Luz Farms Vs Sec of Agrarian Reform

4/20/2019 G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT.
E DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM : DECEMBER 1990 - PHILIPPINE …
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™
Like 0 Tweet Share

Search
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1990 > December 1990 Decisions > G.R. No. 86889 December
4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM:
Custom Search
Search
ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

EN BANC
[G.R. No. 86889. December 4, 1990.]
LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN

REFORM, Respondent.
Enrique M. Belo for petitioner.
DECISION
PARAS, J.:
This is a petition for prohibition with prayer for restraining order and/or preliminary and permanent
injunction against the Honorable Secretary of the Department of Agrarian Reform for acting without
jurisdiction in enforcing the assailed provisions of R.A. No. 6657, otherwise known as the Comprehensive
Agrarian Reform Law of 1988 and in promulgating the Guidelines and Procedure Implementing Production
and Profit Sharing under R.A. No. 6657, insofar as the same apply to herein petitioner, and further from
performing an act in violation of the constitutional rights of the petitioner.
As gathered from the records, the factual background of this case, is as follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
On June 10, 1988, the President of the Philippines approved R.A. No. 6657, which includes the raising of
livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage (Rollo, p. 80).
DebtKollect Company, Inc. On January 2, 1989, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform promulgated the Guidelines and Procedures
Implementing Production and Profit Sharing as embodied in Sections 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657 (Rollo,
p. 80).
On January 9, 1989, the Secretary of Agrarian Reform promulgated its Rules and Regulations
implementing Section 11 of R.A. No. 6657 (Commercial Farms). (Rollo, p. 81).
Luz Farms, petitioner in this case, is a corporation engaged in the livestock and poultry business and
together with others in the same business allegedly stands to be adversely affected by the enforcement
of Section 3(b), Section 11, Section 13, Section 16(d) and 17 and Section 32 of R.A. No. 6657 otherwise
www.chanrobles.com/cralaw/1990decemberdecisions.php?id=1567 1/17
4/20/2019 G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM : DECEMBER 1990 - PHILIPPINE …
known as Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law and of the Guidelines and Procedures Implementing
Production and Profit Sharing under R.A. No. 6657 promulgated on January 2, 1989 and the Rules and
Regulations Implementing Section 11 thereof as promulgated by the DAR on January 9, 1989 (Rollo, pp.
2-36).chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
Hence, this petition praying that aforesaid laws, guidelines and rules be declared unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, it is also prayed that a writ of preliminary injunction or restraining order be issued enjoining
public respondents from enforcing the same, insofar as they are made to apply to Luz Farms and other
livestock and poultry raisers.
This Court in its Resolution dated July 4, 1939 resolved to deny, among others, Luz Farms’ prayer for the
issuance of a preliminary injunction in its Manifestation dated May 26, and 31, 1989. (Rollo, p. 98).
Later, however, this Court in its Resolution dated August 24, 1989 resolved to grant said Motion for
Reconsideration regarding the injunctive relief, after the filing and approval by this Court of an injunction
bond in the amount of P100,000.00. This Court also gave due course to the petition and required the
parties to file their respective memoranda (Rollo, p. 119).
ChanRobles Intellectual Property The petitioner filed its Memorandum on September 6, 1989 (Rollo, pp. 131-168).
Division On December 22, 1989, the Solicitor General adopted his Comment to the petition as his Memorandum
(Rollo, pp. 186-187).
Luz Farms questions the following provisions of R.A. 6657, insofar as they are made to apply to it: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
(a) Section 3(b) which includes the "raising of livestock (and poultry)" in the definition of "Agricultural,
Agricultural Enterprise or Agricultural Activity." cralaw virtua1aw library
(b) Section 11 which defines "commercial farms" as "private agricultural lands devoted to commercial,
livestock, poultry and swine raising . . ." cralaw virtua1aw library
(c) Section 13 which calls upon petitioner to execute a production-sharing plan.
(d) Section 16(d) and 17 which vest on the Department of Agrarian Reform the authority to summarily
determine the just compensation to be paid for lands covered by the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform
Law.
(e) Section 32 which spells out the production-sharing plan mentioned in Section 13 —
". . . (W)hereby three percent (3%) of the gross sales from the production of such lands are distributed
within sixty (60) days of the end of the fiscal year as compensation to regular and other farmworkers in
such lands over and above the compensation they currently receive: Provided, That these individuals or
entities realize gross sales in excess of five million pesos per annum unless the DAR, upon proper
application, determine a lower ceiling.
In the event that the individual or entity realizes a profit, an additional ten (10%) of the net profit after
tax shall be distributed to said regular and other farmworkers within ninety (90) days of the end of the
fiscal year . . ." cralaw virtua1aw library
The main issue in this petition is the constitutionality of Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A. No. 6657
(the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988), insofar as the said law includes the raising of
livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as the Implementing Rules and Guidelines
promulgated in accordance therewith. chanrobles.com.ph : virtual law library
The constitutional provision under consideration reads as follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
ARTICLE XIII
December-1990 Jurisprudence x x x
AGRARIAN AND NATURAL RESOURCES REFORM

[G.R. No. 32945 : December 3, 1990.] MARIANO T.
NASSER, Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS,
Section 4. The State shall, by law, undertake an agrarian reform program founded on the right of farmers
HON. MALCOLM SARMIENTO, in his capacity as
Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of Pampanga, and regular farmworkers, who are landless, to own directly or collectively the lands they till or, in the
Branch I, AURORA RIVERA CANLAS, PATERNO R. case of other farmworkers, to receive a just share of the fruits thereof. To this end, the State shall
CANLAS, and TOMAS CENTILLAS, Respondents. [G.R. encourage and undertake the just distribution of all agricultural lands, subject to such priorities and
No. 32946. December 3, 1990.] MARIANO T. NASSER, reasonable retention limits as the Congress may prescribe, taking into account ecological, developmental,
Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF APPEALS, PATERNO R. or equity considerations, and subject to the payment of just compensation. In determining retention
CANLAS, AURORA RIVERA-CANLAS, TOMAS limits, the State shall respect the rights of small landowners. The State shall further provide incentives
CENTILLAS and THE CHIEF OF POLICE OF SAN for voluntary land-sharing.
ISIDRO, DAVAO ORIENTAL, Respondents.
x x x"
[G.R. No. 39430 : December 3, 1990.] FRANCISCO
MANLAPAZ, DELFIN SANGCAP, DOMINGO SANGCAP, Luz Farms contended that it does not seek the nullification of R.A. 6657 in its entirety. In fact, it
PEDRO CUNANAN, FAUSTO DE LA PENA and
acknowledges the correctness of the decision of this Court in the case of the Association of Small
HONORATA DE LA PENA, Petitioners, vs. HON. COURT
OF APPEALS, HON. JUDGE LORENZO R. MOSQUEDA, Landowners in the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform (G.R. 78742, 14 July 1989) affirming
HON. JUDGE VIRGILIO CANIVEL, TEODORO RIVERA, the constitutionality of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. It, however, argued that Congress in
PABLO RIVERA, RENATO RIVERA and BONIFACIO enacting the said law has transcended the mandate of the Constitution, in including land devoted to the
RIVERA, Respondents. raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage (Rollo, p. 131). Livestock or poultry raising is not
similar to crop or tree farming. Land is not the primary resource in this undertaking and represents no
[G.R. No. 55466 : December 3, 1990.] MANILA more than five percent (5%) of the total investment of commercial livestock and poultry raisers. Indeed,
SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC., Petitioner, vs. COURT there are many owners of residential lands all over the country who use available space in their residence
OF APPEALS and WILLIAM H. QUASHA, Respondents. for commercial livestock and raising purposes, under "contract-growing arrangements," whereby
processing corporations and other commercial livestock and poultry raisers (Rollo, p. 10). Lands support
[G.R. No. 78778 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA the buildings and other amenities attendant to the raising of animals and birds. The use of land is
814 LEONIDA CORONADO, FELIX BUENO, MELANIA incidental to but not the principal factor or consideration in productivity in this industry. Including
RETIZOS, BERNARDINO BUENASEDA and JOVITA
backyard raisers, about 80% of those in commercial livestock and poultry production occupy five
MONTEFALCON, Petitioners, vs. THE COURT OF
APPEALS and JUANA BUENO ALBOVIAS, Respondents. hectares or less. The remaining 20% are mostly corporate farms (Rollo, p. 11).
[G.R. No. 79560 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA On the other hand, the public respondent argued that livestock and poultry raising is embraced in the
823 ANDRES E. DITAN, Petitioner, vs. PHILIPPINE term "agriculture" and the inclusion of such enterprise under Section 3(b) of R.A. 6657 is proper. He cited
OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT ADMINISTRATION that Webster’s International Dictionary, Second Edition (1954), defines the following words: jgc:chanrobles.com.ph
ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

COMMISSION, ASIAWORLD RECRUITMENT, INC., "Agriculture — the art or science of cultivating the ground and raising and harvesting crops, often,
AND/OR INTRACO SALES CORPORATION, including also, feeding, breeding and management of livestock, tillage, husbandry, farming.
Respondents.
It includes farming, horticulture, forestry, dairying, sugarmaking . . .
[G.R. No. 80904 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA
830 BALTAZAR, PEDRO, URSULA, and DOMINGO, all
Livestock — domestic animals used or raised on a farm, especially for profit.
surnamed PANTIG, Petitioners, vs. VENANCIO
BALTAZAR, Respondent.
Farm — a plot or tract of land devoted to the raising of domestic or other animals." (Rollo, pp. 82-83).
[G.R. No. 82115 : December 3, 1990.] 191 SCRA The petition is impressed with merit.
836 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee,
vs. ROMEO ORTIZ y BALLARES, Accused-Appellant. The question raised is one of constitutional construction. The primary task in constitutional construction is
to ascertain and thereafter assure the realization of the purpose of the framers in the adoption of the
[G.R. No. 84884 : December 3, 1990.] EULALIO M. Constitution (J.M. Tuazon & Co. v. Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413 [1970]).
RUIZ and ILUMINADA RUIZ, Petitioners, vs. HON.
chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
DOROTEO N. CANEBA, THE CITY SHERIFF OF MANILA

AND/OR HIS DEPUTIES, ZENAIDA SANGALANG and Ascertainment of the meaning of the provision of Constitution begins with the language of the document
ADOLFO CRUZ, Respondents. itself. The words used in the Constitution are to be given their ordinary meaning except where technical
terms are employed in which case the significance thus attached to them prevails (J.M. Tuazon & Co. v.
[G.R. No. 87264 : December 3, 1990.] MARIANO Land Tenure Administration, 31 SCRA 413 [1970]).
DINGLASAN and FELICIDAD DINGLASAN, Petitioners,
vs. THE HON. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, Presiding It is generally held that, in construing constitutional provisions which are ambiguous or of doubtful
Judge of Branch 159, Regional Trial Court, Pasig, meaning, the courts may consider the debates in the constitutional convention as throwing light on the
Metro Manila, National Capital Judicial Region, The intent of the framers of the Constitution. It is true that the intent of the convention is not controlling by
GOVERNMENT SERVICE INSURANCE SYSTEM, and itself, but as its proceeding was preliminary to the adoption by the people of the Constitution the
CONCEPCION T. TINIO, Respondents. understanding of the convention as to what was meant by the terms of the constitutional provision which
was the subject of the deliberation, goes a long way toward explaining the understanding of the people
[G.R. No. 89545 : December 3, 1990.] SPOUSES
when they ratified it (Aquino, Jr. v. Enrile, 59 SCRA 183 [1974]).
ROLANDO DOLORFINO and MONINA FULE,
Petitioners, vs. THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS,
SEVERO ALCOS and EFIGENIA DE LUNA-ALCOS, The transcripts of the deliberations of the Constitutional Commission of 1986 on the meaning of the word
Respondents. "agricultural," clearly show that it was never the intention of the framers of the Constitution to include
livestock and poultry industry in the coverage of the constitutionally-mandated agrarian reform program
[UDK No. 9864 : December 3, 1990.] RUFINA VDA. of the Government.
DE TANGUB, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS,
PRESIDING JUDGE of the [CAR] RTC, Branch 4, Iligan The Committee adopted the definition of "agricultural land" as defined under Section 166 of R.A. 3844, as
City, and SPOUSES DOMINGO and EUGENIA MARTIL, laud devoted to any growth, including but not limited to crop lands, saltbeds, fishponds, idle and
Respondents. abandoned land (Record, CONCOM, August 7, 1986, Vol. III, p. 11).
[G.R. No. 58668 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 1 The intention of the Committee is to limit the application of the word "agriculture." Commissioner Jamir
SANTIAGO ESCARTE, JR., ERNESTO VILLANUEVA,
proposed to insert the word "ARABLE" to distinguish this kind of agricultural land from such lands as
FELIXBERTO VILLANUEVA, and LOURDES
VILLANUEVA, Petitioners, vs. OFFICE OF THE commercial and industrial lands and residential properties because all of them fall under the general
PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES and TEODORO classification of the word "agricultural." This proposal, however, was not considered because the
MEDINA, Respondents. Committee contemplated that agricultural lands are limited to arable and suitable agricultural lands and
therefore, do not include commercial, industrial and residential lands (Record, CONCOM, August 7, 1986,
[G.R. No. 71929 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 9 Vol. III, p. 30).
ALITALIA, Petitioner, vs. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE
COURT and FELIPA E. PABLO, Respondents. In the interpellation, then Commissioner Regalado (now a Supreme Court Justice), posed several
questions, among others, quoted as follows: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
192 SCRA 21 CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA,

Petitioner, vs. THE INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE x x x
COURT, JESUS BERNAS and REMEDIOS Q. BERNAS,
Respondents.
[G.R. No. 80505 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 28 "Line 19 refers to genuine reform program founded on the primary right of farmers and farmworkers. I
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, wonder if it means that leasehold tenancy is thereby proscribed under this provision because it speaks of
vs. MARIO TANDOY y LIM, Defendant-Appellant. the primary right of farmers and farmworkers to own directly or collectively the lands they till. As also
mentioned by Commissioner Tadeo, farmworkers include those who work in piggeries and poultry
[G.R. No. 80791 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 34 projects.
PEOPLE'S FINANCING CORP. and ENRIQUE V.
ARCENAS, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS I was wondering whether I am wrong in my appreciation that if somebody puts up a piggery or a poultry
(Sixteenth Division), GAUDIOSO MANLIGUEZ and project and for that purpose hires farmworkers therein, these farmworkers will automatically have the
PURIFICACION MANLIGUEZ, Respondents. right to own eventually, directly or ultimately or collectively, the land on which the piggeries and poultry
projects were constructed. (Record, CONCOM, August 2, 1986, p. 618).
[G.R. No. 86586 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 42
NATIONAL IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION,
x x x
Petitioner, vs. HONORABLE TEODORO P. REGINO,
PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH
84, QUEZON CITY and CONSTRUCTION SERVICES OF
AUSTRALIA-PHILIPPINES INC., Respondents. The questions were answered and explained in the statement of then Commissioner Tadeo, quoted as
follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE x x x
SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN
REFORM, Respondent.
"Sa pangalawang katanungan ng Ginoo ay medyo hindi kami nagkaunawaan. Ipinaaalam ko kay
[G.R. No. 88177 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 84 Commissioner Regalado na hindi namin inilagay ang agricultural worker sa kadahilanang kasama rito ang
DOLORES A. PAREDES, Petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE piggery, poultry at livestock workers. Ang inilagay namin dito ay farm worker kaya hindi kasama ang
COMMISSION AND REMEDIOS A. AMOR, Respondents.
piggery, poultry at livestock workers (Record, CONCOM, August 2, 1986, Vol. II, p. 621).
DOLORES A. PAREDES, Petitioner, vs. CIVIL SERVICE
COMMISSION, MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD It is evident from the foregoing discussion that Section II of R.A. 6657 which includes "private
AND REMEDIOS A. AMOR, Respondents. agricultural lands devoted to commercial livestock, poultry and swine raising" in the definition of
"commercial farms" is invalid, to the extent that the aforecited agro-industrial activities are made to be
[G.R. No. 93054 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA covered by the agrarian reform program of the State. There is simply no reason to include livestock and
100 Cordillera Regional Assembly Member poultry lands in the coverage of agrarian reform. (Rollo, p. 21).
ALEXANDER P. ORDILLO, (Banaue), Ifugao Provincial
Board Member CORAZON MONTINIG, (Mayoyao), Hence, there is merit in Luz Farms’ argument that the requirement in Sections 13 and 32 of R.A. 6657
Former Vice-Mayor MARTIN UDAN (Banaue), directing "corporate farms" which include livestock and poultry raisers to execute and implement
Municipal Councilors MARTIN GANO, (Lagawe), and "production-sharing plans" (pending final redistribution of their landholdings) whereby they are called
TEODORO HEWE, (Hingyon), Barangay Councilman upon to distribute from three percent (3%) of their gross sales and ten percent (10%) of their net profits
PEDRO W. DULAG (Lamut); Aguinaldo residents
to their workers as additional compensation is unreasonable for being confiscatory, and therefore
SANDY B. CHANGIWAN, and DONATO TIMAGO; Lamut
resident REY ANTONIO; Kiangan residents ORLANDO violative of due process (Rollo, p. 21). chanrobles virtual lawlibrary
PUGUON, and REYNAND DULDULAO; Lagawe

