Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 10 views

    Heirs of Luna V Afable

    Uploaded by

    LawardCaps
    The heirs of Luis A. Luna filed a petition claiming that their 150-hectare land was exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) as the local government had already reclassified parts of the barangay where the land was located to commercial and industrial uses prior to CARL's enactment. While the DARAB Calapan Office initially ruled in petitioners' favor, higher offices within DAR later disagreed and granted CLOAs to respondent beneficiaries. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled the land was exempt from CARL, giving more weight to the zoning administrator's finding that the land was within the area reclassified by the pre-CARL ordinance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Heirs of Luna V Afable

    Uploaded by

    LawardCaps
    10 views2 pages
    The heirs of Luis A. Luna filed a petition claiming that their 150-hectare land was exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) as the local government had already reclassified parts of the barangay where the land was located to commercial and industrial uses prior to CARL's enactment. While the DARAB Calapan Office initially ruled in petitioners' favor, higher offices within DAR later disagreed and granted CLOAs to respondent beneficiaries. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled the land was exempt from CARL, giving more weight to the zoning administrator's finding that the land was within the area reclassified by the pre-CARL ordinance.

    Original Title

    Heirs of Luna v Afable

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The heirs of Luis A. Luna filed a petition claiming that their 150-hectare land was exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) as the local government had already reclassified parts of the barangay where the land was located to commercial and industrial uses prior to CARL's enactment. While the DARAB Calapan Office initially ruled in petitioners' favor, higher offices within DAR later disagreed and granted CLOAs to respondent beneficiaries. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled the land was exempt from CARL, giving more weight to the zoning administrator's finding that the land was within the area reclassified by the pre-CARL ordinance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    10 views2 pages

    Heirs of Luna V Afable

    Uploaded by

    LawardCaps
    The heirs of Luis A. Luna filed a petition claiming that their 150-hectare land was exempt from coverage under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) as the local government had already reclassified parts of the barangay where the land was located to commercial and industrial uses prior to CARL's enactment. While the DARAB Calapan Office initially ruled in petitioners' favor, higher offices within DAR later disagreed and granted CLOAs to respondent beneficiaries. The Supreme Court ultimately ruled the land was exempt from CARL, giving more weight to the zoning administrator's finding that the land was within the area reclassified by the pre-CARL ordinance.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    Heirs of Luis A. Luna v. Afable, et al.

    Facts:

     Petitioners: owners of a 150-hectare land in Capalan City, Oriental Mindoro; Respondents:


    beneficiaries of CARL
     Before CARL’s enactment (15 June 1988): the local government had already reclassified
    some parts of the barangay in which the subject land is located from agricultural to
    commercial, industrial, and residential lands
     Later, the subject land was subjected to compulsory acquisition pursuant to the CARL, and
    thereafter, CLOAs were granted to the respondents
     Petitioners questioned the inclusion of their land in the CARL before the DARAB, arguing that
    their property had already been converted to an industrial land (“light intensity industrial
    zone”) prior to the enactment of CARL
     DARAB Calapan Office, relying on the findings of the zoning administrator, ruled in favor of
    the petitioners; the DARAB Central Office, however, reversed the decision by saying that an
    exemption clearance from DAR is still needed by the petitioners – that the zoning ordinance
    alone will not exempt the subject land from CARL coverage; a DAR clearance was then
    successfully obtained by the petitioners and issued an Order of Exemption
     The respondents then filed an MR of the said Order, which was granted because the zoning
    ordinance did not categorically convert all the lands in the barangay and the subject land,
    unfortunately for the petitioners, was not included among the lands converted
     In coming up with the decision granting the MR, the DAR relied on the findings of OIC
    Secretary Pangandaman’s team that did an ocular inspection of the subject land; their
    findings: the land was still undeveloped (still with grasses, trees, other plants)
     The petitioners then brought the case to the Office of the President, which then reversed the
    order of the DAR and reinstated the one made by DARAB Calapan
     The respondents then brought the case to the CA, which then reversed the decision of the
    Office of the President; CA relied on the findings of Pangandaman’s team
     The petitioners elevated the case to the SC

    Issue:

    Whether the subject land is exempt from CARL coverage

    Ruling:

    Yes, the land is outside the coverage of CARL.

     The SC gave more credence to the findings of the zoning administrator since he was the one
    who had more expertise in the subject matter
     His findings enjoyed a presumption of regularity, which was not overcome by the
    respondents; respondents failed to present convincing evidence that would show that the
    land was not included in the zoning ordinance enacted prior to CARL

    Additional Notes:
     Zoning ordinances (that convert agricultural lands to non-agricultural) that were enacted
    prior to CARL (15 June 1988) need not be affirmed by the DAR through a clearance;
    ordinances that came after CARL must be cleared/affirmed by DAR
     The clearance from DAR does not mean that it has the power to convert or exempt lands
    from CARL coverage; the clearance is but an affirmation of the land conversion from
    agricultural to non-agricultural

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy