costs of suit

Costs shall be allowed to the prevailing party as a matter of course. No costs, however, shall be allowed against the Republic of the Philippines, unless otherwise provided by law.

The Land Bank of the Philippines is an agency created primarily to provide financial support in all phases of agrarian reform pursuant to RA 3844 and RA 6657. It is vested with the primary responsibility and authority in the valuation and compensation of covered landholdings to carry out the full implementation of the Agrarian Reform Program. It may agree with the DAR and the landowner as to the amount of just compensation to be paid to the latter and may also disagree with them and bring the matter to court for judicial determination. The role of Land Bank in the CARP is more than just the ministerial duty of keeping and disbursing the Agrarian Reform Funds. Land Bank has the discretion to approve or reject the land valuation and just compensation by a party, the DAR, or even the courts; the Land Bank not only has the right, but the duty, to challenge the same, by appeal to the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court, if appropriate.

Since Land Bank is performing a governmental function in agrarian proceeding, it is exempt from the payment of costs of suit as provided under Rule 142, section 1 of the Rules of Court.

Equal Protection

When the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it does not assert superiority over the other departments; it does not in reality nullify or invalidate an act of the legislature, but only asserts the solemn and sacred obligation assigned to it by the Constitution to determine conflicting claims of authority under the Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the rights which that instrument secures and guarantees.. Justice Jose P. Laurel.

Though the law itself be fair on its face and impartial in appearance, yet, if applied and administered by the public authority with an evil eye and an unequal hand, so as practically to make unjust and illegal discriminations between persons in similar circumstances, material to their rights, the denial of equal justice is still within the prohibition of the Constitution.

Of all the branches of government, it is the judiciary which is the most interested in knowing the truth and so it will not allow itself to be a hindrance or obstacle to its attainment. It must, however, be emphasized that the search for the truth must be within constitutional bounds for "ours is still a government of laws and not of men." (Executive Order No. 1, creating the Philippine Truth Commission of 2010, declared unconstitutional. See, Biraogo v. Phil. Truth Com. of 2010; Edsel Lagman, et al v. Paquito Ochoa, et al. GR No. 192935 & GR No. 193036. December 7, 2010).

BAR EXAMS UPDATE...

Matters taken up during the dialogue between the Officers and Members of the Philippine Association of Law Schools and Justice Roberto A. Abad, Chairman of the 2011 Bar Examinations.

1. Random Selection of Topic Items for the Multiple Choice Questions (MCQs)

2. Use of Multiple Choice Questions from Law Schools

3. The Essay Exams

The Examinees will not be graded for a technically right or wrong answer but for the quality of his/her legal advocacy. The test is intended to measure one's skill in: (a) Communicating in English (20%); (b) Sorting out the conflicting claims and extracting those facts that are relevant to the issue or issues in the case (15%); (c) Identifying the issue or issues presented (15%); (d) Constructing your arguments and persuading your reader to your point of view (50%).

Quality of writing, not length is desired. The time pressure is part of the exam.

Award of 12% interest on the unpaid balance of compensation

Let it be remembered that shorn of its eminent domain and social justice aspects, what the agrarian land reform program involves is the purchase by the government, through the Land Bank of the Philippines, of agricultural lands for sale and distribution to farmers. As a purchase, it involves an exchange of values - the landholdings in exchange for Land Bank's payment. In determining the just compensation for this exchange, however, the measure to be borne in mind is not the taker's gain but the owner's loss since what is involved is the takeover of private property under the State's coercive power. The owner's loss, of course, is not only his property but also its income-generating potential. Thus, when property is taken, full compensation of its value must immediately be paid to achieve a fair exchange for the property and the potential income lost. If full compensation is not paid for property taken, then the State must make up for the shortfall in the earning potential immediately lost due to the taking, and the absence of replacement property from which income can be derived; interest on the unpaid compensation becomes due as compliance with the constitutional mandate on eminent domain and as a basic measure of fairness (APO Fruits Corporation & Hijo Plantation, Inc., v. Land Bank of the Philippines, G.R. No. 164195. October 12, 2010).

A feisty lady Senator of the Republic, says...

"I am not angry. I am irate. I am foaming in the mouth. I am homicidal. I am suicidal. I am humiliated, debased, degraded. And I am not only that. I felt like throwing up to be living my middle years in a country of this nature. I am nauseated. I spit on the face of Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and his cohorts in the Supreme Court. I am no longer interested in the position [of Chief Justice] if I was to be surrounded by idiots. I would rather be in another environment but not in the Supreme Court of idiots." 