residents TOMAS KIMAYONG, GREGORIO DANGO, It has been established that this Court will assume jurisdiction over a constitutional question only if it is
GEORGE B. BAYWONG, and VICENTE LUNAG; Hingyon shown that the essential requisites of a judicial inquiry into such a question are first satisfied. Thus, there
residents PABLO M. DULNUAN and CONSTANCIO must be an actual case or controversy involving a conflict of legal rights susceptible of judicial
GANO; Mayoyao residents PEDRO M. BAOANG, determination, the constitutional question must have been opportunely raised by the proper party, and
LEONARDO IGADNA, and MAXIMO IGADNA; and the resolution of the question is unavoidably necessary to the decision of the case itself (Association of
Banaue residents PUMA-A CULHI, LATAYON BUTTIG, Small Landowners of the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian Reform, G.R. 78742; Acuna v. Arroyo,
MIGUEL PUMELBAN, ANDRES ORDILLO, FEDERICO G.R. 79310; Pabico v. Juico, G.R. 79744; Manaay v. Juico, G.R. 79777, 14 July 1989, 175 SCRA 343).
MARIANO, SANDY BINOMNGA, GABRIEL LIMMANG,
ROMEO TONGALI, RUBEN BAHATAN, MHOMDY However, despite the inhibitions pressing upon the Court when confronted with constitutional issues, it
GABRIEL, and NADRES GHAMANG, Petitioners, vs. THE
will not hesitate to declare a law or act invalid when it is convinced that this must be done. In arriving at
COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS; The Honorable
FRANKLIN M. DRILON, Secretary of Justice; Hon. this conclusion, its only criterion will be the Constitution and God as its conscience gives it in the light to
CATALINO MACARAIG, Executive Secretary; The probe its meaning and discover its purpose. Personal motives and political considerations are
Cabinet Officer for Regional Development; Hon. irrelevancies that cannot influence its decisions. Blandishment is as ineffectual as intimidation, for all the
GUILLERMO CARAGUE, Secretary of Budget and awesome power of the Congress and Executive, the Court will not hesitate "to make the hammer fall
Management; and Hon. ROSALINA S. CAJUCOM, OIC, heavily," where the acts of these departments, or of any official, betray the people’s will as expressed in
National Treasurer, Respondents. the Constitution (Association of Small Landowners of the Philippines, Inc. v. Secretary of Agrarian
Reform, G.R. 78742; Acuna v. Arroyo, G.R. 79310; Pabico v. Juico, G.R. 79744; Manaay v. Juico, G.R.
[G.R. No. 30616 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 79777, 14 July 1989).
110 EUFRACIO D. ROJAS, Plaintiff-Appellant, vs.
CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA, Defendant-Appellee. Thus, where the legislature or the executive acts beyond the scope of its constitutional powers, it
becomes the duty of the judiciary to declare what the other branches of the government had assumed to
[G.R. No. 36827 : December 10, 1990.] THE
do, as void. This is the essence of judicial power conferred by the Constitution" (I)n one Supreme Court
DIRECTOR OF FOREST ADMINISTRATION, THE
and in such lower courts as may be established by law" (Art. VIII, Section 1 of the 1935 Constitution;
DIRECTOR OF LANDS and THE REPUBLIC OF THE Article X, Section I of the 1973 Constitution and which was adopted as part of the Freedom Constitution,
PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs. HON. RAMON C. and Article VIII, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution) and which power this Court has exercised in many
FERNANDEZ, HERMOGENES CONCEPCION, JR., and instances (Demetria v. Alba, 148 SCRA 208 [1987]).
EMILIO A. GANCAYCO, ET AL., Respondents. [G.R. No.
56622 : December 10, 1990.] THE DIRECTOR OF PREMISES CONSIDERED, the instant petition is hereby GRANTED. Sections 3(b), 11, 13 and 32 of R.A.
LANDS and THE DIRECTOR OF FOREST DEVELOPMENT,
No. 6657 insofar as the inclusion of the raising of livestock, poultry and swine in its coverage as well as
Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS (Ninth Division),
GREGORIO A. LEGASPI and VALENTINA CERVANIA, the Implementing Rules and Guidelines promulgated in accordance therewith, are hereby DECLARED null
Respondents. [G.R. No. 70076 : December 10, 1990.] and void for being unconstitutional and the writ of preliminary injunction issued is hereby MADE
REYNALDA ESPEJO, BENITA GARLITOS and permanent.
ENRIQUETA OXCIANO, Petitioners, vs. INTERMEDIATE
APPELLATE COURT, HON. ANTONIO M. BELEN, as SO ORDERED.
Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Lingayen,
Pangasinan Branch XXXVIII and ASTERIO SAURA, Fernan (C.J.), Narvasa, Melencio-Herrera, Gutierrez, Jr., Cruz, Gancayco, Padilla, Bidin, Griño-Aquino,
Respondents. Medialdea and Regalado, JJ., concur.
[G.R. No. 44749 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA Feliciano, J., is on leave.
vs. MELVIN GIRON y SANTOS, Accused-Appellant.
Separate Opinions
151 RUBEN DELFIN, BENITO DOLOSA, CORNELIO
AGUILAR, ANASTACIO GORDOLA, CESAR PANALIGAN, SARMIENTO, J., concurring: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
LUIS VIESCA, VICENTE GUADAMOR, JUAN CAGATIN,

SIMEON CHICA, REYNALDO CINCO, WILFREDO IPAS, I agree that the petition be granted.
SIMEON TAGAYONA, FLORENCIO SINAMBAN,
FERMINIO DIEGO, POLICARPIO DILE, EDDIE DE It is my opinion however that the main issue on the validity of the assailed provisions of R.A. 6657 (the
CASTRO, AQUILINO CABILITASAN, CRISOGONO Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law of 1988) and its Implementing Rules and Guidelines insofar as they
CANTERO, GUALBERTO REBUSTER, RODOLFO include the raising of livestock, poultry, and swine in their coverage can not be simplistically reduced to a
GATCHALIAN, ANGELITO DOMINGO, FERNANDO question of constitutional construction.
JOVER, RAFAEL SALCEDO, SIMON DIANA, BENJAMIN
GONZALES, JR., BENIGNO ROJA, DEMETRIO SIMEON,
It is a well-settled rule that construction and interpretation come only after it has been demonstrated
JOSE TELAN, HILARIO VILLANUEVA, NICK
FRANCISCO, PACIFICO DALIPE, EUPEMIO DALITE, that application is impossible or inadequate without them. A close reading however of the constitutional
ARTEMIO DE CASTRO, ISABELO RASTICA, ANECITO text in point, specifically, Sec. 4, Art. XIII, particularly the phrase,." . . in case of other farmworkers, to
RASTICA, LAMBERTO NIETO, ESMERALDO TATEL, receive a just share of the fruits thereof," provides a basis for the clear and possible coverage of
PASCUAL BATOCTOY, ESMENIO PATRICIO, ARMANDO livestock, poultry, and swine raising within the ambit of the comprehensive agrarian reform program. This
DE GUZMAN, JESUS MALLARI, JOSE MALLARI, accords with the principle that every presumption should be indulged in favor of the constitutionality of a
SULPICIO MALLARI, GENEROSO COS, AGAPITO statute and the court in considering the validity of a statute should give it such reasonable construction
ESPINOSA, VIRGILIO SEVAÑES, RICARDO MANZAN, as can be reached to bring it within the fundamental law. 1
OSCAR BENSOL, PABLO DIAGSAY, EMILIO DIAGSAY,
PAULINO COMETA, MATERO COREA, BENJAMIN The presumption against unconstitutionality, I must say, assumes greater weight when a ruling to the
LACANARIA, GAUDY TIU, JOVENCIO AGUILAR, contrary would, in effect, defeat the laudable and noble purpose of the law, i.e., the welfare of the
ROMULO POSADA, RICARDO POSIC, ALFONSO landless farmers and farmworkers in the promotion of social justice, by the expedient conversion of
SALGADO, RICARDO TAGANAP, ARMANDO RAMIREZ,
agricultural lands into livestock, poultry, and swine raising by scheming landowners, thus, rendering the
FELIPE RAMIRES, EDELBERTO BERNARDO, PONCIANO
MONTILLA, JUAN MONTILLA, IGNACIO PANCHITO,
comprehensive nature of the agrarian program merely illusory.
JEORGE SERRAN, VICTOR IGNIS, LUCAS IGAT,
BARTOLOME MAGDAEL, AUGUSTO ROSALINAS, The instant controversy, I submit, boils down to the question of whether or not the assailed provisions
RAFAEL SOCITO, JORGE CO, LUCINO WAGAN, CELSO violate the equal protection clause of the Constitution (Article II, section 1) which teaches simply that all
BARADA, WINSTON DIENZO, PAULINO SANCHEZ, persons or things similarly situated should be treated alike, both as to rights conferred and
ELESEO SANCHES, CONRADO SANCHES, GENEROSO responsibilities imposed. 2
ANTONIO, AGUSTIN LOPEZ, RUDY SOCITO, SEGUNDO
SOCITO, JOAQUIN PARAS, DOMINADOR BUTAHON, There is merit in the contention of the petitioner that substantial distinctions exist between land directed
GERMOGENES GINGCO, HONORIO DETOITO, ELIGIO purely to cultivation and harvesting of fruits or crops and land exclusively used for livestock, poultry and
MENDOZA, RUBEN QUITORIANO, LEON DELA CRUZ, swine raising, that make real differences, to wit:
PACITO SALES, ANTONIO CEMANES, IRENEO
chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
LUBUGIN, FORTUNATO MATO, ROMEO MERIC,

x x x
ALBERTO GALLO, MELCHOR SALGADO, SIMEON
QUIJANO, ANTONIO CARAAN, CARLITO GUZMAN,
ALBERTO SALMON, FELIMON TAN, FERNANDO
FAUSTINO, CONRADO DAVID, REYNALDO NOLASCO, No land is tilled and no crop is harvested in livestock and poultry farming. There are no tenants nor
ANTONIO NIETO, JAIME CAMACHO, ALBERTO landlords, only employers and employees.
PANGLAO, ROSAURO GANAC, ALFREDO ARCABIO,
PEDRO MANASALA, VICENTE BELARMINO, ROMULO Livestock and poultry do not sprout from land nor are they "fruits of the land." cralaw virtua1aw library
SIOCO, SEVERINO ATIENZA, JR., RUFO ABALOS,

JESUS POSADA, ALBINO BACARRO, ERNESTO DAJAY, Land is not even a primary resource in this industry. The land input is inconsequential that all the
WILFREDO VILLALON, CELESTINO BACARRO, MANUEL commercial hog and poultry farms combined occupy less than one percent (1%) (0.4% for piggery, 0.2%
TOLENTINO, ERNESTO ANTONIO, OSCAR ABUNDIO, for poultry) of the 5.45 million hectares of land supposedly covered by the CARP. And most farms utilize
ZOSIMO IJARES, RUBEN ARISTORENAS, GAUDENCIO only 2 to 5 hectares of land.
CASTILLO, DOMINGO DELA TORRE, DANILO
chanroblesvirtualawlibrary
RONCADA, RAFEL PUPA, ALFONSO SAPINORO,

LUISITO JACRIQUE, MARCELINO BESA, ANSELMO In every respect livestock and poultry production is an industrial activity. Its use of an inconsequential
DATELES, ALBERTO PALCULAN, BIENVENIDO portion of land is a mere incident of its operation, as in any other undertaking, business or otherwise.
FUENSALIDA AND JOSE ORZAL, Petitioners, vs. THE
HON. AMADO G. INCIONG in his capacity as Deputy The fallacy of defining livestock and poultry production as an agricultural enterprise is nowhere more
Minister of Labor; NLRC Commissioners DIEGO evident when one considers that at least 95% of total investment in these farms is in the form of fixed
ATIENZA, CLETO VILLATUYA and GERONIMO assets which are industrial in nature.
QUADRA; ATLANTIC CONTAINER CORPORATION;
INLAND INDUSTRIES, INC., LAZARO ARRIOLA, These include (1) animal housing structures and facilities complete with drainage, waterers, blowers,
BIENVENIDO KATALBAS, AURORA JEREZA, GOSHI DE misters and in some cases even piped-in music; (2) feedmills complete with grinders, mixers, conveyors,
YULO AND PAZ YULO AND ROBERTO JACINTO, exhausts, generators, etc.; (3) extensive warehousing facilities for feeds and other supplies; (4) anti-
Respondents. pollution equipment such as bio-gas and digester plants augmented by lagoons and concrete ponds; (5)
deepwells, elevated water tanks, pumphouses and accessory facilities; (6) modern equipment such as
163 SPOUSES TEOFILO ERCILLO and TERESITA sprayers, pregnancy testers, etc.; (7) laboratory facilities complete with expensive tools and equipment;
ERCILLO, Petitioners, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and and a myriad other such technologically advanced appurtances.
SPOUSES LUTGARDA CIFRA and BENJAMIN CIFRA,
SR., represented by their son and attorney-in-fact, How then can livestock and poultry farmlands be arable when such are almost totally occupied by these
BENJAMIN CIFRA, JR., and HON. JOSE P. CASTRO, structures?
Respondents.
The fallacy of equating the status of livestock and poultry farmworkers with that of agricultural tenants
[G.R. No. 55613 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA surfaces when one considers contribution to output. Labor cost of livestock and poultry farms is no more
169 ERNESTO DICHOSO, Petitioner, vs. The than 4% of total operating cost. The 98% balance represents inputs not obtained from the land nor
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and TEODOLFO provided by the farmworkers — inputs such as feeds and biochemicals (80% of the total cost), power
RAMOS, Respondents. cost, cost of money and several others.
177 FILIPINAS MILLS, INC., BUENAVENTURA TAN and Moreover, livestock and poultry farmworkers are covered by minimum wage law rather than by tenancy
VIRGINIA DUMLAO-TAN, Petitioners, vs. HON. law. They are entitled to social security benefits where tenant-farmers are not. They are paid fixed wages
ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, in his capacity as Presiding rather than crop shares. And as in any other industry, they receive additional benefits such as
Judge of the Court of First Instance of Manila, Branch allowances, bonuses, and other incentives such as free housing privileges, light and water.
II, ASSOCIATED CITIZENS BANK and OSCAR V.
ATAYDE, in his capacity as the Deputy Sheriff of the Equating livestock and poultry farming with other agricultural activities is also fallacious in the sense that
CFI-Manila, Branch II, Respondents. like the manufacturing sector, it is a market for, rather than a source of agricultural output. At least 60%
of the entire domestic supply of corn is absorbed by livestock and poultry farms. So are the by-products
[G.R. No. 69863-65 : December 10, 1990.] 192 of rice (rice-bran), coconut (copra meal), banana (banana pulp meal), and fish (fish meal). 3
SCRA 183 LINO BROCKA, BENJAMIN CERVANTES,
COSME GARCIA, RODOLFO SANTOS, VALENTINO x x x
SALIPSIP, RICARDO VEGA, ERIC MARIANO, JOSE
EMMANUEL OYALES, RONNIE MATTA, ALFREDO VIAJE,
RUBEN EUGENIO, REYNALDO ORTIZ, ORLANDO In view of the foregoing, it is clear that both kinds of lands are not similarly situated and hence, can not
ORTIZ, NOEL REYES, EDUARDO IMPERIAL, NESTOR be treated alike. Therefore, the assailed provisions which allow for the inclusion of livestock and poultry
SARMIENTO, FRANCO PALISOC, VIRGILIO DE industry within the coverage of the agrarian reform program constitute invalid classification and must
GUZMAN, ALBERTO REYES, JESSIE PINILI, ROMULO accordingly be struck down as repugnant to the equal protection clause of the Constitution.
AUGUIS, DOMINADOR RESURRECION III, RONNIE
chanrobles.com:cralaw:red
LAYGO, ROSAURO ROQUE, CLARENCE SORIANO,

OCTAVO DEPAWA, CARLITO LA TORRE, SEVERNO Endnotes:
ILANO, JR., DOMINGO CAJIPE, ALAN ALEGRE, RAMON
MARTINEZ, MA. GILDA HERNANDEZ, EDNA P.
VILLANUEVA, DOLLY S. CANU, MELQUIADES C.
ATIENZA, ELIGIO P. VERA CRUZ, ROGER C. BAGAN, SARMIENTO, J., concurring: chanrob1es virtual 1aw library
ABUNDIO M. CALISTE, Petitioners, vs. JUAN PONCE

