June 23, 1998
DAR OPINION NO. 73-98
ELIEZER T . HERNANDEZ
#24 Sampaguita St.
Pembo, Zone 3
1218 Makati City
Dear Mr. Hernandez:
This has reference to your letter dated 27 April 1998 seeking opinion on whether or not an agricultural land burdened with an unsatisfied attorney's lien could be validly awarded to farmer-beneficiaries.
As culled from your letter, the subject property has an area of Three Hundred Nine Thousand Five Hundred Eighty Three (309,583) square meters registered in the name of the late Augusto de los Reyes; that a petition dated 18 August 1997 was filed but the same has been denied by an Order of the Secretary dated 12 November 1997; that despite the fact that there exists an encumbrance on the said title conveying one third (1/3) of the subject landholding in favor of Atty. Dionisio A. Hernandez, the same was awarded to Leonardo and Pelagio Tabajonda; and that according to you the award violates the laws pertaining to liens and encumbrances.
At the outset, we wish to emphasize that the enactment of agrarian laws is pursuant to valid exercise of the police power of the State. In its exercise, the State may interfere with property, business and occupation. The rationale for the interference is that public welfare or interest is superior to private rights, thus, well-settled is the rule as underscored by the Supreme Court in a long line of decisions that the constitutional guarantee of non-impairment of obligations is limited by the exercise of the police power of the State.
While your claim for attorney's lien on the subject landholding remains unsatisfied, the same should not serve as a stumbling block in the smooth implementation of the comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP). Specifically, Section 4 of Republic Act No. 6657 expressly provides that "the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, of 1988 shall cover, regardless of tenurial arrangement and commodity produced, all public and private agricultural lands as provided in Proclamation No. 131 end Executive Order No. 229, including other lands of the public domain suitable for agriculture." Stated differently, the right of a lawyer to claim attorney's fees for services rendered is subordinate to the right of the State to acquire agricultural lands for distribution to qualified farmers-beneficiaries pursuant to said laws.
The issue as to the claim of attorney's fees is a distinct and separate matter personal to counsel and client which they alone should resolve (through the corresponding payment by the latter to the former after the land in issue has been acquired under CARP and paid by the Land Bank of the Philippines) without unduly affecting the coverage of the subject landholding. Accordingly, based on the foregoing, said fees could not be invoked as a ground to derail or defeat the implementation of the Program.
Thank you for communicating with us and we hope to have clarified the matter with you.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) ARTEMIO A. ADASA, JR.
Undersecretary for Legal Affairs, and Policy and Planning