A careful re-reading of her utterances would readily show that her statements were expressions of personal anger and frustration at not being considered for the post of Chief Justice. In a sense, therefore, her remarks were outside the pale of her official parliamentary functions. Even parliamentary immunity must not be allowed to be used as a vehicle to ridicule, demean, and destroy the reputation of the Court and its magistrates, nor as armor for personal wrath and disgust. Parliamentary immunity is not an individual privilege accorded the individual members of the Parliament or Congress for their personal benefit, but rather a privilege for the benefit of the people and the institution that represents them.

The Rules of the Senate itself contains a provision on Unparliamentary Acts and Language that enjoins a Senator from using, under any circumstance, "offensive or improper language against another senator or against any public institution." But as to Senator Santiago's unparliamentary remarks, the Senate President had not apparently called her to order, let alone referred the matter to the Senate Ethics Committee for appropriate disciplinary action, as the Rules dictates under such circumstance. The Lady Senator clearly violated the rules of her own chamber. It is unfortunate that her peers bent backwards and avoided imposing their own rules on her (Antero Pobre v. Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago, A.C. No. 7399. August 25, 2009).

Technicalities v Substantive Rights

Judicial action must be guided by the principle that a party litigant should be given the fullest opportunity to establish the merits of his complaint or defense rather than for him to lose life, liberty, honor or property on technicalities. The Rules of Court was conceived and promulgated to set forth guidelines in the dispensation of justice, but not to bind and chain the hand that dispenses it, for otherwise, courts will be mere slaves or robots of technical rules, shorn of judicial discretion. Courts must always be conscientiously guided by the norm that on the balance, technicalities take a backseat to substantive rights, and not the other way around. Thus, the court may dismiss an appeal for failure to file appellant's brief on time. However, the dismissal is directory, not mandatory. It is not ministerial duty of the court to dismiss an appellant's appeal. It is a power conferred on the court, not a duty. The discretion must be a sound one, to be exercised in accordance with the tenets of justice and fair play, having in mind the circumstances obtaining in each case. While it is desirable that the Rules of Court be faithfully observed, courts should not be too strict with procedural lapses that do not really impair the proper administration of justice. The rules are intended to ensure the proper and orderly conduct of litigation because of the higher objective they seek, which is the attainment of justice and protection of substantive rights of the parties.

Time of Taking...

It is reminded to adhere strictly to the doctrine that just compensation must be valued at the time of taking. The "time of taking" is the time when the landowner was deprived of the use and benefit of his property, such as when the title is transferred to the Republic.

When the evidence received by the trial court are irrelevant to the issue of just compensation and in total disregard of the requirements provided under Section 17 of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law, the Court is left with no evidence on record that could aid in the proper resolution of the case. While remand is frowned upon for obviating the speedy dispensation of justice, it becomes necessary to ensure compliance with the law and to give everyone - the landowner, the farmers, and the State - their due (Land Bank of the Philippines v. Enrique Livioco, G.R. No. 170685. September 22, 2010).

Procedure in Land Valuation on CARP covered lands

The Land Bank of the Philippines (LBP) is charged with the initial responsibility of determining the value of lands placed under land reform and the compensation to be paid for their taking. Once an expropriation proceeding or the acquisition of private agricultural lands is commenced by the DAR, the indispensable role of LBP begins. Based on the valuation of the land by the LBP, the DAR makes an offer to the landowner through a written notice. In case the landowner rejects the offer, a summary administrative proceeding is held and, afterwards, depending on the value of the land, the Provincial Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (PARAD), the Regional Agrarian Reform Adjudicator (RARAD), or the DARAB, fixes the price to be paid for the said land. If the landowner still does not agree with the price so fixed, he may bring the matter to the RTC, acting as Special Agrarian Court. The amount of "offer" which the DAR gives to the landowner as compensation for his land is based on the initial valuation by the LandBank and not the amount as determined by the PARAD, RARAD or DARAB (LBP v. Heirs of Trinidad S. Vda. de Arieta, rep. by Alicia Arieta, G.R. No. 161834. August 11, 2010).