ENRILE, MAJ. GENERAL FIDEL V. RAMOS, BRIG. 1. In re Guarina, 24 Phil. 37; Yu Cong Eng v. Trinidad, 70 L. ed., p. 1059.
GENERAL PEDRO BALBANERO, COL. ABAD, COL.
DAWIS, SERGIO APOSTOL, P/LT, RODOLFO M. 2. Ichong v. Hernandez, 101 Phil. 1155.
GARCIA and JUDGE RICARDO TENSUAN, Respondents.
[G.R. No. 74762 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 3. Rollo, 29-30.
191 COMMERCIAL MOTORS CORPORATION,
Petitioner, vs. COMMISSIONERS, SECOND DIVISION,
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, and
PEDRO UMLAS, Respondents.
[G.R. No. 78163 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA Back to Home | Back to Main
199 ANGELINA P. SANTIAGO, Petitioner, vs. The
Honorable DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY and HI-
CEMENT CORPORATION, Respondents.
QUICK SEARCH
209 LUCIO R. CRUZ, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF
APPEALS AND CONRADO Q. SALONGA, Respondents.
1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
224 S & A GAISANO INCORPORATED, CANUTO CUPIN, 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
represented by his son Salvador P. Cupin as Attorney- 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
in-Fact; VICENTE CUPIN; EVARISTO CUPIN,
represented by his wife Marites R. Cupin as Attorney- 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
in-Fact; RAMON CUPIN; FE CUPIN and
1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
BUENAVENTURA CUPIN, both represented by their
brother Ramon Cupin as Attorney-in-Fact, Petitioners, 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
vs. HON. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, Executive and 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
Presiding Judge of Regional Trial Court of Butuan City
and Agusan del Norte; Branch V, Region X; VICTOR 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964
CHAN; ATTY. ARTURO RICAFORTE, in his capacity as 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
Register of Deeds of Butuan City; CITY ENGINEER
VICTORIOSO GO, in his capacity as National Building 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
Official of Butuan City, Respondents. 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
[G.R. No. 82215 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
232 ANTIPAZ PRESCO y PARAS, ANTONIO AMORES y 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
PARAS, and ANSELMA PARAS, Petitioners, vs. HON.
COURT OF APPEALS, HON. MARIANO UMALI, Judge of 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
the Regional Trial Court of Cavite, Branch 25, Trece 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Martires City, HON. EDWINA P. MENDOZA, Judge of
the Municipal Trial Court of General Trias, Cavite,
MODESTO PARAS, and SIMPLICIO SANCHEZ,
Respondents.

242 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!
vs. ERNESTO AVILA y MENDOZA AND JOHN DOE,
Accused-Appellant.

246 ALLIED BANKING CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs.
HON. SECRETARY SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ (Public
Respondent) and ALFREDO CHING (Private
Respondent), Respondents.
[G.R. Nos. 84132-33 : December 10, 1990.] 192

SCRA 257 NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND
NEW AGRIX, INC., Petitioners, vs. PHILIPPINE
VETERANS BANK, THE EX-OFFICIO SHERIFF and
GODOFREDO QUILING, in his capacity as Deputy
Sheriff of Calamba, Laguna, Respondents.

vs. AMANDO TASARRA and ABELARDO TASARRA,
Accused-Appellants.

vs. LYDIA RAMA, Defendant-Appellant.

277 JOSE A. SADDUL, JR., Petitioner, vs. THE HON.
COURT OF APPEALS and THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
[A.M. No. P-86-32 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

288 ALFREDO LLANES, complainant, vs. GAUDIOSO
BORJA, DEPUTY SHERIFF, RTC, BRANCH 19, NAGA
CITY, Respondent.

296 DIRECTOR OF LANDS, DIRECTOR OF FORESTRY
and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs.
HON. JUAN P. AQUINO, as Judge of the Court of First
Instance of Abra, Second Judicial District and ABRA
INDUSTRIAL CORPORATION, Respondents.

305 TRADERS ROYAL BANK, Petitioner, vs. HON.
INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT and HON.
GREGORIO S. CENDAÑA, in his capacity as DIRECTOR
OF THE NATIONAL MEDIA PRODUCTION CENTER
(NMPC), Respondents

315 CAGAYAN DE ORO COLISEUM, INC., Petitioner, vs.
OFFICE OF THE MINISTER OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT, represented by Deputy Minister
VICENTE LEOGARDO, JR. and ANGEL CHAVES,
Respondents.

320 DIRECTOR OF LANDS, Petitioner, vs. SPOUSES
FRANCISCO K. REDOR and ANGELITA CASTRO, and
HON. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR., Presiding Judge
of the Regional Trial Court, Branch XXVII, Sta. Cruz,
Laguna, Respondents.

326 DR. OFELIA P. TRISTE, Petitioner, vs. LEYTE
STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, namely: Hon.
Lourdes R. Quisumbing, Secretary of the Department
of Education, Culture and Sports and Chairman of the
Board and/or Dr. Minda C. Sutaria as the authorized
representative; Dr. Purificacion M. Flores, President of
the Leyte State College and Vice-Chairman of the
Board; Director Venancio Baclagon, National
Economic and Development Authority, Regional Office
No. VIII and Member of the Board; HON. SEDFREY A.
ORDOÑEZ, Secretary of Justice and Chairman of the
Review Committee under Executive Order No. 17; and
DR. CRES V. CHAN-GONZAGA, Respondents.

342 CRISTITO AUSTRIA y RODIS, Petitioner-
Appellant, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES and THE
HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, Respondents-
Appellees.

358 SIXTO S. BRILLANTES, JR., Petitioner, vs.
HAYDEE B. YORAC, in her capacity as ACTING
CHAIRPERSON of the COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,
Respondent.
[G.R. Nos. 95203-05 : December 18, 1990.] 192

SCRA 363 SENATOR ERNESTO MACEDA, Petitioner, vs.
ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD (ERB); MARCELO N.
FERNANDO, ALEJANDRO B. AFURONG; REX V.
TANTIONGCO; and OSCAR E. ALA, in their collective
official capacities as Chairman and Members of the
Board (ERB), respectively; CATALINO MACARAIG, in
his quadruple official capacities as Executive
Secretary, Chairman of Philippine National Oil
Company; Office of the Energy Affairs, and with
MANUEL ESTRELLA, in their respective official
capacities as Chairman and President of the Petron
Corporation; PILIPINAS SHELL PETROLEUM
CORPORATION; with CESAR BUENAVENTURA and REY
GAMBOA as chairman and President, respectively;
CALTEX PHILIPPINES with FRANCIS ABLAN, President
and Chief Executive Officer; and the Presidents of
Philippine Petroleum Dealer's Association, Caltex
Dealer's Co., Petron Dealer's Asso., Shell Dealer's
Asso. of the Phil., Liquefied Petroleum Gas Institute
of the Phils., any and all concerned gasoline and
petrol dealers or stations; and such other persons,
officials, and parties, acting for and on their behalf; or
in representation of and/or under their authority,
Respondents. [G.R. Nos. 95119-21 : December 18,
1990.] 192 SCRA 363 OLIVER O. LOZANO, Petitioner,
vs. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD (ERB), PILIPINAS
SHELL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, CALTEX (PHIL.),
INC., and PETRON CORPORATION, Respondents.

vs. JUVENAL KYAMKO, Accused-Appellant.
[A.C. No. 2756 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA

381 PRUDENTIAL BANK, Petitioner, vs. BENJAMIN M.
GRECIA, Respondent.

388 JULITA FRANCISCO and her husband,
HERMENEGILDO TANKENKO, and RESTITUTO
FRANCISCO and his wife, FELISA ABEJO, Petitioners,
vs. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, Judge of the Court of First
Instance of Bulacan; FRANCISCA FRANCISCO,
MAXIMA FRANCISCO and FRANCISCO FRANCISCO,
Respondents.
[G.R. Nos. 88710-13 : December 19, 1990.] 192

