MANUEL S.

ENVERGA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION

Lucena City

COLLEGE OF LAW
Final Examination, Summer 2015

1. Maxima and Elpidio are the registered owners of an agricultural land. During the
lifetime of Elpidio, he cultivated the land with the help of Arcadio, his brother, and
other paid farm workers. Every weekend, all workers, including Arcadio were being
paid the amount corresponding to the number of days they have worked in the
farm. When Elpidio died, Maxima cannot personally till the land so he entrusted the
administration of tilling unto Arcadio. She even allowed Arcadio to build a shanty on
the land and to bring his wife and 3 sons to reside thereon. Nothing has changed in
the set up however; Maxima still paid the weekly wages for the work rendered in
the farm, until Arcadio died. Upon death of Arcadio, Maxima requested the formers
widow and 3 sons, who were already grown up and with families of their own, to
vacate the premise as she intends to set up a poultry farm on the land. Arcadios
wife requested for an extension of time to enable her to look for a place where she
can transfer residence. Then Maxima fell ill and suffered stroke; her children did not
push through with the demand for Arcadios family to vacate the premises. After
some time, one of Maximas children, Cristina, armed with a special power of
attorney executed by Maxima, sent a notice to vacate to Arcadios family, but the
latter refused to do so claiming that they are tenants of the spouses Maxima and
Elpidio. Thus, Maximas daughter filed a case of unlawful detainer against the widow
of Arcadio and her sons, with the municipal trial court, after mediation efforts with
the barangay has failed. In her complaint, Cristina claimed that Arcadio was not a
tenant but a paid farm worker and thus no tenancy right was transferred by virtue
of succession. As proof thereof, Cristina presented receipts of wages signed by
Arcadio. Arcadios widow and her sons, on the other hand, claimed that his husband
was a tenant and upon his death, the tenancy right was passed on to his heirs. As
proof, Arcadios family presented unsigned lists of alleged remittances of shares in
the harvest from the land.
Question: Was Arcadio a tenant of Maxima and Elpidio? Why or why not? What are
the elements in determining the existence of tenancy relation?
Given the elements mentioned above there is no proof that they have produced any
of the element

Answer
No. In the case at bar Arcadio is considered to be a farm
worker and not a tenant for he is paid from all of his work hours.
Maxima allowed them to put up a shanty but it it doesnt mean

that the latter given her consent for Arcadio and his family to be
tenant of the land. For them to be a tenant they must establish all
the elements of tenant and owner relationship which are: 1). the
parties are the landowner and the tenant, 2). the subject is
agricultural land, 3.) there is consent 4). The purpose is
agricultural production, 5). There is personal cultivation and 6.)
There is sharing of harvest.
In the given elements mentioned above there are only 3
elements present which are the land is an agricultural land, the
purpose is for agricultural production and there is cultivation.
Given the facts that the family of Arcadio has alleged evidence
regarding the remittances of harvest they havent prove how
much and if the family of Maxima really receive the fruit of
harvest. Therefore Arcadio and his family cannot be considered
a tenant of Maxima and herfamily.

2. In 1972, the DAR covered the property owned by Nenita and the former
immediately took possession of the same in the same year and thereafter
subdivided the land and distributed the same to the famer beneficiaries. At the
time, the government valued the property at P50 per square meter, to which Nenita
did not agree, thus the issue was brought before the PARAD. However, parties were
not able to agree on the price and ultimately, in 1990, the issue was still in court.
On petition for review before the supreme court, Nenita questioned the decision of
Court of Appeals when it ruled that the just compensation should be computed
based on the price at the time of the taking. She contended that just compensation
should be computed based on the price at the time of actual payment to her.
Decide.

Answer:
In determining just compensation, the cost of acquisition of
the land is considered, the value of the standing crop is
valuated ,the current value of like properties is determined by its

nature, actual use and income, there should be sworn valuation

by the owner, the tax declarations, the assessment made by
government assessors, seventy percent of the zonal valuation of
the Bureau of Internal Revenue which is translated into a basic
formula by the Department of Agrarian reform shall be
considered, and shall be subject to the final decision of the
proper court.

3. What are the conditions for prawn farms to be exempted from the coverage of
the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program?

ANSWER:
The conditions for prawn farms to be exempted from the
coverage of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program are:
The prawn farm should not have been distributed and there
should be a Certificate of Land Ownership Award issued to the
agrarian reform beneficiaries under the Comprehensive Agrarian
Reform Program
4. The land of Emilio was covered by the Agrarian Reform Program. In 2010, the
processes required for the possession of the land was completed by the DAR. During
the turn over ceremony of the land to the farmer-beneficiaries, Angelo, Carlito, and
Berta prevented the DAR officials and the farmer beneficiaries from entering the
land and in fact installed barbed wire fences on the entrance of the property,
claiming that they are the rightful possessors of the said land. They even
threatened to shoot anyone who would dare enter the premise, thus DAR officials
and the farmer beneficiaries were not able to enter the premise.
Questions: What is the available remedy for the DAR officials? Explain and cite your
basis.

Answer:

The available remedy for the Department of Agrarian

Reform given that they have quasi judicial power is that they
may be able to punish Angelo, Carlito and Berta for contempt
for being disrespectful in the authority.
The DAR is vested with primary jurisdiction to determine
and adjudicate agrarian reform matters and shall have exclusive
original jurisdiction over all matters involving the
implementation of agrarian reform except those falling under the
exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture (DA)
and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
(DENR).
It shall have the power to summon witnesses, administer oaths,
take testimony, require submission of reports, compel the
production of books and documents and answers to
interrogatories and issue subpoena, and subpoena duces tecum,
and enforce its writs through sheriffs or other duly deputized
officers. It shall likewise have the power to punish direct and
indirect contempts in the same manner and subject to the same
penalties as provided in the Rules of Court.

5. RA 6657 prohibits the sale, transfer, conveyance or change of the nature of lands
outside of urban centers and city limits either in whole or in part after its Effectivity.
What are the exceptions?

Answer:

The exemptions in prohibiting the sale, transfer,

conveyance or change of the nature of the lands outside of urban
centers and city limits are 1.) Section 71 which allows Banks
and other financial institutions to hold mortgage rights or
security interests in agricultural lands to secure loans and other
obligations of borrowers, they may acquire title to these
mortgaged properties, regardless of area, subject to existing laws
on compulsory transfer of foreclosed assets and acquisition as
prescribed under Section 13, 2.) After the lapse of five years
from its award, when the land ceases to be economically feasible
and sound for agricultural purposes, or the locality has become
urbanized and the land will have a greater economic value for
residential, commercial or industrial purposes, the Department
of Agrarian Reform, upon application of the beneficiary or the
landowner, with due notice to the affected parties, and subject to
existing laws, may authorize the reclassification or conversion
of the land and its disposition: provided, that the beneficiary
shall have fully paid his obligation.

(f) The sale, transfer or conveyance by a beneficiary of the right to use or any other
usufructuary right over the land he/she acquired by virtue of being a beneficiary, in order to
circumvent the provisions of this Act;