Lawyerly

GR No. 155580

2015-07-01

BERSAMIN, J.

For tenancy relationship to exist, therefore, the following elements must be shown to concur, to wit: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant; (2) the subject matter is agricultural land; (3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; (4) the purpose is of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and (6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[23] The presence of all these elements must be proved by substantial evidence;[24] this means that the absence of one will not make an alleged tenant a de jure tenant.[25] Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure or to be covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[26]

GR No. 168164

2010-07-05

VICENTE ADRIANO v. ALICE TANCO

DEL CASTILLO, J.

Here, there was no evidence presented to show sharing of harvest in the context of a tenancy relationship between Vicente and the respondents. The only evidence submitted to establish the purported sharing of harvests were the allegations of Vicente which, as discussed above, were self-serving and have no evidentiary value. Moreover, petitioner's allegations of continued possession and cultivation do not support his cause. It is settled that mere occupation or cultivation of an agricultural land does not automatically convert a tiller or farm worker into an agricultural tenant recognized under agrarian laws.[30] It is essential that, together with the other requisites of tenancy relationship, the agricultural tenant must prove that he transmitted the landowner's share of the harvest.[31]

GR No. 169589

2009-06-16

JOAQUIN SOLIMAN v. PAMPANGA SUGAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY

NACHURA, J.

Based on the foregoing definition of a tenant, entrenched in jurisprudence are the following essential elements of tenancy: 1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[44] The presence of all these elements must be proved by substantial evidence. Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure and is not covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[45] Tenancy relationship cannot be presumed. Claims that one is a tenant do not automatically give rise to security of tenure.[46]

GR No. 176942

2008-08-28

NICORP MANAGEMENT v. LEONIDA DE LEON

YNARES-SATIAGO, J.

There is a tenancy relationship if the following essential elements concur: 1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[23] All the foregoing requisites must be proved by substantial evidence and the absence of one will not make an alleged tenant a de jure tenant.[24] Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure or covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[25]

GR No. 168252

2008-07-28

EUGENIO MABAGOS v. ORLANDO MANINGAS

CORONA, J.

Moreover, a tenancy relationship can only be created with the consent of the true and lawful landholder.[22] There being supposedly a legal relationship, the intent of the parties and their agreement were important.[23] Petitioner's honest belief and impression that he was the tenant of the land did not necessarily make him one.[24] The actual meeting of the minds of the parties (i.e. the landowner and the tenant) to establish a landowner-tenant relationship for the purpose of agricultural production and with the objective to share harvests was necessary.

GR No. 154953

2008-06-26

REPUBLIC V.S. T.A.N. PROPERTIES, INC.

CARPIO, J.

The CENRO and Regional Technical Director, FMS-DENR, certifications do not fall within the class of public documents contemplated in the first sentence of Section 23 of Rule 132. The certifications do not reflect "entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer," such as entries made by the Civil Registrar[22] in the books of registries, or by a ship captain in the ship's logbook. [23] The certifications are not the certified copies or authenticated reproductions of original official records in the legal custody of a government office. The certifications are not even records of public documents.[24] The certifications are conclusions unsupported by adequate proof, and thus have no probative value. [25] Certainly, the certifications cannot be considered prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.

GR No. 143111

2007-06-07

LORETO REYES v. SPS. HONORIO AND JOSEFINA B. JOSON

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.

Moreover, mere occupation or cultivation of an agricultural land does not automatically convert a tiller or farm worker into an agricultural tenant recognized under agrarian laws.[8] Occupancy and continued possession do not make one a de jure tenant.[9] Tenancy status only arises if an occupant has been given possession of an agricultural landholding for the primary purpose of agricultural production which, in this case, is significantly absent. Based on the records, petitioner was a mere fishpond watcher/caretaker.

GR No. 161959

2007-02-02

GERARDO CASTILLO v. VS.CA

QUISUMBING, J.

To begin with, the agreement called Kasunduan Buwisan sa Sakahan entered into by Pajota and the petitioner can not by itself prove that the petitioner is a bona fide tenant. To determine whether a tenancy relationship exists, the concurrence of all the following essential requisites must be established by substantial evidence: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; (2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; (3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; (4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and (6) the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.[22]

GR NO. 130260

2006-02-06

HILARIA RAMOS VDA. DE BRIGINO v. DOMINADOR RAMOS

CHICO-NAZARIO, J.

The essential requisites of tenancy relationship based on the foregoing definition, as cited in cases of recent vintage,[10] are:1) that the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) that the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) that there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) that the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) that there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) that the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.