SCRA 396 UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES (UFE),
MANUEL L. SARMIENTO, BENJAMIN M. ALTAREJOS,
RODOLFO D. PAGLINAWAN, CARMELITA G. NUQUI,
CORAZON Y SAZON, RODRIGO P. LUCAS, RUDOLPH C.
ARMAS, EDUARDO A. ABELLA, ANGEL A. CANETE,
JUANITO T. CAPILI, ADOLFO S. CASTILLO, JR.,
PONCIANO A. CARINGAL, ERIBERTO S. LEONARDO,
ADELAIDA B. MIRA, EUGENIA C. NUÑEZ, PAZ B. SAN
JOSE, VENUSITO S. SOLIS, EMMANUEL S. VILLENA,
ALFONSO R. RICAFRENTE, MELANIO C. LANTIN,
AMADOR M. MONTOJO, RODOLFO M. MUNSOD,
RENATO P. DIAZ, RODRIGO M. URGELLES, CARLOS B.
SAN JOSE, EUSTAQUIO E. BUNYI, NELSON P.
CENTENO, SOTERO A. GACUTAN, GUILLERMO G. DE
BORJA, DIONISIO H. NIPALES, EUGENIO S. SAN
PEDRO, MANUEL DELA FUENTE, CARLO MEDINA,
CESAR B. PONCE, JORGE B. CASTRO, JR., RICARDO
AREVALO, REY M. BEO, FELIX ESGUERRA, REYNALDO
ALMENANZA, MELITON C. ROXAS (as represented by
his surviving spouse, MA. CORAZON ROXAS), ROMEO
A. ARANDELA, ISIDRO A. NATIVIDAD, EMILIANO M.
SAYAO, CELSO J. CENIDO, PAUL C. MEJARES,
SILVERIO C. PAMPANG, DIONISIO S. CANLOBO,
GILBERT C. NOBLE, RODOLFO D. CALONG-CALONG,
SR., PEPITO Q. QUITLONG, DIONISIO C. COMPLETO,
ANTONIO T. AVELINO, ANGELITO PAYABYAB, ISAIAS
A. RIEZA, DEODITO M. BELARMINO, QUEZON G.
MATEO, CARLITO PRE, CIPRIANO P. LUPEBA, EFREN
P. DINSAY, WILDON C. BARROS, SUSAN A. BERRO,
MANUEL A. LAVIN, ROY U. BACONGUIS, JEROME T.
FIEL, ANASTACIO G. CABALLERO, JR., ROGELIO E.
RAIZ, JOSE T. ISIDTO, ANGELITO M. ANICIETE, RAUL
ROBERTO C. NANQUIL, LIZA T. VILLANUEVA, CESAR S.
CRUZ, REYNALDO L. CALIGUIA, ERNESTO M.
SOLOMON, OSCAR G. AGUINALDO, DIEGO P. OLIVA,
JAIME D. NILLAS, ELPIDIO A. HERMOCILLA, DANTE L.
ESCOSURA, FEDERICO P. CONTEMPRATO, LAURO C.
MAKILING, RENATO O. MINDANAO, RAFAEL C. TURA
AND QUINTIN J. PEDRIDO, JR., Petitioners, vs.
NESTLÉ PHILIPPINES, INC., NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS COMMISSION, HON. EDUARDO G. MAGNO,
HON. ZOSIMO T. VASALLO and HON. EVANGELINE S.
LUBATON, Respondents.

414 UNION OF FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, Petitioner, vs.
THE HONORABLE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION and NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC.,
Respondents.

430 EDUARDO ACOP, ROGER ALMENDAREZ,
BIENVENIDO AMBRAY, BENITO ARELLANO, WILLIAM
ARMENDARES, HERMINIO ARREZA, TEODORO
ARREZA, PEREGRINO BANGUIS, MOISES BARENG,
HIPOLITO BONGGOT, RAMON BUCALON, MELITO
BUENAVIDES, FELIX CAGONG, LORENZO CALIWATAN,
ANGEL CALUMBA, HENRY CARIAGA, GEORGE CASANO,
REYNALDO CAPUTOLAN, FELOMENO CHATO, JULIETO
CONGSIGNA, REYMUNDO CUADRA, EUFRONIO
CUBERO, BIENVENIDO CURAYAG, RUDICASTRO
CURAYAG, JOVENCIO DARAY, DAVID DE LEON,
NELSON ECHIN, ROLANDO ESCATRON, BERTINO
ESPINOLA, CRESENCIO FRANCIS, MATEO FRIAS,
RODOLFO FUENTES, BENEDICTO GALLOGO, HERMANO
GALOPE, JORGE GALVE, ERNESTO GONABO, VIRGILIO
GRUMO, JEMELITO GUBAL, RICARDO GUILLEN,
GENEROSO HERNANDEZ, JR., NELSON JABAY, EMILIO
JACINTO, EMELIANO JALA, JR., IGNACIO JURALBAR,
ALFREDO LOMOLJO, CELESTINO LOMOLJO, EDUARDO
LOPEZ, LUCIO LOPIO, SAMUEL LOREDO, NORBERTO
LORIA, MARCOS LOSIS, MARIO LUENGAS, NICOLAS
MAGHINAY, ROGELIO MATILDO, FLORANTE MIRANDA,
ANACLETO MONTON, NARCISO MONTON, ERNESTO
OROZCO, CHARLITO ORQUITA, MERLCHOR PANTO,
CASIMIRO PEREGRINO, EDUARDO PLAZA, NELSON
PLAZA, PAQUITO PLAZA, PEDRO PLAZA, FREDIOMIO
QUIÑONES, PEPE RAMIREZ, JOEL REMEDIO, EDUARDO
REVELLEZA, GERALDO ROSIL, JR., TEMESTOCLES
RUBENAL, REMEGIO SABUSIDO, ROGER SOTES,
BELTRANO SULLANO, JAIME SULLANO, ERNIE
TACUGDOY, WENIFREDO TOCMO, SR., PAQUITO
TRUGILLO, ANIOLITO URBIZTONDO, ROMARICO
URIARTE DARIO ORQUIZA, BERTINO VALLEJO,
FRANCISCO VEGA, CRESENCIO YPARRAGUIRRE, RUDY
YPARUAGUIRRI and EDUARDO SACRAGON, SR.,
Petitioners, vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, (Fifth Division), SURIGAO
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (SUDECOR) and RET.
GEN. REYNALDO G. DILAN, Vice President for Field
Operations & Administration, Respondents.
[A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 : December 19, 1990.] 192

SCRA 434 EFREN JAVIER and PEDRO JAVIER,
Complainants, vs. JUDGE SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN,
JR., Respondent.

445 DOMINGO REYES, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE
JUDGE SERAFIN

454 LILIA AGUIRRE, GENATO AGUIRRE and BENITO
AGRAVA, Petitioners, vs. THE HONORABLE COURT OF
FIRST INSTANCE OF LEYTE, BRANCH III, EDUARDO
TAMPIL and LETICIA A. TAMPIL, Respondents.

459 WORLD MACHINE ENTERPRISES, Petitioner, vs.
INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT AND J.R.
LITHOPLATES, Respondents.

469 ROMEO J. ORDOÑEZ, Petitioner, vs. THE HON.
ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, in his capacity as presiding
judge of Regional Trial Court of Cavite, Branch XVI,
Cavite City, Municipality of Rosario, Cavite, former
Mayor Calixto D. Enriquez of Rosario, Cavite, and
Valeriano Espiritu of Mabolo, Bacoor, Cavite,
Respondents.

vs. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN y DE DIOS, Accused-
Appellant.
[G.R. Nos. 86492-94 : December 20, 1990.] 192

SCRA 483 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-
Appellee, vs. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE, Defendant-
Appellant.

492 PENTAGON SECURITY and INVESTIGATION
AGENCY, Petitioner, vs. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL.,
and NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION,
SECOND DIVISION, Respondents.

496 HON. RAUL S. MANGLAPUS, in his capacity as
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, Petitioner, vs. HON.
ANDRES E. MATIAS, Judge of the Regional Trial Court
of Manila (Branch 45) and GAVINO P. ABAYA,
Respondents.
[G.R. Nos. 92029-30 : December 20, 1990.] 192

SCRA 507 NICANOR G. DE GUZMAN, JR., Petitioner,
vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS, Former Fifth Division,
HON. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, National Capital
Judicial Region, Br. 48, Manila, and ENRIQUE KP. TAN,
Respondents.

514 FNCB FINANCE, Petitioner, vs. NAPOLEON
ESTAVILLO, Respondent.

521 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs.
HON. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON and
FEDERICO DE GUZMAN, Respondents.
[G.R. Nos. 48535-36 : December 21, 1990.] 192

SCRA 533 KOH TIECK HENG, Petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES and COURT OF APPEALS,
Respondents.

548 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellant, vs.
SALVADOR MONTEIRO, Appellee.

554 DIONG BI CHU, alias PATRICK CHANG, CHANG KA
HEE and LU LIONG CORPORATION, Petitioners, vs.
THE HON. COURT OF APPEALS, HON. GREGORIO G.
PINEDA, as Presiding Judge, Court of First Instance of
Rizal, Branch XXI; JAIME NAVOA and MILAGROS DE
LEOS, Respondents.
[G.R. No. 63753-54 : December 21, 1990.] 192

SCRA 561 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-
Appellee, vs. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ARTURO
DEVARAS, ARTEMIO TULANG (at large), and RUFINO
CAMINONG (at large), accused. GREGORIO
BERINGUEL and ARTURO DEVARAS, Accused-
Appellants.

