe definitionofAgrariandisputeunderSec.3ofRA 6657, it is clear that the definition is broad enough to includedisputesarisingfromanytenurial arrangementsbeyondthatinthetraditional landowner-tenantorlessor-lesseerelationship. Thereforedisputesrelatingtotherightsand obligationsoftwojuridicalpersonsengagedinthe management,cultivationanduseofagricultural lands acquired through CARP fall within the ambit of thephraseanycontroversyrelatingtotenurial arrangements. 6.Cubero v. Laguna West DARAB has jurisdiction to determine and adjudicate all agrarian disputes involving implementation of the CARL. Included in the definition of agrarian disputes are those arising from tenurial arrangements beyond AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 11 of 31 thetraditionallandowner-tenantorlessor-lessee relationshipsuchasdisputesarisingfromjoint ventureagreements.Thus,theDARABhas jurisdictionoverdisputesarisingfromtheinstant JointProductionAgreemententeredintobythe parties in this case. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 12 of 31 III.ACQUISITION OF LANDS UNDER THE CARL Section 4, CARL, as amended by RA No. 9700 Section 5, CARL *NOTE: Sec. 7 of RA 9700 extended the implementation of the CARL,particularlytheacquisitionanddistributionof agricultural lands to June 30, 2014 Section 7, CARL, as amended SEC.4.Scope.TheComprehensiveAgrarian ReformLawof1988shallcover,regardlessof tenurialarrangementandcommodity produced,allpublicandprivateagricultural landsasprovidedinProclamationNo.131and ExecutiveOrderNo.229,includingotherlands ofthepublicdomainsuitableforagriculture: Provided, That landholdings of landowners with a total area of five (5) hectares and below shall notbecoveredforacquisitionanddistribution toqualifiedbeneficiaries.IHAcCS"More specifically,thefollowinglandsarecoveredby the CARP: "(a) All alienable and disposable lands of the public domain devoted to or suitable for agriculture.Noreclassificationofforestor minerallandstoagriculturallandsshallbe undertakenaftertheapprovalofthisActuntil Congress,takingintoaccountecological, developmental and equity considerations, shall havedeterminedbylaw,thespecificlimitsof thepublicdomain;"(b)Alllandsofthepublic domaininexcessofthespecificlimitsas determinedbyCongressinthepreceding paragraph;"(c)Allotherlandsownedbythe Governmentdevotedtoorsuitablefor agriculture; and "(d) All private lands devoted to orsuitableforagricultureregardlessofthe agricultural products raised or that can be raised thereon. "A comprehensive inventory system in consonance with the national land use plan shall beinstitutedbytheDepartmentofAgrarian Reform(DAR),inaccordancewiththeLocal GovernmentCode,forthe purposeofproperly identifying and classifying farmlands within one (1)yearfromeffectivityofthisAct,without prejudicetotheimplementationoftheland acquisition and distribution." Section 5. Schedule of Implementation. The distribution of all lands covered by this Act shall beimplementedimmediatelyandcompleted withinten(10)yearsfromtheeffectivity thereof. SEC.7.Priorities.-TheDAR,incoordination withthePresidentialAgrarianReformCouncil (PARC)shallplanandprogramthefinal acquisitionanddistributionofallremaining unacquired and undistributed agricultural lands fromtheeffectivityofthisActuntilJune30, 2014. Lands shall be acquired and distributed as follows: PhaseOne:Duringthefive(5)-yearextension period hereafter all remaining lands above fifty (50)hectaresshallbecoveredforpurposesof agrarian reform upon the effectivity of this Act. All private agricultural lands of landowners with aggregatelandholdingsinexcessoffifty(50) hectares which have already been subjected to anoticeofcoverageissuedonorbefore December10,2008;riceandcornlandsunder PresidentialDecreeNo.27;allidleor abandonedlands;allprivatelandsvoluntarily offeredbytheownersforagrarianreform: Provided,Thatwithrespecttovoluntaryland transfer, only those submitted by June 30, 2009 shallbeallowedProvided,further,Thatafter June 30, 2009, the modes of acquisition shall be limited to voluntary offer to sell and compulsory acquisition:Provided,furthermore,Thatall previouslyacquiredlandswhereinvaluationis subjecttochallengebylandownersshallbe completedandfinallyresolvedpursuantto Section17ofRepublicActNo.6657,as amended: Provided, finally, as mandated by the lic Act No. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 13 of 31 RepublicActNo.6657,asamended,and RepublicActNo.3844,asamended,only farmers(tenantsorlessees)andregular farmworkersactuallytillingthelands,as certifiedunderoathbytheBarangayAgrarian Reform Council (BARC) and attested under oath bythelandowners,arethequalified beneficiaries.Theintendedbeneficiaryshall state under oath before the judge of the city or municipal court that he/she is willing to work on thelandtomakeitproductiveandtoassume the obligation of paying the amortization for the compensationofthelandandthelandtaxes thereon;alllandsforeclosedbygovernment financialinstitutions;alllandsacquiredbythe PresidentialCommissiononGoodGovernment (PCGG);andallotherlandsownedbythe governmentdevotedtoorsuitablefor agriculture,whichshallbeacquiredand distributedimmediatelyupontheeffectivityof thisAct,withtheimplementationtobe completed by June 30, 2012; Phase Two: (a) Lands twenty-four (24) hectares up to fifty (50) hectares shall likewise be covered forpurposesofagrarianreformuponthe effectivityofthisAct.Allalienableand disposablepublicagriculturallands;allarable publicagriculturallandsunderagro-forest, pastureandagriculturalleasesalready cultivatedandplantedtocropsinaccordance with Section 6, Article XIII of the Constitution; all public agricultural lands which are to be opened for new development and resettlement: and all privateagriculturallandsoflandownerswith aggregatelandholdingsabovetwenty-four(24) hectaresuptofifty(50)hectareswhichhave already been subjected to a notice of coverage issuedonorbeforeDecember1O,2008,to implement principally the rights of farmers and regularfarmworkers,whoarelandless,toown directly or collectively the lands they till, which shallbedistributedimmediatelyuponthe effectivityofthisAct, with theimplementation to be completed by June 30, 2012; and"(b)Allremainingprivateagriculturallandsof landownerswithaggregatelandholdingsin excessoftwenty-four(24)hectares,regardless astowhetherthesehavebeensubjectedto noticesofcoverageornot,withthe implementation to begin on July 1, 2012 and to be completed by June 30, 2013; Phase Three: All other private agricultural lands commencingwithlargelandholdingsand proceedingtomediumandsmalllandholdings under the following schedule: "(a)Landsoflandownerswithaggregate landholdingsaboveten(10)hectaresupto twenty- four (24)hectares, insofar as the excess hectarage above ten (10) hectares is concerned, to begin on July 1,2012 and to be completed by June 30, 2013; and "(b)Landsoflandownerswithaggregate landholdings from the retention limit up to ten (10) hectares, to begin on July 1, 2013 and to be completedbyJune30,2014;toimplement principallytherightoffarmersandregular farmworkerswhoarelandless,toowndirectly or collectively the lands they till. The schedule of acquisition and redistribution of allagriculturallandscoveredbythisprogram shallbemadeinaccordancewiththeabove order o f priority, which shall be provided in the implementing rules to be prepared by the PARC, takingintoconsiderationthefollowing:the landholdings wherein the farmers are organized and understand ,the meaning and obligations of farmland ownership; the distribution of lands to thetillersattheearliestpracticabletime;the enhancementofagriculturalproductivity;and theavailabilityoffundsandresourcesto implement and support the program: Provided, ThatthePARCshalldesignandconduct