Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
JUAN
LEGAL RESEARCH
CASE BRIEFING EXERCISE
A. HACIENDA LUISITA
1. PRIMARY SOURCE: INTERNET
2.http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2011/july2011/171101.htm
B.
1. CASE TITLE: G.R. No. 171101 HACIENDA LUISITA, INCORPORATED,
Petitioner, LUISITA INDUSTRIAL PARK CORPORATION and RIZAL
COMMERCIAL BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioners-in-Intervention,
V. PRESIDENTIAL AGRARIAN REFORM COUNCIL; SECRETARY NASSER
PANGANDAMAN OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN REFORM; ALYANSA NG
MGA MANGGAGAWANG BUKID NG HACIENDA LUISITA, RENE GALANG, NOEL
MALLARI, and JULIO SUNIGA[1] and his SUPERVISORY GROUP OF THE
HACIENDA LUISITA, INC. and WINDSOR ANDAYA,
Respondents.
PONENTE: ELASCO, JR., J.
The details of the events that happened next involving the hacienda
and the political color some of the parties embossed are of minimal
significance to this narration and need no belaboring. Suffice it to state that
on May 7, 1980, the martial law administration filed a suit before the Manila
Regional Trial Court (RTC) against Tadeco, et al., for them to surrender
Hacienda Luisita to the then Ministry of Agrarian Reform (MAR, now the
Department of Agrarian Reform [DAR]) so that the land can be distributed to
farmers at cost. Responding, Tadeco or its owners alleged that Hacienda
Luisita does not have tenants, besides which sugar landsof which the
hacienda consistedare not covered by existing agrarian reform legislations.
As perceived then, the government commenced the case against Tadeco as a
political message to the family of the late Benigno Aquino, Jr.[23]
On March 17, 1988, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) moved
to withdraw the governments case against Tadeco, et al. By Resolution of
May 18, 1988, the CA dismissed the case the Marcos government initially
instituted and won against Tadeco, et al. The dismissal action was, however,
made subject to the obtention by Tadeco of the PARCs approval of a stock
distribution plan (SDP) that must initially be implemented after such approval
Like EO 229, RA 6657, under the latters Sec. 31, also provides two
(2) alternative modalities, i.e., land or stock transfer, pursuant to either of
which the corporate landowner can comply with CARP, but subject to welldefined conditions and timeline requirements. Sec. 31 of RA 6657 provides:
DAR issued Administrative Order No. 10, Series of 1988 (DAO 10),[27] entitled
Guidelines and Procedures for Corporate Landowners Desiring to Avail
Themselves of the Stock Distribution Plan under Section 31 of RA 6657.