575 TIMOTEO POJAS, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE
MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
JUDGE, CITY OF TAGBILARAN, IRENEA POJAS,
CESARIA LAGROSA and CORNELIA BETINOL,
Respondents.
[G.R. Nos. 78551-52 : December 21, 1990.] 192

Appellee, vs. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO y VILLANUEVA
and ANTONIO MARCEDONIO y VILLANUEVA, Accused-
Appellants.

vs. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ alias "Jun Plementero",
Defendant-Appellant.

598 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FREE TRADE
UNIONS (NAFTU), Petitioner, vs. MAINIT LUMBER
DEVELOPMENT COMPANY WORKERS UNION-UNITED
LUMBER AND GENERAL WORKERS OF THE
PHILIPPINES. (MALDECOWU-ULGWP), Respondents.

604 HYDRO RESOURCES CONTRACTORS
CORPORATION, Petitioner, vs. THE COURT OF TAX
APPEALS and THE HON. DEPUTY MINISTER OF
FINANCE, ALFREDO PIO DE RODA, Respondents.
[G.R. No. 83257-58 : December 21, 1990.] 192

SCRA 612 OSIAS ACADEMY and MONICA R. DE
CASTRO, Petitioners, vs. THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
AND EMPLOYMENT, CONCHITA MERCADO, NECITAS
GACIS, EVELYN B. GARAIS, ESTRELLA GATON, EVA L.
CAYETANO, TERESA G. BILAZON, SUSAN G. FUELLAS,
ELVIRA D. GACIS, LOURDES CORREA, JULIETA A.
MANALO, NILA G. GABELO and TEODORO GUANIZO,
Respondents.

621 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-
Appellee, vs. DANTE BARTULAY Accused-Appellant.

vs. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA, Defendant-Appellant.

Appellee, vs. ISAGANI DESLATE and ROMY
FRANCISCO alias "Romeo Francisco", Accused,
ISAGANI DESLATE, Appellant.

Appellee, vs. ISABELO SANCHEZ y PANDILI, Accused-
Appellant.
[G.R. Nos. 89682-83 : December 21, 1990.] 192
Appellee, vs. BENJAMIN HERICO, Defendant-
Appellant.

Appellee, vs. GERONIMO GOLES, Defendant-Appellant.

674 ATTY. TEODORO V. CABILAN & ALEJANDRO A.
PARALISAN, Petitioners, vs. HON. JUDGE JOSE R.
RAMOLETE & PROVINCIAL/CITY JAIL WARDEN of
Cebu City, Respondents.

680 RICARDO VILLAFLOR, Petitioner, vs. COURT OF
APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,**
Respondents.

691 VICENTE GERARDO, VALENTINA GERARDO,
CORNELIO GERARDO, BENJAMIN GERARDO, ANGEL
GERARDO, & CONSTANTE GERARDO, Petitioners, vs.
HON. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, Presiding Judge,
Branch VI, Court of First Instance of Ilocos Norte,
TERESA ANTONIO BELZA, VISITACION ANTONIO
ADINA, ILUMINADA PASCUA ANTONIO, FELICIDAD
BATACAN MATA, POLICARPO BATACAN, BASILIO
BATACAN, ISABEL BANGLOY, IRINEO BANGLOY,
EDUARDO BANGLOY, DIONICIO BANGLOY, DOMINGA
BANGLOY, and ERMINIO BANGLOY, Respondents.

vs. MARIO ABLAO, ISAGANI SACOP, LEOPOLDO DE
GUZMAN, PEDRO LADIANA, ZENON SAMONTE,
ALFREDO DEL MUNDO, BRUNO ABLAO, ISIDORO
GALEMA, DANILO MERCADO, RUSTICO LIWANAG,
FRANCISCO BALDEMECA, HECTOR SAMONTE and
DAVID ABLAO, accused, MARIO ABLAO, ISAGANI
SACOP, LEOPOLDO DE GUZMAN, PEDRO LADIANA,
ZENON SAMONTE, and ALFREDO DEL MUNDO,
Accused-Appellants.

709 SPOUSES EUFRACIO ROJAS AND CONCEPCION
ROJAS, Petitioners, vs. HON. COURT OF APPEALS,
AND SPOUSES FELIX E. MEDALLA AND DIONISIA
PACATAN MEDALLA, Respondents.

725 INVESTMENT AND UNDERWRITING
CORPORATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioners, vs.
COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC. and GENE V.
TAMESIS, Respondents.

735 FRANCISCO JOSE, ANTONIO, ERLINDA, JOVITA,
ARACELI, DOLORES, VIRGINIA, MARTA, LEDINIA, and
ANITA, all surnamed RAMON JAO, Petitioners, vs.
COURT OF APPEALS and LAUREANA C. VDA. DE
BAIRAN, as administratrix of the Estate of Pablo
Bairan, Respondents.

743 REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, vs.
THE HONORABLE SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST
DIVISION), Respondents.

768 JOSE ORDA and IMELDA LOZADA, Petitioners, vs.
THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS and GIL
GALANG Respondents.
G.R. No. 32945 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO T.

NASSER v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 39430 December 3, 1990 - FRANCISCO

MANLAPAZ, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 55466 December 3, 1990 - MANILA

SURETY & FIDELITY CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS,
ET AL.
G.R. No. 78778 December 3, 1990 - LEONIDA

CORONADO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 79560 December 3, 1990 - ANDRES E.

DITAN v. PHILIPPINE OVERSEAS EMPLOYMENT
ADMINISTRATION ADMINISTRATOR, ET AL.
G.R. No. 80904 December 3, 1990 - BALTAZAR

PANTIG, ET AL. v. VENANCIO BALTAZAR
G.R. No. 82115 December 3, 1990 - PEOPLE OF THE

PHIL. v. ROMEO B. ORTIZ
G.R. No. 84884 December 3, 1990 - EULALIO M.

RUIZ, ET AL. v. DOROTEO N. CANEBA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 87264 December 3, 1990 - MARIANO

DINGLASAN, ET AL. v. MARIA ALICIA M. AUSTRIA, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 89545 December 3, 1990 - ROLANDO

DOLORFINO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
UDK No. 9864 December 3, 1990 - RUFINA VDA. DE

TANGUB v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 58668 December 4, 1990 - SANTIAGO
ESCARTE, JR., ET AL. v. OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF
THE PHIL., ET AL.
G.R. No. 71929 December 4, 1990 - ALITALIA v.

INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 74577 December 4, 1990 - CONSOLACION

VILLANUEVA v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT, ET
AL.

PHIL. v. MARIO L. TANDOY
G.R. No. 80791 December 4, 1990 - PEOPLE’S

FINANCING CORP., ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 86586 December 4, 1990 - NATIONAL

IRRIGATION ADMINISTRATION v. TEODORO P.
REGINO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v.

SEC. OF THE DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM
G.R. No. 88177 December 4, 1990 - DOLORES A.

PAREDES v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 93054 December 4, 1990 - ALEXANDER P.

ORDILLO, ET AL. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS, ET
AL.
G.R. No. 30616 December 10, 1990 - EUFRACIO D.

ROJAS v. CONSTANCIO B. MAGLANA
G.R. No. 36827 December 10, 1990 - DIRECTOR OF

FOREST ADMINISTRATION, ET AL. v. RAMON C.
FERNANDEZ, ET AL.
G.R. No. 44749 December 10, 1990 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHIL. v. MELVIN S. GIRON
G.R. No. 50661 December 10, 1990 - RUBEN

DELFIN, ET AL. v. AMADO G. INCIONG, ET AL.
G.R. No. 55361 December 10, 1990 - TEOFILO

ERCILLO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 55613 December 10, 1990 - ERNESTO

DICHOSO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 56620 December 10, 1990 - FILIPINAS

MILLS, INC., ET AL. v. ABELARDO M. DAYRlT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 69863-65 December 10, 1990 - LINO

BROCKA, ET AL. v. JUAN PONCE ENRILE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 74762 December 10, 1990 - COMMERCIAL

MOTORS CORPORATION v. COMMISSIONERS, NLRC,
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 78163 December 10, 1990 - ANGELINA P.

SANTIAGO v. DEPUTY EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, ET AL.
G.R. No. 79962 December 10, 1990 - LUCIO R.

CRUZ v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A

GAISANO INC., ET AL. v. VICENTE A. HIDALGO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 82215 December 10, 1990 - ANTIPAZ P.

PRESCO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. ERNESTO M. AVILA, ET AL.
G.R. No. 82495 December 10, 1990 - ALLIED

BANKING CORPORATION v. SEDFREY ORDOÑEZ
G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 -

NATIONAL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, ET AL. v.
PHILIPPINE VETERANS BANK, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. AMANDO TASARRA, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. LYDIA RAMA
G.R. No. 91041 December 10, 1990 - JOSE A.