seminars,symposia,informationcampaigns, and other similar programs for farmers who are not organized or not covered by any landholding AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 14 of 31 Order of Priorities of Coverage PHASE 1 public landsPHASE 2 public lands PHASE 3 private agricultural lands Section 16, CARL Completionbythesefarmersofthe aforementioned seminars, symposia, and other similarprogramsshallbeencouragedinthe implementationofthisActparticularlythe provisions of this Section. "Landacquisitionanddistributionshallbe completedbyJune30,2014onaprovince-by- provincebasis.Inanycase,thePARCorthe PARCExecutiveCommittee(PARCEXCOM), uponrecommendationbytheProvincial AgrarianReformCoordinatingCommittee (PARCCOM),maydeclarecertainprovincesas prioritylandreformareas,inwhichcasethe acquisitionanddistributionofprivate agriculturallandsthereinunderadvanced phases may be implemented ahead of the above schedules on the condition that prior phases in theseprovinceshavebeencompleted: Provided,Thatnotwithstandingtheabove schedules,phasethree(b)shallnotbe implementedinaparticularprovinceuntilat leastninetypercent(90%)oftheprovincial balance of that particular province as of January 1, 2009 under Phase One, Phase Two (a), Phase Two(b),,andPhaseThree(a),excludinglands underthejurisdictionoftheDepartmentof EnvironmentandNaturalResources(DENR), have been successfully completed. ThePARCshallestablishguidelinesto implement the above priorities and distribution scheme, including the determination of who are qualifiedbeneficiaries:Provided,Thatan owner-tillermaybeabeneficiaryoftheland he/shedoes notown butisactuallycultivating to the extent of the difference between the area ofthelandhe/sheownsandtheawardceiling ofthree(3)hectares:Provided,further,That collective ownership by the farmer beneficiaries shall be subject to Section 25 of Republic Act No. 6657, as amended: Provided, furthermore, That ruralwomenshallbegiventheopportunityto participateinthedevelopmentplanningand implementation of this Act: Provided, finally,Thatinnocaseshouldtheagrarianreform beneficiaries'sex,economic,religious,social, cultural and political attributes adversely affect the distribution of lands. SECTION16.ProcedureforAcquisitionof Private Lands. For purposes of acquisition of private lands, the following procedures shall be followed: (a)Afterhavingidentifiedtheland,the landowners and the beneficiaries, the DAR shall send its notice to acquire the land to the owners thereof, by personal delivery or registered mail, and post the same in a conspicuous place in the municipalbuildingandbarangayhallofthe place where the property is located. Said notice shallcontaintheofferoftheDARtopaya correspondingvalueinaccordancewiththe valuation set forth in Sections 17, 18, and other pertinent provisions hereof. (b)Withinthirty(30)daysfromthedateof receipt of written notice by personal delivery or registeredmail,thelandowner,his administrator or representative shall inform the DAR of his acceptance or rejection of the offer. (c)Ifthelandowneracceptstheofferofthe DAR, the Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) shall paythelandownerthepurchasepriceofthe landwithinthirty(30)daysafterheexecutes anddeliversadeedoftransferinfavorofthe governmentandsurrenderstheCertificateof Title and other muniments of title. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 15 of 31 Whataretheproceduresincompulsoryland acquisition 1)IdentificationbytheDARoftheland, landowner & beneficiary 2)Notice by the DAR to the landowner about the compulsoryacquisitionandthepriceoffer thru:a)Personal notice or by registered mail b)Postingofnoticeinaconspicuous place in the brgy hall & municipal hall where the land is located 3)Replybythelandownerabouthisacceptance or rejection of the offered price a)LandowneracceptsLandbankwill pay the landowner within 30 days from execution&deliveryofDeedof Transfer b)LandownerrejectsDARwill determine the justcompensation thru thesummaryadministrative proceedings c)LandownerdisagreeswiththeDAR decisionlandownermaybringthe matter to the regular courts of justice forfinaldeterminationofjust compensation4)Taking of immediate possession of the land by the DAR a)Ifthelandownerreceivesthe corresponding payment; or b)ifthelandownerdoesnotrespondto the Notice of Acquisition 5)RequestbytheDARtoRegisterofDeedsto issueaTransferCertificateofTitletothe Republic of the Phil. 6)Distributionoflandstothenqualified beneficiaries Whatarethe2noticesrequiredforthevalidityof implementation?a)Notice of coverage [DAR AO no. 12] b)Notice of acquisition [Sec. 16, CARL] Whennonoticeofcoveragehasbeenissuedorif noticeofcoveragehasbeenissuedbutdidnot particularlystatetheportionsoflandthatwillbe included, what would be the effect?Itshouldbetreatedasviolationofconstitutionaldue processandshouldbedeemedarbitrary,capricious, whimsical and tainted with grave abuse of discretion When does thetitle or ownership of the land transfer to the state?Only upon full payment of the just compensation. Until thejustcompensationisfinallydeterminedandfully paid,thetitleandownershipremainswiththe landowners even if the DAR has deposited the offered (d)Incaseofrejectionorfailuretoreply,the DARshallconductsummaryadministrative proceedings to determine the compensation for thelandrequiringthelandowner,theLBPand otherinterestedpartiestosubmitevidenceas tothejustcompensationfortheland,within fifteen (15) days from the receipt of the notice. Aftertheexpirationoftheaboveperiod,the matterisdeemedsubmittedfordecision.The DAR shall decide the case within thirty (30) days after it is submitted for decision. (e)Uponreceiptbythelandownerofthe correspondingpaymentor,incaseofrejection ornoresponsefromthelandowner,uponthe depositwithanaccessiblebankdesignatedby theDARofthecompensation incash orinLBP bonds in accordance with this Act, the DAR shall take immediate possession of the land and shall request the proper Register of Deeds to issue a Transfer Certificate of Title (TCT) in the name of theRepublicofthePhilippines.TheDARshall thereafterproceedwiththeredistributionof the land to the qualified beneficiaries. (f)Anypartywhodisagreeswiththedecision maybringthemattertothecourtofproper jurisdictionforfinaldeterminationofjust compensation. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 16 of 31 pricewiththeLandbank.ThemerefactthattheDAR hasdepositedtheofferedpricedoesnotwarrantthe cancellation of the owners title. Does opening of trust account constitute payment?Nobecausethelawrequiresjustcompensationtobe paidincashandLandbankbondsandnotbytrust account. Section 19, CARL Whatarethedocumentaryrequirementsfor voluntary offer to sell?a)Title or proof of ownership, if untitled b)Tax declaration c)Approved survey plan *NOTE:ifthelandownerfailstosubmitthedocumentary requirementsthelandwillbesubjectedtocompulsory acquisition. Section 20, CARL *NOTE:Sec.7ofCARL,asamendedbyRA9700,allowed voluntary land transfer up to June 30, 2009 only. After the said date, modes of acquisition are limited to voluntary offer to sell and compulsory acquisition What are the modes of land acquisition?a)Voluntary offer to sell b)Compulsory acquisitionc)Voluntary land transfer CASE: Roxas & Co., Inc. v. CA TheacquisitionProceedingsoverthehaciendasinthis casewerenotvalid.Foravalidimplementationofthe CAR Program, two notices are required first the Notice of Coverageandletterofinvitationtoapreliminary conference sent to the landowner, the representatives of the BARC, LBP, farmer beneficiaries and other interested parties and second, the Notice of Acquisition sentto the landowner under Section 16 of the CARL. The importance of the first notice, the Notice of