Due Process

Although the Civil Service Rules do not specifically provide that a formal charge without the requisite preliminary investigation is null and void, it is, however, "mandatory for the disciplinary authority to conduct a preliminary investigation or at least respondent should be given the opportunity to comment and explain his side." No exception is provided by the CSC Rules, not even an indictment in flagranti.
The violation of a party's right to due process raises a serious jurisdictional issue which cannot be glossed over or disregarded at will. Where the denial of the fundamental right to due process is apparent, a decision rendered in disregard of that right is void for lack of jurisdiction. The constitutional guarantee that no man shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process is unqualified by the type of proceedings (be it judicial, quasi-judicial. or administrative), where he stands to lose the same (Garcia v. Molina; August 18, 2010).

a line we must not cross...

"We grow up forming our own opinions, and then learn to form opinions about others. Then, those opinions become judgments, at which point we hurt people. There is a fine line that separates an opinion from a judgment,
a line we must not cross."

The power of contempt

A judge, as a public servant, should not be so thin-skinned or sensitive as to feel hurt or offended if a citizen expresses an honest opinion about him which may not altogether be flattering to him. After all, what matters is that a judge performs his duties in accordance with the dictates of his conscience and the light that God has given him. A judge should never allow himself to be moved by pride, prejudice, passion, or pettiness in the performance of his duties. The power of the court to punish for contempt should be exercised for purposes that are impersonal, because that power is intended as a safeguard not for judges as persons but for the functions they exercise.

employment vs tenancy

It should be stressed that individuals who are employed or who own real property can be considered as tenant-lessee on agricultural land provided all the essential requisites or elements of tenancy relationship are established. They may not qualify to become beneficiaries or awardees, but certainly they can be agricultural lessees. Employment or owning realty does not ipso facto disqualify one from becoming an agricultural tenant-lessee.

Forum Shopping

The petition for judicial reconstitution and the application for administrative reconstitution in the Land Registration Authority addressed different situations and did not have identical bases. For forum shopping to exist, both actions must involve the same transaction, same essential facts and circumstances and must raise identical causes of action, subject matter and issues. A violation of the rule against forum shopping other than a willful and deliberate forum shopping did not authorize the [court] to dismiss the proceeding without motion and hearing. By its outright and undiscerning application of the sanction against forum shopping, the [court] plunged into an unwanted limbo the petitioner's and his co-owners' ownership of the realties. A modicum of care and discernment could have avoided such prejudicial result. We now put an end to such limbo by cautioning all judges to exercise care and discernment in their enforcement of the rule against forum shopping, that they may unduly trench on the valuable rights of litigants (IN RE: Reconstitution of TCTs and issuance of owners' duplicate CTCs in lieu of those lost, G.R. No. 156797, July 6, 2010).

Withdrawal of land valuation pending appeal

Under the CARP Law, landowners are entitled to withdraw the amount deposited in their behalf pending the final resolution of the case involving the final valuation of their property. Land Bank's argument that by allowing withdrawal of the incremental amount, the government may be placed at a losing end, citing the possibility that the recomputed amount may be more than the just compensable value of the [land] taken, is specious. Land Bank's lament about the impropriety of what amounts to the DARAB allowing execution pending appeal without requiring the [landowner] to post a bond does not persuade. To the DARAB, "there is no more ground more meritorious than the [landowners'] agony of waiting for a long period of time to have their properties valued" (LBP v. DARAB, et al, G.R. No. 183279. January 25, 2010).

Just Compensation for Agri-land taken under Agrarian Reform

The concept of just compensation embraces not only the correct determination of the amount to be paid to the owners of the land, but also payment within a reasonable time from its taking. Without prompt payment, compensation cannot be considered "just" inasmuch as the property owner is made to suffer the consequences of being immediately deprived of his land while being made to wait for a decade or more before actually receiving the amount necessary to cope with his loss. To condition the payment upon Land Bank's approval and its release upon compliance with some documentary requirements would render nugatory the very essence of "prompt payment".

Conversion vs Reclassification

Conversion is the act of changing the current use of a piece of agricultural land into some other use as approved by the DAR while reclassification is the act of specifying how agricultural lands shall be utilized for non-agricultural use such as residential, industrial and commercial, as embodied in the land use plan, subject to the requirements and procedures for land use conversion. In view thereof, a mere reclassification of an agricultural land does not automatically allow a landowner to change its use. He has to undergo the process of conversion before he is permitted to use the agricultural land for other purposes. It must be stressed that agricultural lands though reclassified to residential, commercial, industrial or other non-agricultural uses must undergo the process of conversion before they can be used for the purpose to which they are intended.

