January 30, 1995

DAR OPINION NO. 03-95

Atty. Clemente C. Carlos, Jr.

Chief, Legal Division

DAR, Lipa City, Batangas

Dear Atty. Carlos,

This has reference to your letter requesting for opinion whether sugarcane farmers who are paid on a per ton basis may be considered tenants as defined under R.A. 3844, as amended. You state that the request for opinion is due to the fact that there are several pending cases in the Province of Batangas involving said issue.

A finding of tenancy cannot be based merely on the information that the farmers are paid on a per ton basis. As held by the Supreme Court in a long line of cases, the most recent of which is in "Rafael Gelos vs. Court of Appeals and Ernesto Alzona" (G.R. No. 86186, 6 May 1992), the following requisites must concur in order for an agricultural leasehold contract to exist:

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 or payment of rental

Note that all of the above requisites must be present in order for a person to be considered an agricultural lessee on the farmholding involved. If one is absent, there could be no leasehold relations to speak of. You are therefore advised to determine the circumstances under which the farmer commenced working on the land, his duties and responsibilities thereon as agreed upon between him and the landowner, and such other matters as would enable you to ascertain whether or not the above requisites are present. Once you have made such a determination, you should decide on the issue before you. The party who feels aggrieved may then file his appeal therefrom.

Please be guided accordingly.

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) HECTOR D. SOLIMAN
Assistant Secretary Legal Affairs Office