Coverage and the letter ofinvitationtotheconference,anditsactualconduct cannotbeunderstated.Theyarestepsdesignedto complywiththerequirementsofadministrativedue process.The implementation of the CARL is an exercise oftheStatespolicepowerandthepowerofeminent domain.TotheextentthattheCARLprescribes retention limits to the landowners, there is an exercise of policepowerfortheregulationofprivatepropertyin accordancewiththeConstitution.Butwhere,tocarry SECTION 19. Incentives for Voluntary Offers for Sales.Landowners,otherthanbanksand otherfinancialinstitutions,whovoluntarily offertheirlandsforsaleshall beentitledtoan additional five percent (5%) cash payment. ECTION20.VoluntaryLandTransfer.Landownersofagriculturallandssubjectto acquisitionunderthisActmayenterintoa voluntaryarrangementfordirecttransferof theirlandstoqualifiedbeneficiariessubjectto the following guidelines: (a)Allnoticesforvoluntarylandtransfermust be submitted to the DAR within the first year of theimplementationoftheCARP.Negotiations betweenthelandownersandqualified beneficiariescoveringanyvoluntaryland transferwhich remainunresolved afterone (1) year shall not be recognized and such land shall insteadbeacquiredbythegovernmentand transferred pursuant to this Act. (b)Thetermsandconditionsofsuchtransfer shall not be less favorable to the transferee than thoseofthegovernment'sstandingofferto purchasefromthelandownerandtoresellto the beneficiaries, if such offers have been made and are fully known to both parties. (c)Thevoluntaryagreementshallinclude sanctionsfornon-compliancebyeitherparty andshallbedulyrecordedandits implementation monitored by the DAR. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 17 of 31 outsuchregulation,theownersaredeprivedoflands they own in excess of the maximum area allowed, there is also a taking under the power of eminent domain. In this case, respondent DAR claims that it sent a letter of invitationtopetitionercorporation,throughJaime Pimentel,theadministratorofHaciendaPalicobuthe wasnotauthorizedassuchbythecorporation.TheSC stressedthatthefailureofrespondentDARtocomply withtherequisitesofdueprocessintheacquisition proceedings does not give the SC the power to nullify the CLOAsalreadyissuedtothefarmerbeneficiaries.The Courtsaid,toassumethepoweristoshort-circuitthe administrativeprocess,whichhasyettorunitsregular course.RespondentDARmustbegiventhechanceto correctitsprocedurallapsesintheacquisition proceedings.InHaciendaPalicoalone,CLOA'swere issuedto177farmerbeneficiariesin1993.Sincethen untilthepresent,thesefarmershavebeencultivating their lands. It goes against the basic precepts of justice, fairness and equity to deprive these people, through no faultoftheirown,ofthelandtheytill.Thepetitionis granted in part and the acquisition proceedings over the threehaciendasarenullifiedforrespondentDAR's failure to observe due process. IV.ALTERNATIVES TO LAND ACQUISITION Section 31, CARL SECTION31.CorporateLandowners.Corporatelandownersmayvoluntarily transferownershipovertheiragricultural landholdingstotheRepublicofthe PhilippinespursuanttoSection20hereofor toqualifiedbeneficiaries,undersuchterms andconditions,consistentwiththisAct,as they may agree upon, subject to confirmation bytheDAR.UponcertificationbytheDAR, corporationsowningagriculturallandsmay givetheirqualifiedbeneficiariestherightto purchase such proportion of the capital stock ofthecorporationthattheagriculturalland, actuallydevotedtoagriculturalactivities, bearsinrelationtothecompany'stotal assets,undersuchtermsandconditionsas may be agreed upon by them. In no case shall the compensation received by the workers at thetimethesharesofstocksaredistributed bereduced.Thesameprincipleshallbe appliedtoassociations,withrespecttotheir equityorparticipation.Corporationsor associationswhichvoluntarilydivesta proportionoftheircapitalstock,equityor participation in favor of their workers or other qualified beneficiaries under this section shall bedeemedtohavecompliedwiththe provisionsoftheAct:Provided,Thatthe followingconditionsarecompliedwith:a)In ordertosafeguardtherightofbeneficiaries whoownsharesofstockstodividendsand otherfinancialbenefits,thebooksofthe corporation or association shall be subject to periodic audit by certified public accountants chosen by the beneficiaries; b) Irrespective of the value of their equity in the corporation or association, the beneficiaries shall be assured of at least one (1) representative in the board of directors, or in a management or executive committee, if one exists, of the corporation or association;andc)Anysharesacquiredby such workers and beneficiaries shall have the samerightsandfeaturesasallothershares. d)Anytransferofsharesofstocksbythe originalbeneficiariesshallbevoidabinitio unless said transaction is in favor of a qualified andregisteredbeneficiarywithinthesame corporation.Ifwithintwo(2)yearsfromthe approval of this Act, the land or stock transfer envisionedaboveisnotmadeorrealizedor the plan for such stock distribution approved bythePARCwithinthesameperiod,the agriculturallandofthecorporateownersor corporationshallbesubjecttothe compulsory coverage of this Act. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 18 of 31 CASE: Hacienda Luisita v. PARC Guide Questions: 1)Who can approve and revoke Stock Distribution PlansundertheCARL?Withrespectto revocation,whataccordingtothecourt,was the basis of this authority? The Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) has jurisdiction, power and authority to approve and nullify or revoke Stock Distribution Plans. RA 6657explicitlyvestedthePARCwiththepower to approve stock distribution plans however it is silentwhenitcomesto revokingorrecallingan approvedSDP.Accordingtothecourt,such powerorauthorityisdeemedpossessedunder thedoctrineofnecessaryimplication,abasic postulatethatwhatisimpliedinastatuteisas muchapartofitasthatwhichisexpressed. Applyingthesaiddoctrine,theconfermentof expresspowertoapproveaSDPnecessarily includes the power to revoke the approval of the plan. 2)In the case, did the supreme court declare Sec. 31 of the CARL unconstitutional?No,SCdidnotdeclareSec.31unconstitutional because of the following reasons: Constitutional question was not raised at the earliest possible opportunity.The resolution of the constitutional issue is not the lis mota of the case Sec. 31simplyimplements sec.4ofart. XIIIoftheconstitutionthatlandcanbe owned collectively by farmers. 3)Did the SC uphold the revocation of the SDP? Yes,SCupheldtherevocationbecauseofthe3 objectionable features of the SDP: Man days. In using man days as the basisfortheacquisitionofshares,HLI violatedtheruleonstockdistribution and effectively deprived the beneficiaries ofequalsharesofstockinthe corporation,for,inneteffect,these 6,296qualifiedbeneficiaries,who theoretically had given up their rights to the land that could have been distributed to them, suffered a dilution of their due share entitlement.Wateringdownofthesharesofstock. HLIhaschosentousetheshares earmarkedforfarmworkersasreward system chips to water down the shares of the original 6,296 beneficiaries. It is clear that the original 6,296 beneficiaries, who werequalifiedatthetimeofthe approvaloftheSDP,sufferedfrom wateringdownofshares.Eachoriginal beneficiaryisentitledto18,804.32HLI shares. The original beneficiaries got less than the guaranteed no. of share. Timeframeoftheimplementationof theSDP.Par.3oftheSDOAexpressly providing for30-year timeframe for HLI-to-beneficiariesstocktransfersan arrangement contrary to what Sec. 11 of DAO10 prescribes. Said sec. 11 provides for the implementation of the approved SDP within 3 months from receipt by the corporatelandowneroftheapprovalof the plan by PARC.

4)Doesthenon-impairmentclausebarthe court fromreviewingthevalidityofapartially implemented SDP? Nobecausethenon-impairmentprotectionis applicableonlytolawsthatderogateprioracts orcontractsbyenlarging,abridgingorinany manner changing the intention of the parties and SDOA is not a law. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 19 of 31 IV.RETENTION RIGHTS, EXEMPTIONS, EXCLUSIONS Section 6, of RA 6657 as amended by RA 9700 SECTION6.RetentionLimits.Exceptas otherwiseprovidedinthisAct,nopersonmay ownorretain,directlyorindirectly,anypublic orprivateagriculturalland,thesizeofwhich shall vary according to factors governing a viable family-size farm, such as commodity produced, terrain,infrastructure,andsoilfertilityas determined by the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council(PARC)createdhereunder,butinno caseshallretentionbythelandownerexceed five (5) hectares. Three (3) hectares may be awarded to each child ofthelandowner,subjecttothefollowing qualifications: (1) that he is at least fifteen (15) years of age; and (2) that he is actually tilling the landordirectlymanagingthefarm:Provided, Thatlandownerswhoselandshavebeen coveredbyPresidentialDecreeNo.27shallbe allowed to keep the areas originally retained by themthereunder:Provided,further,That originalhomesteadgranteesortheirdirect compulsoryheirswhostillowntheoriginal homesteadatthetimeoftheapprovalofthis Actshallretainthesameareasaslongasthey continue to cultivate said homestead. Therighttochoosetheareatoberetained, whichshallbecompactorcontiguous,shall pertaintothelandowner:Provided,however, Thatincasetheareaselectedforretentionby the landowner is tenanted, the tenant shall have the option to choose whether to remain therein orbeabeneficiaryinthesameoranother agriculturallandwithsimilarorcomparable features.Incasethetenantchoosestoremain in the retained area, he shall be considered aleaseholderandshalllosehisrighttobea beneficiaryunderthisAct.Incasethetenant choosestobeabeneficiaryinanother agriculturalland,heloseshisrightasa leaseholdertothelandretainedbythe landowner. The tenant must exercise this option within a period of one (1) year from the time the landownermanifestshischoiceoftheareafor retention. In all cases, the security of tenure of the farmers or farmworkers on the land prior to the approval of this Act shall be respected. UpontheeffectivityofthisAct,anysale, disposition,lease,management,contractor transfer of possession of private lands executed by the original landowner in violation of the Act shall be null and void: Provided, however, That thoseexecutedpriortothisActshallbevalid only when registered with the Register of Deeds withinaperiodofthree(3)monthsafterthe effectivity of this Act. Thereafter, all Registers of Deeds shall inform the Department of Agrarian Reform(DAR)withinthirty(30)daysofany transaction involving agricultural lands in excess of five (5) hectares. SEC.6-A.ExceptiontoRetentionLimits. Provincial, city and municipal government units acquiringprivateagriculturallandsby expropriationorothermodesofacquisitionto beusedforactual,directandexclusivepublic purposes,suchasroadsandbridges,public markets,schoolsites,resettlementsites,local government facilities, public parks and barangay plazas or squares, consistent with the approved local comprehensive land use plan, shall not be subjecttothefive(5)-hectareretentionlimit under this Section and Sections 70 and 73(a) of RepublicActNo.6657,asamended:Provided, ThatlandssubjecttoCARPshallfirstundergo the land acquisition and distribution process of theprogram:Provided,further,Thatwhen theselandshavebeensubjectedto expropriation, the agrarian reform beneficiaries therein shall be paid just compensation. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 20 of 31 Whatarethefactorsgoverningaviablefamilysize farms?a)Commodity produced b)Terrain c)Infrastructure d)Soil fertility Whatarethelandscoveredbytheretentionlimit under section 6 of RA 6657?a)Public agricultural lands b)Private agricultural lands Whatisthemaximumsizeofthelandcana landowner retain?5 hectares Whatisthesizeofthelandthatcanbeawardedto each child of the landowner?3 hectares Whatarethequalificationsshouldachildofa landownermetinordertobeawardedwithaland under section 6 of RA 6657?a)At least 15 years of age b)Heisactuallytillingthelandordirectly managing the farm Doesthechildneedtodirectlyorpersonallytillthe land?No. it is enough the he directly manages the farm. Canlandsawardedtoqualifiedchildrenof landowners be sold, transferred, or conveyed?No. it cannot be sold, transferred or conveyed within 10 yearsExceptions: 1. Through hereditary succession 2. To the government 3. To the LBP 4. To other qualified beneficiaries WhataretheconditionimposedbyRA6657to originalhomesteadgranteesortheircompulsory heirs in order to retain their land?a)They are still the original owner of the original homesteadatthetimeoftheapprovalofRA 6657 b)Theystillcontinuetocultivatethesaid homestead What is the right vested by RA 6657 to the landowners with respect to the retention limit?Right to choose the area to be retained What is the period should the landowner exercise his right to choose the area to be retained?Within 60 days from receipt of the Notice of Coverage What is the effect if the landowner failed to exercise his right to choose within the specified period?TheMunicipalAgrarianReformOfficerwilldesignate the retained area for the landowner. If the landowner disagrees he may file a protest with the MARO WhatistheconditionimposedbyRA6657with regards to the right of a landowner to choose the area to be retained?The land should be compact or contiguous

Willamereoccupationorcultivationofan agricultural land make a tiller an agricultural tenant?No Whataretheoptionsgiventothetenantsofthe retained area?a)To remain in the said landSEC.6-B.ReviewofLimitsofLandSize. Within six (6) months from the effectivity of this Act,theDARshallsubmitacomprehensive study on the land size appropriate for each type ofcroptoCongressforapossiblereviewof limits of land sizes provided in this Act AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 21 of 31 b)beabeneficiaryinthesameoranother agriculturallandwithsimilarorcomparable features What are the effects if a tenant chooses to remain in the retained area?a)He shall be considered a leaseholder or a lessee b)He shall lose his rights to be a beneficiary under RA 6657 What are the rights entitled to a lessee?a)Peaceful possession & enjoyment of the land b)Manage and work on the land in a manner and methodofcultivationandharvestwhich conform to proven farm practices c)Mechanize all or any phase of his farm work d)Deal with millers and processors and attend to the issuance quedans and warehouse receipts for the produce due him e)Be afforded a homelot