GR No. 160118

2005-11-22

NORBERTO RIMASUG v. MELENCIO MARTIN

CARPIO MORALES, J.

the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2. the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3. there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4. the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5. there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6. the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.[45]

	GR No. 155580 2015-07-01	ROMEO T. CALUZOR v. DEOGRACIAS LLANILLO BERSAMIN, J.
For tenancy relationship to exist, therefore, the following elements must be shown to concur, to wit: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant; (2) the subject matter is agricultural land; (3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; (4) the purpose is of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and (6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[23] The presence of all these elements must be proved by substantial evidence;[24] this means that the absence of one will not make an alleged tenant a de jure tenant.[25] Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure or to be covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[26]
	GR No. 168164 2010-07-05	VICENTE ADRIANO v. ALICE TANCO DEL CASTILLO, J.
Here, there was no evidence presented to show sharing of harvest in the context of a tenancy relationship between Vicente and the respondents. The only evidence submitted to establish the purported sharing of harvests were the allegations of Vicente which, as discussed above, were self-serving and have no evidentiary value. Moreover, petitioner's allegations of continued possession and cultivation do not support his cause. It is settled that mere occupation or cultivation of an agricultural land does not automatically convert a tiller or farm worker into an agricultural tenant recognized under agrarian laws.[30] It is essential that, together with the other requisites of tenancy relationship, the agricultural tenant must prove that he transmitted the landowner's share of the harvest.[31]
	GR No. 169589 2009-06-16	JOAQUIN SOLIMAN v. PAMPANGA SUGAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY NACHURA, J.
Based on the foregoing definition of a tenant, entrenched in jurisprudence are the following essential elements of tenancy: 1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[44] The presence of all these elements must be proved by substantial evidence. Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure and is not covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[45] Tenancy relationship cannot be presumed. Claims that one is a tenant do not automatically give rise to security of tenure.[46]
	GR No. 176942 2008-08-28	NICORP MANAGEMENT v. LEONIDA DE LEON YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
There is a tenancy relationship if the following essential elements concur: 1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) the harvest is shared between landowner and tenant or agricultural lessee.[23] All the foregoing requisites must be proved by substantial evidence and the absence of one will not make an alleged tenant a de jure tenant.[24] Unless a person has established his status as a de jure tenant, he is not entitled to security of tenure or covered by the Land Reform Program of the Government under existing tenancy laws.[25]
	GR No. 168252 2008-07-28	EUGENIO MABAGOS v. ORLANDO MANINGAS CORONA, J.
Moreover, a tenancy relationship can only be created with the consent of the true and lawful landholder.[22] There being supposedly a legal relationship, the intent of the parties and their agreement were important.[23] Petitioner's honest belief and impression that he was the tenant of the land did not necessarily make him one.[24] The actual meeting of the minds of the parties (i.e. the landowner and the tenant) to establish a landowner-tenant relationship for the purpose of agricultural production and with the objective to share harvests was necessary.
	GR No. 154953 2008-06-26	REPUBLIC V.S. T.A.N. PROPERTIES, INC. CARPIO, J.
The CENRO and Regional Technical Director, FMS-DENR, certifications do not fall within the class of public documents contemplated in the first sentence of Section 23 of Rule 132. The certifications do not reflect "entries in public records made in the performance of a duty by a public officer," such as entries made by the Civil Registrar[22] in the books of registries, or by a ship captain in the ship's logbook. [23] The certifications are not the certified copies or authenticated reproductions of original official records in the legal custody of a government office. The certifications are not even records of public documents.[24] The certifications are conclusions unsupported by adequate proof, and thus have no probative value. [25] Certainly, the certifications cannot be considered prima facie evidence of the facts stated therein.
	GR No. 143111 2007-06-07	LORETO REYES v. SPS. HONORIO AND JOSEFINA B. JOSON SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Moreover, mere occupation or cultivation of an agricultural land does not automatically convert a tiller or farm worker into an agricultural tenant recognized under agrarian laws.[8] Occupancy and continued possession do not make one a de jure tenant.[9] Tenancy status only arises if an occupant has been given possession of an agricultural landholding for the primary purpose of agricultural production which, in this case, is significantly absent. Based on the records, petitioner was a mere fishpond watcher/caretaker.
	GR No. 161959 2007-02-02	GERARDO CASTILLO v. VS.CA QUISUMBING, J.
To begin with, the agreement called Kasunduan Buwisan sa Sakahan entered into by Pajota and the petitioner can not by itself prove that the petitioner is a bona fide tenant. To determine whether a tenancy relationship exists, the concurrence of all the following essential requisites must be established by substantial evidence: (1) the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; (2) the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; (3) there is consent between the parties to the relationship; (4) the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; (5) there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and (6) the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.[22]
	GR NO. 130260 2006-02-06	HILARIA RAMOS VDA. DE BRIGINO v. DOMINADOR RAMOS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The essential requisites of tenancy relationship based on the foregoing definition, as cited in cases of recent vintage,[10] are:1) that the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2) that the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3) that there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4) that the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5) that there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6) that the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.
	GR No. 160118 2005-11-22	NORBERTO RIMASUG v. MELENCIO MARTIN CARPIO MORALES, J.
the parties are the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee; 2. the subject matter of the relationship is an agricultural land; 3. there is consent between the parties to the relationship; 4. the purpose of the relationship is to bring about agricultural production; 5. there is personal cultivation on the part of the tenant or agricultural lessee; and 6. the harvest is shared between the landowner and the tenant or agricultural lessee.[45]

AMBAYEC v. TIONKO