IN MEMORIAM

This structure was built in memory of those who perished during the great rock and mud flow, of intense magnitude, cascading down the slope of Mayon Volcano at the height of Typhoon Reming in 30 November 2006.
Site location: Barangay Padang, Legazpi City.

Agricultural Land reserved for residential

The term "reserved for residential" does not change the nature of the land from agricultural to non-agricultural. The term simply reflects the intended use. It does not denote that the property has already been reclassified as residential, because the phrase reserved for residential is not a land classification category.
The exclusive jurisdiction to classify and identify landholdings for coverage under CARP is reposed in the DAR Secretary. The matter of CARP coverage, like the instant case for application for exemption, is strictly part of the administrative implementation of the CARP, a matter well within the competence of the DAR Secretary (Alangilan Realty and Development Corporation v. Office of the President, et al, G.R. No. 180471. March 26, 2010).

All those who don the judicial robe must always instill in their minds the exhortation that the administration of justice is a mission. Judges, from the lowest to the highest levels, are the gems in the vast government bureaucracy, beacon lights looked upon as the embodiment of all what is right, just and proper, the ultimate weapons against injustice and oppression (Lawyers of Bulacan v. Victoria Villalon-Pornillos, 592 SCRA 36).

National Housing Authority acquired agricultural lands vs Agrarian Reform

Are all lands acquired by the National Housing Authority (NHA) for its resettlement and housing efforts beyond the scope of agrarian laws? Presidential Decree 1472 exempts from land reform those lands that NHA acquired for its housing and resettlement programs whether it acquired those lands when the law took effect or afterwards. The language of the exemption is clear, the exemption covers "lands or property acquired xxx or to be acquired" by NHA. Moreover, the law does not make any distinction whether the land NHA acquired is tenanted or not. The purchase by NHA of lands for development and resettlement transformed the property by operation of law from agricultural to residential. The Court is mindful of the plight of tenant-farmers but it is also incumbent upon it to weigh their rights against the government's interest in meeting the housing needs of the greater majority (National Housing Authority v. DAR Adjudication Board, et al, G.R. No. 175200. May 4, 2010).

Referral of Agrarian Dispute

All controversies on the implementation of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program fall under the jurisdiction of the Department of Agrarian Reform, even though they raise questions that are also legal or constitutional in nature. All doubts should be resolved in favor of the DAR, since the law has granted it special and original authority to hear and adjudicate agrarian matters. No court or prosecutor's office shall take cognizance of cases pertaining to the implementation of the CARP. If there is an allegation from any of the parties that the case is agrarian in nature and one of the parties is a farmer, farmworker, or tenant, the case shall be automatically referred by the judge or the prosecutor to the DAR which shall determine and certify whether an agrarian dispute exists. The referral shall be made by the concerned judge or fiscal motu proprio or upon motion by the party concerned.

Cancellation of titles issued under the Agrarian Reform Program

The State recognizes the indefeasibility of Certificate of Land Ownership Award (CLOA), Emancipation Patent (EP) and other titles issued under any agrarian reform program. However, CLOAs, EPs and other titles erroneously issued do not attain indefeasiblity.

The titles generated and distributed pursuant to the agrarian reform program form an integral part of the property registration and enjoy the same respect accorded to other modes of acquiring title to lands. Taking into account the detailed procedure in the generation of these titles, flaws and issues may arise resulting to the erroneous issuance of the defined titles. As a consequence, titles of this nature shall be cancelled but only on grounds prescribed by existing rules and regulations and strictly observing the provisions of PD1529. The cancellation of the registered EPs, CLOAs and other titles issued under any agrarian reform program are within the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the Secretary of DAR. 

Dismissal based on pure technicality

Rules of procedure are tools to facilitate a fair and orderly conduct of proceedings. Strict adherence thereto must not get in the way of achieving substantial justice. So long as their purpose is sufficiently met and no violation of due process and fair play takes place, the rules should be liberally construed, especially in agrarian cases. There is nothing sacred about the forms of pleadings or processes, their sole purpose being to facilitate the application of justice to the rival claims of contending parties. Hence, pleadings as well as procedural rules should be construed liberally. Dismissal of appeals purely on technical grounds is frowned upon because rules of procedure should not be applied to override substantial justice. Courts must proceed with caution so as not to deprive a party of statutory appeal; they must ensure that all litigants are granted the amplest opportunity for the proper and just ventilation of their causes, free from technical constraints. If the foregoing tenets are followed in a civil case, their application is made more imperative in an agrarian case where the rules themselves provide for liberal construction. It must be stressed that the purpose of the notice of appeal is not to detail one's objections regarding the appealed decision; that is the purpose of the appellants' memorandum. In the context of a DARAB case, the notice of appeal serves only to inform the tribunal or officer that rendered the appealed decision of the timeliness of the appeal and the general reason for the appeal, and to prepare the records thereof for transmission to the appellate body (RARAD, San Fernando, Pampanga, et al v. CA, et al; G.R. No. 165155. April 13, 2010).