SADDUL, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
A.M. No. P-86-32 December 10, 1990 - ALFREDO

LLANES v. GAUDIOSO BORJA, ET AL.

LANDS, ET AL. v. JUAN P. AQUINO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 68514 December 17, 1990 - TRADERS

ROYAL BANK v. INTERMEDIATE APPELLATE COURT,
ET AL.
G.R. No. 71589 December 17, 1990 - CAGAYAN DE

ORO COLISEUM, INC. v. MINISTER OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

LANDS v. FRANCISCO K. REDOR, ET AL.
G.R. No. 78623 December 17, 1990 - OFELIA P.

TRISTE v. LEYTE STATE COLLEGE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES, ET AL.
G.R. No. 83530 December 18, 1990 - CRISTITO R.

AUSTRIA v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.
G.R. No. 93867 December 18, 1990 - SIXTO S.

BRILLANTES, JR. v. HAYDEE B. YORAC
G.R. Nos. 95203-05 December 18, 1990 - ERNESTO

MACEDA v. ENERGY REGULATORY BOARD, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. JUVENAL KYAMKO
A.C. No. 2756 December 18, 1990 - PRUDENTIAL

BANK v. BENJAMIN M. GRECIA
G.R. No. 44167 December 19, 1990 - JULITA

FRANCISCO, ET AL. v. CRISPIN V. BAUTISTA, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 88710-13 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF

FILIPRO EMPLOYEES, ET AL. v. NESTLE PHILIPPINES,
INC., ET AL.
G.R. No. 91025 December 19, 1990 - UNION OF

FILIPRO EMPLOYEES v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, ET AL.
G.R. No. 95478 December 19, 1990 - EDUARDO

ACOP, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
COMMISSION, ET AL.
A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 December 19, 1990 - EFREN

JAVIER, ET AL. v. SALVADOR P. DE GUZMAN, JR.
G.R. No. 46198 December 20, 1990 - DOMINGO

REYES v. SERAFIN E. CAMILON, ET AL.
G.R. No. 53556 December 20, 1990 - LILIA

AGUIRRE, ET AL. v. COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF
LEYTE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 72019 December 20, 1990 - WORLD

MACHINE ENTERPRISES v. INTERMEDIATE
APPELLATE COURT, ET AL.
G.R. No. 81835 December 20, 1990 - ROMEO J.

ORDOÑEZ v. ALFREDO J. GUSTILO, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. FRANCISCO DE GUZMAN
G.R. Nos. 86492-94 December 20, 1990 - PEOPLE

OF THE PHIL. v. LEOPOLDO MONTANTE
G.R. No. 88114 December 20, 1990 - PENTAGON

SECURITY, ET AL. v. VICENTE T. JIMENEZ, ET AL.
G.R. No. 89618 December 20, 1990 - RAUL S.

MANGLAPUS v. ANDRES E. MATIAS, ET AL.
G.R. Nos. 92029-30 December 20, 1990 - NICANOR

G. DE GUZMAN, JR. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 93394 December 20, 1990 - FNCB

FINANCE v. NAPOLEON ESTAVILLO

THE PHIL. v. FELICIDAD CARANDANG VILLALON, ET
AL.
G.R. Nos. 48535-36 December 21, 1990 - KOH

TIECK HENG v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR MONTEIRO
G.R. No. 49588 December 21, 1990 - DIONG BI

CHU, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 63753-54 December 21, 1990 - PEOPLE OF

THE PHIL. v. GREGORIO BERINGUEL, ET AL.
G.R. No. 76519 December 21, 1990 - TIMOTEO

POJAS v. MERCEDES GOZO-DALOLE, ET AL.

OF THE PHIL. v. ROLANDO MARCEDONIO

THE PHIL. v. SALVADOR V. LUTAÑEZ

ASSO. OF FREE TRADE UNIONS v. MAINIT LUMBER
DEVT. COMPANY WORKERS
G.R. No. 80276 December 21, 1990 - HYDRO

RESOURCES CONTRACTORS CORPORATION v. COURT
OF TAX APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 83257-58 December 21, 1990 - OSIAS

ACADEMY, ET AL. v. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. DANTE BARTULAY

THE PHIL. v. ED FERNANDEZ AVILA
THE PHIL. v. ISAGANI DESLATE, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. ISABELO P. SANCHEZ

OF THE PHIL. v. BENJAMIN HERICO

THE PHIL. v. GERONIMO GOLES
G.R. No. 43491 December 26, 1990 - TEODORO V.

CABILAN, ET AL. v. JOSE R. RAMOLETE, ET AL.
G.R. No. 46210 December 26, 1990 - RICARDO

VILLAFLOR v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 61527 December 26, 1990 - VICENTE

GERARDO, ET AL. v. FLORENTINO DE LA PEÑA, ET AL.

THE PHIL. v. MARIO ABLAO, ET AL.
G.R. No. 77668 December 26, 1990 - EUFRACIO

ROJAS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 81039 December 26, 1990 - INVESTMENT

AND UNDERWRITING CORP. OF THE PHIL. v.
COMPTRONICS PHILIPPINES, INC., ET AL.

JOSE, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.
G.R. No. 88336 December 26, 1990 - REPUBLIC OF

THE PHIL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN
G.R. No. 92625 December 26, 1990 - JOSE ORDA,

ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.



ET AL.






AL.



THE PHIL., ET AL.


AL.


AL.

REGINO, ET AL.



AL.

FERNANDEZ, ET AL.







SECOND DIVISION


G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A




G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 -







ET AL.

EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.


TRUSTEES, ET AL.







INC., ET AL.

COMMISSION, ET AL.

COMMISSION, ET AL.


LEYTE, ET AL.









AL.










EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.


















ET AL.






AL.



THE PHIL., ET AL.


AL.


AL.

REGINO, ET AL.



AL.


FERNANDEZ, ET AL.







SECOND DIVISION


G.R. No. 80397 December 10, 1990 - S & A



G.R. Nos. 84132-33 December 10, 1990 -







ET AL.

EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.


TRUSTEES, ET AL.







INC., ET AL.

COMMISSION, ET AL.

COMMISSION, ET AL.



LEYTE, ET AL.









AL.










EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.















Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™ RED

Luz Farms Vs Sec of Agrarian Reform

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Luz Farms Vs Sec of Agrarian Reform

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

4/20/2019 G.R. No. 86889 December 4, 1990 - LUZ FARMS v. SEC. OF THE DEPT.

E DEPT. OF AGRARIAN REFORM : DECEMBER 1990 - PHILIPPINE …

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™

Like 0 Tweet Share

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

[G.R. No. 86889. December 4, 1990.]

LUZ FARMS, Petitioner, v. THE HONORABLE SECRETARY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRARIAN

Enrique M. Belo for petitioner.

(c) Section 13 which calls upon petitioner to execute a production-sharing plan.

AGRARIAN AND NATURAL RESOURCES REFORM

ADMINISTRATOR, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS

DOROTEO N. CANEBA, THE CITY SHERIFF OF MANILA

192 SCRA 21 CONSOLACION VILLANUEVA,

[G.R. No. 86889 : December 4, 1990.] 192 SCRA 51

PUGUON, and REYNAND DULDULAO; Lagawe

LUIS VIESCA, VICENTE GUADAMOR, JUAN CAGATIN,

LUBUGIN, FORTUNATO MATO, ROMEO MERIC,

SIOCO, SEVERINO ATIENZA, JR., RUFO ABALOS,

RONCADA, RAFEL PUPA, ALFONSO SAPINORO,

LAYGO, ROSAURO ROQUE, CLARENCE SORIANO,

ABUNDIO M. CALISTE, Petitioners, vs. JUAN PONCE

[G.R. No. 82374 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 82495 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 84132-33 : December 10, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 85531 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 89988 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 91041 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[A.M. No. P-86-32 : December 10, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 31688 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 68514 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 71589 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 76303 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 78623 : December 17, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 83530 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 93867 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 95203-05 : December 18, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 95263 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[A.C. No. 2756 : December 18, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 44167 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 88710-13 : December 19, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 91025 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 95478 : December 19, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[A.M. No. RTJ-89-380 : December 19, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 46198 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 53556 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 72019 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 81835 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 82002 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 86492-94 : December 20, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 88114 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 89618 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 92029-30 : December 20, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 93394 : December 20, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 43659 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 48535-36 : December 21, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 49454 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 49588 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 63753-54 : December 21, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 76519 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. Nos. 78551-52 : December 21, 1990.] 192

[G.R. No. 78854 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 79526 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA

[G.R. No. 80276 : December 21, 1990.] 192 SCRA