f)Beindemnifiedforthecostandexpenses incurredinthecultivation,plantingor harvestingandotherexpensesincidentalto theimprovementofhiscropincasehe surrenders or abandons his landholding for just cause or ejected therefrom g)Buytheagriculturallandholdingunder reasonabletermsandconditionsincasethe agricultural lessor decides to sell the same h)Redeem the landholding at a reasonable price andconsiderationincasetheagricultural lessor sold the same to a third person without his knowledge Whatistheeffectifatenantchoosestobea beneficiary in the same or another agricultural land?Heshalllosehisrightsasaleaseholdertotheland retained by the owner Whatistheperiodgiventothetenantstoexercise their option?Within 1 year from the time the landownermanifests his choice of the area for retention Undersection6,whatshallberespectedinthe implementation of the retention limit?Security of tenure of the farmers or farmworkers on the land prior to the approval of RA 6657 Undersection6,shouldtheretainedareabe personally cultivated by the landowner?No, the retained area need not be personally cultivated bythelandowner.Cultivationcanbedoneindirectly through labor administration Canalandownerwhohasalreadyexercisedhis retentionrightsunderPD27beentitledtothe retention rights under RA 6657?No. He can no longer exercise the retention right under RA 6657. However if the landowner chooses to retain 5 hectaresunderRA6657,the7hectarespreviously retainedbyhimunderPD27shallbeimmediately placed under the coverage of the RA 6657 Can spouses retain 5 hectares each under RA 6657?It depends on the property regime of the spouses: a)Conjugal or absolute community the spouses can retain only 5 hectares b)Separation of property spouses can retain 5 hectares each Whatarethelandsincludedintheexceptionto retention limits?Privateagriculturallandsacquiredbyprovincial,city andmunicipalgovtunitsthroughexpropriationor other modes of acquisition used for actual, direct and exclusive public purposes such as: a)Roads and bridges b)Public markets c)School sites d)Resettlement sites e)Local govt facilities f)Public parks g)Barangay plazas or squares

AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 22 of 31 Section 28 of RA 6657 WhatwillhappentothecropsatthetimetheDAR took possession of the land?Thelandownerretainshisrightsovercropsnotyet harvested Section 10 of RA 6657 What are the lands not subject to retention limit a)Ancestrallandsofeachindigenouscultural community b)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedfor parks, wildlife, forest reserves, reforestation, fish sanctuariesandbreedinggrounds,watersheds and mangroves c)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedfor prawn farms and fishpondsd)Lands with at least 18% slope e)Landsactually,directlyandexclusivelyusedan found to be necessary fornational defense school sites and campuses experimental farm stations operated for educational purposes seedsandseedlingresearchandpilot production center church sites and convents mosque sites and Islamic centers communalburialgroundsand cemeteries penal colonies and penal farms govtandprivateresearchand quarantine centers f)landholdingsof landowners with a total area of five (5) hectares and below g)lands devoted to the raising of livestock, poultry and swine [Luz Farms v. Sec. of DAR] h)lands obtained through homestead patent [Alita v. CA] EXCEPTION:landsobtainedthrough homesteadpatentthatarenotbeing personallycultivatedbyoriginal homesteadgranteesortheirdirect compulsory heirs [Paris v. Alfeche] CASES: 1.RomanCatholicArchbishopofCaceresvDAR Secretary Facts:Archbishopistheregisteredownerofseveral propertiesinCamarinesSur,withatotalareaof 268.5668hectares. Of thatland, 249.0236hectaresare planted with rice and corn, while the remaining 19.5432 hectaresareplantedwithcoconuttrees.In1985, Archbishopseveralpetitionsforexemptionofcertain propertieslocatedinvarioustownsofCamarinesSur fromthecoverageofOperationLandTransferunder SECTION28.StandingCropsattheTimeof Acquisition.Thelandownershallretainhis share of any standing crops unharvested at the time theDAR shall take possession of the land under Section 16 of the Act, and shall be givena reasonable time to harvest the same. SECTION10.ExemptionsandExclusions.Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found to be necessary for parks, wildlife, forest reserves,reforestation,fishsanctuariesand breeding grounds, watersheds, and mangroves, nationaldefense,schoolsitesandcampuses includingexperimentalfarmstationsoperated bypublicorprivateschoolsforeducational purposes,seedsandseedlingsresearchand pilotproductioncenters,churchsitesand conventsappurtenantthereto,mosquesites andIslamiccentersappurtenantthereto, communal burial grounds and cemeteries, penal colonies and penal farms actually worked by the inmates, governmentand private researchand quarantinecentersandalllandswitheighteen percent(18%)slopeandover,exceptthose alreadydevelopedshallbeexemptfromthe coverage of the Act. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 23 of 31 Presidential Decree No. 27. Two of these petitions were deniedinanOrderdatedNovember6, 1986,issued by the Regional Director of DAR, Region V, Juanito L. Lorena. ArchbishopappealedfromtheorderoftheRegional Directorcontending,interalia,thattheyareusedfor charitable and religious purposes. The appeal was denied by the DAR Secretary. On appeal to the CA, the same was dismissed. Issue:Whetherornotthesubjectlandsareexempt from the coverage of CARP Held:Archbishop cannot claim exemption in behalf of themillionsofFilipinofaithful,asthelandsareclearly not exempt under the law. The laws simply speak of the landownerwithoutqualificationastounderwhattitle the land is held or what rights to the land the landowner may exercise. There is no distinction made whether the landowner holds naked title only or can exercise all the rightsofownership.ArchbishopwouldhavetheCourt readdeeperintothelaw, tocreateexceptionsthatare not stated in PD 27 and RA 6657, and to do so would be to frustrate the revolutionary intent of the law, which is theredistributionofagriculturallandforthebenefitof landless farmers and farmworkers. 2. Natalia Realty vs. DAR FACTS: PetitionerNATALIAistheownerofthree(3) contiguousparcelsoflandwithatotalof125.0078 hectares and embraced in a TCT of the ROD. PresidentialProclamationNo.1637setaside 20,312 hectares of land located in the Municipalities of Antipolo, San Mateo and Montalban as townsite areas to absorb the population overspill in the metropolis which were designated as the Lungsod Silangan Townsite. The NATALIApropertiesaresituatedwithintheareas proclaimed as townsite reservation. ISSUE: Arelandsalreadyclassifiedforresidential, commercial or industrial use, as approved by the Housing andLandUseRegulatoryBoardanditsprecursor agencies 1 prior to 15 June 1988, 2 covered by R.A. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988? RULING:NO Section4ofR.A.6657providesthattheCARL shall"cover,regardlessoftenurialarrangementand commodity produced, all public and private agricultural lands."Astowhatconstitutes"agriculturalland,"itis referredtoas"landdevotedtoagriculturalactivityas definedinthisActandnotclassifiedasmineral,forest, residential,commercialorindustrialland."16The deliberationsoftheConstitutionalCommissionconfirm thislimitation."Agriculturallands"areonlythoselands whichare"arableandsuitableagriculturallands"and "donotincludecommercial,industrialandresidential lands." 17 Basedontheforegoing,itisclearthatthe undevelopedportionsoftheAntipoloHillsSubdivision cannotinanylanguagebeconsideredas"agricultural lands." These lots were intended for residential use. They ceasedtobeagriculturallandsuponapprovaloftheir inclusionintheLungsodSilanganReservation.Even today, the areas in question continued to be developed as a low-cost housing subdivision, albeit at a snail's pace. ThiscanreadilybegleanedfromthefactthatSAMBA memberseveninstitutedanactiontorestrain petitioners from continuing with such development. The enormityoftheresourcesneededfordevelopinga subdivisionmayhavedelayeditscompletionbutthis doesnotdetractfrom the factthat these lands arestill residential lands and outside the ambit of the CARL. Indeed, lands not devoted to agricultural activity areoutsidethecoverageofCARL.Theseincludelands previously converted to non-agricultural uses prior to the effectivityofCARLbygovernmentagenciesotherthan respondentDAR.InitsRevisedRulesandRegulations AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 24 of 31 GoverningConversionofPrivateAgriculturalLandsto Non-Agricultural Uses, 18 DAR itself defined "agricultural land" thus . . . Agricultural lands refers to those devoted to agriculturalactivityasdefinedinR.A.6657andnot classifiedasmineralorforestbytheDepartmentof EnvironmentandNaturalResources(DENR)andits predecessoragencies,andnotclassifiedintownplans and zoning ordinances as approved by the Housing and LandUseRegulatoryBoard(HLURB)anditspreceding competentauthoritiespriorto15June1988for residential, commercial or industrial use. Since the NATALIA lands were converted prior to 15June1988,respondentDARisboundbysuch conversion.Itwasthereforeerrortoincludethe undevelopedportionsoftheAntipoloHillsSubdivision within the coverage of CARL. 3. LUZ FARMS vs. SECRETARY OF AGRARIAN REFORM FACTS: OnJune10,1988,thePresidentofthe PhilippinesapprovedR.A.No.6657, whichincludesthe raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage ISSUE:WhetherornotSections3(b),11,13and32of R.A. No. 6657 (the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988) unconstitutional, insofar as the said law includes the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage aswellastheImplementingRulesandGuidelines promulgated in accordance therewith. RULING: SectionIIofR.A.6657whichincludes"private agriculturallandsdevotedtocommerciallivestock, poultryandswineraising"inthedefinitionof "commercialfarms"isinvalid,totheextentthatthe aforecitedagro-industrialactivitiesaremadetobe coveredbytheagrarianreformprogramoftheState. There is simply no reason to include livestock and poultry lands in the coverage of agrarian reform. 4. DAR vs. Delia Sutton FACTS: Respondentshereininheritedalandwhichhas beendevotedexclusivelytocowandcalfbreeding. Pursuant to the then existing agrarian reform program of the government, respondents made a voluntary offer to sell (VOS) their landholdings to petitioner DAR to avail of certainincentivesunderthelaw.anewagrarianlaw, RepublicAct(R.A.)No.6657,alsoknownasthe ComprehensiveAgrarianReformLaw(CARL)of1988, tookeffect.Itincludedinitscoveragefarmsusedfor raising livestock, poultry and swine. Thereafter, in an en banc decision in the case of Luz Farms v. Secretary of DAR thisCourtruledthatlandsdevotedtolivestockand poultry-raisingarenotincludedinthedefinitionof agriculturalland.Hence,wedeclaredas unconstitutional certain provisions of the CARL insofar as they included livestock farms in the coverage of agrarian reform.Thus,respondentsfiledwithpetitionerDARa formalrequesttowithdrawtheirVOSastheir landholding was devoted exclusively to cattle-raising and thus exempted from the coverage of the CARL. However, DAR issued A.O. No. 9, series of 1993 which provided that onlyportionsofprivateagriculturallandsusedforthe raising of livestock, poultry and swine as of June 15, 1988 shallbeexcludedfromthecoverageoftheCARL.The DARSecretaryissuedanOrderpartiallygrantingthe applicationofrespondentsforexemptionfromthe coverageofCARLbutapplyingtheretentionlimits outlined in the DAR A.O. No. 9. Respondents moved for reconsideration.Theycontendthattheirentire landholdingshouldbeexemptedasitisdevoted exclusivelytocattle-raisingandappealingthattheDAR A.O. No. 9 be declared unconstitutional. ISSUE: WhetherornotDARAdministrativeOrderNo. 09, Series of 1993 which prescribes a maximum retention forownersoflandsdevotedtolivestockraisingis constitutional? HELD: AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 25 of 31 TheA.O.soughttoregulatelivestockfarmsby includingtheminthecoverageofagrarianreformand prescribingamaximumretentionlimitfortheir ownership is invalid as it contravenes the Constitution. .TheCourtclarifiedintheLuzFarmscasethatlivestock, swine and poultry-raising are industrial activities and do notfallwithinthedefinitionofagricultureor agricultural activity.The raising of livestock, swine and poultryisdifferentfromcroportreefarming.Itisan industrial, not an agricultural activity. DAR has no power toregulatelivestockfarmswhichhavebeenexempted bytheConstitutionfromthecoverageofagrarian reform. It has exceeded its power in issuing the assailed A.O.TheassailedA.O.ofpetitionerDARwasproperly strickendownasunconstitutionalasitenlargesthe coverage of agrarian reform beyond the scope intended by the 1987 Constitution 5. Milestone Farms Inc. v. Office of the President FACTS: Petitioner Milestone Farms, Inc. (petitioner) was incorporatedwiththeSecuritiesandExchange CommissiononJanuary8,1960.Amongitspertinent secondary purposes are:(1)to engage in the raising of cattle,pigs,andotherlivestock;toacquirelandsby purchaseorlease,whichmaybeneededforthis purpose; and to sell and otherwise dispose of said cattle, pigs,andotherlivestockandtheirproducewhen advisable and beneficial to the corporation;(2)to breed, raise, and sell poultry; to purchase or acquire and sell, or otherwisedisposeofthesupplies,stocks,equipment, accessories,appurtenances,products,andby-products of said business; and (3)to import cattle, pigs, and other livestock,andanimalfoodnecessaryfortheraisingof said cattle, pigs, and other livestock as may be authorized by law.