HAM Radio, a hobby of a lifetime.

HAM Radio is my hobby. With my High Frequency (HF) Kenwood TS 430S radio, communication with the world is just amazing. Known as DU4ABA in the association of HAM radio operators around the globe, keeping in touch with people through the medium of wireless communication, without seeing or meeting them, foster international friendship and camaraderie.
Such a unique hobby, however, must not interfere with the duties you owe to your work, home & family.

The Supreme Court has finally spoken

We cannot permit the meaning of the Constitution to be stretched to any unintended point in order to suit the purposes of any quarter.

It has been insinuated as part of the polemics attendant to the controversy we are resolving that because all the Members of the present Court were appointed by the incumbent President, a majority of them are now granting to her the authority to appoint the successor of the retiring Chief Justice.

The insinuation is misguided and utterly unfair.

The Members of the Court vote on the sole basis of their conscience and the merits of the issues. Any claim to the contrary proceeds from malice and condescension. Neither the outgoing President nor the present Members of the Court had arranged the current situation to happen and evolve as it has. None of the Members of the Court could have prevented the Members composing the Court when she assumed the Presidency about a decade ago from retiring during her prolonged term and tenure, for their retirements were mandatory. Yet, she is now left with an imperative duty under the Constitution to fill up the vacancies created by such inexorable retirements within 90 days from their occurrence. Her official duty she must comply with. So must we ours who are trusted by the Constitution to settle the controversy (Arturo M. De Castro, et al v. Judicial Bar Council and Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo; denying with finality the Motion for Reconsideration of Petitioners).

Landowners' rights

The noble purpose of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law to emancipate the tenants from the bondage of the soil and to transfer to them the ownership of the lands they till should not be the guise to trample upon the landowners' rights by including lands that are unquestionably outside the coverage of the CARL. Neither should such noble intention be frustrated by designating beneficiaries who are neither tenants or tillers of the land, nor otherwise qualified under the law to be the beneficiaries of land reform (DAR v. Pablo Berenguer, et al. G.R. No. 154094. March 9, 2010).

Employment not a disqualification

The assertion that a person who is employed and owns realty cannot be a tenant-farmer lacks basis. It must be stressed that individuals who are employed or who own real property can be considered as tenant-lessee on the agricultural land provided all the essential requisites or elements of tenancy relationship are established. They may not qualify to become beneficiaries or awardees, but certainly they can be agricultural lessees. Employment or owning realty does not ipso facto disqualify one from becoming an agricultural tenant-lessee.

Decision on land valuation

The Adjudicator's decision on land valuation attains finality after the lapse of the 15-day period stated in the DARAB Rules. In the event that the aggrieved party wants to raise the issue to the Regional Trial Court, acting as a Special Agrarian Court, the petition must be filed within the aforementioned period. While a petition for the fixing of just compensation with the Special Agrarian Court is not an appeal from the agrarian reform Adjudicator's decision but an original action, the same has to be filed within the 15-day period stated in the DARAB Rules, otherwise, the Adjudicator's decision will attain finality. This rule is not only in accord with law and settled jurisprudence but also with the principles of justice and equity (LBP v. Raymunda Martinez, G.R. No. 169008. July 31, 2008).

Harvest Sharing

One of the essential requisites of tenancy relationship is the sharing of the harvest between the landowner and the tenant. When a witness testifies and declares that he/she knows for a fact that the allege tenant is the cultivator of the agricultural land since time immemorial without disclosing, however, the circumstances or details of the alleged harvest sharing, such testimony cannot be deemed as evidence of harvest sharing. Occupancy and continued possession of the land will not ipso facto make one a de jure tenant.

The Pride of Albay

Mayon Volcano.. in its usual form. Conspicuously exuding its world acclaimed perfect cone in the heart of the Province of Albay, Bicol, Philippines.