OnJune10,1988,anewagrarianreformlaw, RepublicAct(R.A.)No.6657,otherwiseknownasthe Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL), took effect, whichincludedtheraisingoflivestock,poultry,and swineinitscoverage.However,onDecember4,1990, this Court, sitting en banc, ruled in Luz Farms v. Secretary oftheDepartment ofAgrarianReformthatagricultural lands devoted to livestock, poultry, and/or swine raising are excluded from theComprehensiveAgrarian Reform Program (CARP). Meanwhile,onDecember27,1993,the DepartmentofAgrarianReform(DAR)issued Administrative Order No. 9, Series of 1993 (DAR A.O. No. 9),settingforthrulesandregulationstogovernthe exclusion of agricultural lands used for livestock, poultry, and swine raising from CARP coverage. TheLUCEC,thus,recommendedtheexemption ofpetitioners316.0422-hectarepropertyfromthe coverageofCARP.heSouthernPinugayFarmersMulti-PurposeCooperative,Inc.(PinugayFarmers), represented by Timiano Balajadia, Sr. (Balajadia), moved for the reconsideration of the said Order, butthesame wasdeniedbyDirectorDalugduginhisOrder.Inthe meantime, R.A. No. 6657 was amended by R.A. No. 7881, whichwasapprovedonFebruary20,1995.Private agriculturallandsdevotedtolivestock,poultry,and swineraisingwereexcludedfromthecoverageofthe CARL. OnApril29,2005, theCA foundthat,based on thedocumentaryevidencepresented,theproperty subjectoftheapplicationforexclusionhadmorethan satisfied the animal-land and infrastructure-animal ratios under DAR A.O. No. 9. The CA also found that petitioner appliedforexclusionlongbeforetheeffectivityofDAR A.O.No.9,thus,negatingtheclaimthatpetitioner merely converted the property for livestock, poultry, and swine raising in order to exclude it from CARP coverage. Petitioner was held to have actually engaged in the said business on the property even before June 15, 1988. ISSUE:WONtheDARhasthepowertoregulate livestockfarmswhichhavebeenexemptedbythe Constitution from the coverage of agrarian reform. HELD:No. AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 26 of 31 The instant case does not rest on facts parallel to those of Sutton because, in Sutton, the subject property remained a livestock farm. ItisestablishedthatissuesofExclusionand/or ExemptionarecharacterizedasAgrarianLaw Implementation(ALI)caseswhicharewellwithinthe DAR Secretarys competence and jurisdiction. Section 3, RuleIIofthe2003DepartmentofAgrarianReform Adjudication Board Rules of Procedure provides: Section 3. Agrarian Law Implementation Cases. TheAdjudicatorortheBoardshallhavenojurisdiction overmattersinvolvingtheadministrative implementation of RA No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988 and other agrarian laws as enunciated by pertinent rules and administrative orders, which shall be under the exclusive prerogativeofandcognizablebytheOfficeofthe Secretary of the DAR in accordance with his issuances, to wit:

3.8ExclusionfromCARPcoverageof agriculturallandusedforlivestock,swine,andpoultry raising. Thus, we cannot, without going against the law, arbitrarily strip the DAR Secretary of his legal mandate to exercisejurisdiction and authority over all ALI cases. To succumb to petitioners contention that when a land is declared exempt from the CARP on the ground that it is not agricultural as of the time the CARL took effect, the useanddispositionofthatlandisentirelyandforever beyondDARsjurisdictionisdangerous,suggestiveof self-regulation.Precisely,itistheDARSecretarywho is vestedwithsuchjurisdictionandauthoritytoexempt and/or exclude a property from CARP coverage based on the factual circumstances of each case and in accordance with law and applicable jurisprudence. In addition, albeit parenthetically,SecretaryVillahadalreadygrantedthe conversion into residential and golf courses use of nearly one-half of the entire area originally claimed as exempt from CARP coverage because it was allegedly devoted to livestock production. 7.DepartmentofAgrarianReformvs.Departmentof Education Culture and Sports FACTS: In controversy are Lot No. 2509 and Lot No. 817-Dconsisting ofanaggregateareaof189.2462hectares located at Hacienda Fe, Escalante, Negros Occidental and Brgy. Gen. Luna, Sagay, Negros Occidental, respectively. On October 21, 1921, theselands were donated by the lateEstebanJalandonitorespondentDECS(formerly Bureau of Education).2 Consequently, titles thereto were transferredinthenameofrespondentDECSunder Transfer Certificate of Title No. 167175.3 OnJuly15,1985,respondentDECSleasedthe landstoAngloAgriculturalCorporationfor10 agriculturalcropyears,commencingfromcropyear 1984-1985 to crop year 1993-1994. The contract of lease wassubsequentlyrenewedforanother10agricultural cropyears,commencingfromcropyear1995-1996to crop year 2004-2005.4 OnJune10,1993,EugenioAlparandseveralothers, claimingtobepermanentandregularfarmworkersof thesubjectlands,filedapetitionforCompulsory AgrarianReformProgram(CARP)coveragewiththe Municipal Agrarian Reform Office (MARO) of Escalante. After investigation, MARO Jacinto R. Piosa, sent a "Notice of Coverage" to respondent DECS, stating that the subject lands are now covered by CARP and inviting itsrepresentativesforaconferencewiththefarmer beneficiaries.6 Then, MARO Piosa submitted his report toOIC-PAROStephenM.Leonidas,whorecommended totheDARRegionalDirectortheapprovalofthe coverage of the landholdings. OnAugust7,1998,DARRegionalDirector DominadorB.Andresapprovedtherecommendation, the dispositive portion of which reads: AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 27 of 31 WHEREFORE,alltheforegoingpremises considered,thepetitionisgranted.Orderishereby issued: 1. Placing under CARP coverage Lot 2509 with an area of 111.4791 hectares situated at Had. Fe, Escalante, Negros Occidental and Lot 817-D with an area of 77.7671 hectaressituatedatBrgy.Gen.Luna,Sagay,Negros Occidental; RespondentDECSappealedthecasetothe Secretary ofAgrarianReform whichaffirmed the Order of the Regional Director. 8 Aggrieved,respondentDECSfiledapetitionfor certiorari with the Court of Appeals, which set aside the decision of the Secretary of Agrarian Reform.9 Hence, the instant petition for review. ISSUE:Whetherornotthesubjectpropertiesare exemptfromthecoverageofRepublicActNo.6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1998 (CARL). RULING:NO. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE NOT EXEMPT FROM THE COVERAGE OF RA 6657 (CARL) Section10ofR.A.No.6657enumeratesthe types of lands which are exempted from the coverage of CARP as well as the purposes of their exemption, viz: x x x x x x x x x c) Lands actually, directly and exclusively used and found tobenecessaryfornationaldefense,schoolsitesand campuses,includingexperimentalfarmstations operatedbypublicorprivateschoolsforeducational purposes, , shall be exempt from the coverage of this Act.13 x x x x x x x x x Clearly, a reading of the paragraph shows that, in order to be exempt from the coverage: 1) the land must be "actually, directly, and exclusively used and found to be necessary;" and 2) the purpose is "for school sites and campuses,includingexperimentalfarmstations operatedbypublicorprivateschoolsforeducational purposes." The importance of the phrase "actually, directly, and exclusively used and found to be necessary" cannot be understated, as what respondent DECS would want us to do by not taking the words in their literal and technical definitions.Thewordsofthelawareclearand unambiguous.Thus,the"plainmeaningrule"orverba legisinstatutoryconstructionisapplicableinthiscase. Wherethewordsofastatuteareclear,plainandfree from ambiguity, it must be given its literal meaning and applied without attempted interpretation. We are not unaware of our ruling in the case of Central Mindanao University v. Department of Agrarian Reform Adjudication Board,15 wherein we declared the landsubjectthereofexemptfromCARPcoverage. However,respondentDECSreliancethereonis misplacedbecausethefactualcircumstancesare different in the case at bar. Firstly,intheCMUcase,thelandinvolvedwas notalienableanddisposablelandofthepublicdomain becauseitwasreservedbythelatePresidentCarlosP. GarciaunderProclamationNo.476fortheuseof MindanaoAgriculturalCollege(nowCMU).16Inthis case,however,thelandsfallunderthecategoryof alienableanddisposablelandsofthepublicdomain suitable for agriculture. Secondly, in the CMU case, the land was actually, directly and exclusively used and found to be necessary forschoolsitesandcampuses.Althoughaportionofit wasbeingusedbythePhilippinePackingCorporation (now Del Monte Phils., Inc.) under a "Management and Development Agreement", the undertaking was that the land shall be used by the Philippine Packing Corporation aspartoftheCMUresearchprogram,withdirect AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 28 of 31 participation of faculty and students. Moreover, the land was part of the land utilization program developed by the CMU for its "Kilusang Sariling Sikap Project" (CMU-KSSP), amulti-disciplinaryappliedresearchextensionand productivity program.17 Hence, the retention of the land wasfoundtobenecessaryforthepresentandfuture educationalneedsoftheCMU.Ontheotherhand,the landsinthiscasewerenotactuallyandexclusively utilizedasschoolsitesandcampuses,astheywere leasedtoAngloAgriculturalCorporation,notfor educationalpurposesbutforthefurtheranceofits business. Also, as conceded by respondent DECS, it was theincomefromthecontractofleaseandnotthe subjectlandsthatwasdirectlyusedfortherepairsand renovations of the schools in the locality. 8. PROVINCE OF CAMARINES SUR vs. CA FACTS: OnDecember22,1988,theSangguniang PanlalawiganoftheProvinceofCamarinesSurpassed ResolutionNo.129,Seriesof1988,authorizingthe Provincial Governor to purchase or expropriate property contiguoustotheprovincialcapitolsite,inorderto establishapilotfarmfornon-foodandnon-traditional agriculturalcropsandahousingprojectforprovincial government employees. PursuanttotheResolution,theProvinceof CamarinesSur,throughitsGovernor,Hon.Luis R.Villafuerte,filedtwoseparatecasesforexpropriation against Ernesto N. San Joaquin and Efren N. San Joaquin, docketedasSpecialCivilActionNos.P-17-89andP-19-89oftheRegionalTrialCourt,Pili,CamarinesSur, presided by the Hon. Benjamin V. Panga. Forthwith, the Province of Camarines Sur filed a motionfortheissuanceofwritofpossession.TheSan Joaquins failed to appear at the hearing of the motion. TheSanJoaquinsmovedtodismissthe complaintsonthegroundofinadequacyoftheprice offeredfortheirproperty. Inan orderdated December 6, 1989, the trial court denied the motion to dismiss and authorizedtheProvinceofCamarinesSurtotake possessionofthepropertyuponthedepositwiththe Clerk of Court of the amountof P5,714.00, the amount provisionallyfixedbythetrialcourttoanswerfor damagesthatprivaterespondentsmaysufferinthe eventthattheexpropriationcasesdonotprosper.The trial court issued a writ of possession in an order dated January18, 1990. TheSanJoaquinsfiledamotionforrelieffrom the order, authorizing the Province of Camarines Sur to take possession of their property and a motion to admit anamendedmotiontodismiss.Bothmotionswere denied in the order dated February 1990. In their petition before the Court of Appeals, the San Joaquins asked: (a) that Resolution No. 129, Series of 1988 of theSangguniangPanlalawiganbedeclarednull andvoid;(b)thatthecomplaintsforexpropriationbe dismissed;and(c)thattheorderdatedDecember6, 1989(i)denying the motiontodismissand(ii) allowing the Province of Camarines Sur to take possession of the propertysubjectoftheexpropriationandtheorder datedFebruary26,1990,denyingthemotiontoadmit the amended motion to dismiss, be set aside. They also asked that an order be issued to restrain thetrial court from enforcing the writ of possession, and thereafter to issue a writ of injunction. Initsanswertothepetition,theProvinceof Camarines Sur claimed that it has the authority to initiate the expropriation proceedings under Sections 4 and 7 of LocalGovernmentCode(B.P.Blg.337)andthatthe expropriations are for a public purpose. AskedbytheCourtofAppealstogivehis Commenttothepetition,theSolicitorGeneralstated that under Section 9 of the Local Government Code (B.P. Blg.337),therewasnoneedfortheapprovalbythe OfficeofthePresidentoftheexercisebythe SangguniangPanlalawiganoftherightofeminent domain.However,theSolicitorGeneralexpressedthe view that the Province of Camarines Sur must first secure theapprovaloftheDepartmentofAgrarianReformof AGRARIAN LAW AND SOCIAL LEGISLATIONLEANGIE L. MORA Atty. MercanoSSCRM College of Law Notes and Reviewer for Midterm Exam 1st Sem, SY 2015-2016 Page 29 of 31 the plan to expropriate the lands of petitioners for use as ahousingproject.TheCourtofAppealssetasidethe order of the trial court Hence this petition. ISSUE: whethertheexpropriationofagriculturallands bylocalgovernmentunitsissubject,totheprior approval of the Secretary of the Agrarian Reform, as the implementator of the agrarian reform program. RULING: NO. Section 9 of B.P. Blg. 337 doesnot intimate in the least thatlocalgovernment,unitsmustfirstsecurethe approvaloftheDepartmentofLandReformforthe conversion of lands from agricultural to non-agricultural use,beforetheycaninstitutethenecessary expropriationproceedings.Likewise,thereisno provisionintheComprehensiveAgrarianReformLaw which expressly subjects the expropriation of agricultural landsbylocalgovernmentunitstothecontrolofthe Department of Agrarian Reform. The closest provision of lawthattheCourtofAppealscouldcitetojustifythe interventionoftheDepartmentofAgrarianReformin expropriationmattersisSection65ofthe Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, which reads: Sec. 65. Conversion of Lands. After the lapse of five (5) years from its award, when the land ceases to beeconomicallyfeasibleandsoundfor,agricultural purposes, or the locality has become urbanized and the landwillhaveagreatereconomicvalueforresidential, commercialorindustrialpurposes,theDAR,upon application of the beneficiary or the landowner, with due noticetotheaffectedparties,andsubjecttoexisting laws, may authorize the reclassification or conversion of thelandanditsdisposition:Provided,Thatthe beneficiary shall have fully paid his obligation. Theopening,adverbialphraseoftheprovisionsends signalsthatitappliestolandspreviouslyplacedunder the agrarian reform program as it speaks of "the lapse of five (5) years from its award." Therulesonconversionofagriculturallands foundinSection4(k)and5(1)ofExecutiveOrderNo. 129-A,Seriesof1987,cannotbethesourceofthe authorityoftheDepartmentofAgrarianReformto determine the suitability of a parcel of agricultural land forthepurposetowhichitwouldbedevotedbythe expropriatingauthority.Whilethoserulesvestonthe DepartmentofAgrarianReformtheexclusiveauthority toapproveordisapproveconversionso