Emancipation from the bondage

The arduous legal battle that tenant-farmers have to endure in order to be finally freed from the bondage of the soil is not unusual. Several agrarian cases can be viewed as a microcosm of the persistent agrarian reform problem in our country. Some tenants have to wait for several years to be emancipated from the bondage. But of course there are also tales of landowners who unduly suffer either the abuse of some farmers or the harsh consequences of agrarian law. We are still faced with the same agrarian problem that we sought to resolved several years back when the CARP law was first introduced. It is high time that we undertake a more realistic, rational comprehensive agrarian reform law. The solution lies with Congress.

Finality of Judgment

The rule on finality of decisions, orders or resolutions of a judicial, quasi-judicial, or administrative body is not a question of technicality but of substance and merit, the underlying consideration is the protection of the substantive rights of the winning party. Just as the losing party has the right to file an appeal within the prescribed period, the winning party also has the correlative right to enjoy the finality of the resolution of his/her case. The noble purpose is to write finis to disputes once and for all. This is a fundamental priciple in our justice system, without which there would be no end to litigations. Utmost respect and adherence to this principle must always be maintained by those who wield the power of adjudication. Any act which violalates such principle must immediately be struck down.

Order of Succession

In case of death or permanent incapacity of the agricultural lessee to work his landholding, the leasehold shall continue between the agricultural lessor and the person who can cultivate the landholding personally, chosen by the agricultural lessor within one month from such death or permanent incapacity, from among the following: a) the surviving spouse; b) the eldest direct descendant by consanguinity; or, (c) the next eldest descendant or descendants in the order of their age. In the event that the agricultural lessor fails to exercise his choice within the period provided, the priority shall be in accordance with the order herein established. Note: a direct descendant or parent is not among those listed in the order of succession.

The Veil of Corporate Fiction

The Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law was designed precisely to liberate peasant-farmers from the clutches of feudalism and poverty. When corporate fiction is used as mere smokescreen to the same form of feudal servitude, the lofty aim of the agrarian law is thwarted and the very problem which the law seeks to solve is perpetrated. The veil of corporate fiction will be pierced when used for improper purposes and unfair objectives. The use of corporate fiction as a means to evade legal liability is not new. This scheme or device has long been perceived to be used in other fields of law, notably taxation to minimize payment of tax with varying degrees of success and acceptability. But the continued employment of the scheme in agrarian cases is not only deplorable; it is alarming. It is time to put a lid on the cap (Sta. Monica Industrial and Development Corporation v. DAR, et al).

Social Justice

Justice Isagani Cruz, in one of the cases decided by the Supreme Court, eloquently said, Social Justice, or any justice for that matter, is for the deserving, whether he be a millionaire in his mansion or a pauper in his hovel. It is true that, in case of reasonable doubt, we are called to tilt the balance in favor of the poor to whom the Constitution fittingly extends its sympathy and compassion. But never is it justified to give preference to the poor simply because they are poor, or reject the rich simply because they are rich, for justice must always be served for the poor and rich alike according to the mandate of the law (Gelos v. CA, 208 SCRA 608).

Tenancy Relationship

Unless a person has established his status as 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. The following are the essential elements of tenancy relationship: (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. Note: all requisites must be proved by substantial evidence and the absence of one will not make an alleged tenant a de jure tenant.

Negotiating conflict: By Jeffrey Krivis
1. When people are deeply upset about something, they need to get their story out. This is the basic principle of mediation and one that is important to remember. Yes, allowing people to speak their minds can increase the level of conflict with which you must deal. That is OK. You have to get through the conflict phase to find the solution.
2. Often in a conflict, the parties are so focused on minutiae that they lose sight of the big picture and it's implications. As the mediator, you need to bring people back to reality by wrenching their attention away from the grain of sand and having them focus on the whole beach. Doing so may help resolution arrive at a startling speed.
3. Identify the true impediment. In every conflict. ask yourself: Is the true motivating factor here? What is really keeping this person from agreeing to a solution?

It seems to be daylight.. but it's the glittering luster of the moon on the night of January 1, 2010

Municipality of Pilar in the Province of Sorsogon, a gateway to the island Province of Masbate..

One of our destinations in our regular bike ride for life.

Sunrise at Misibis Estate Spa & Resort..

A must go and see beach resort at the east coast of Albay..

HAM Radio, a hobby of a lifetime.

HAM radio enthusiasts.. members of the Amateur Radio Enthusiasts of Albay, Inc., (DX4AREA) on its way to one of the PARAs National (hamvention) Convention..
Taken few years back when DX4AREA was still a very active amateur radio club in Albay.