--------- which is not only a source of livelihood for many of Filipinos but is also one
of our most important dollar producing industries.
FACTS: CA - The Lower Court (RTC) relied principally on the interpretation of
Section 1 of R.A. 809 that the law applies only in the absence of written The present bill seeks to avoid fatal controversies in the sugar industry by
milling agreements and dismissed the petition. In this case, the Laborers and determining the respective share of millers and sugarcane planters in the
Planters have an existing written agreement, thus excepting them from the absence of milling agreement. And is also in harmony with the
RA 809. And Respondent (Central) claims that they (Federation) have no recommendation of the Bell Report for the improvement of the living
cause of action against it since it had existing written milling agreements condition of the labouring class by providing higher wages therefor. This bill
with respondent farmers, and Republic Act 809 is applicable only in the does not violate existing milling agreements between planters and millers
absence of written milling agreements. Lower Court then was error in of sugarcane as its provisions are only applicable in the absence of such
rendering judgement since the SC gave due course to the petition by the milling contracts.
Federation.
SC: We agree that millers and planters may indeed enter into written milling
I – The existence of written milling agreements between Central and agreements stipulating participations different from those prescribed in Sec
Planters renders inapplicable the operation of RA 809. 1 of the Sugar Act. Justified through the language of Section 1. The phrase
‘in the absence of’ clearly indicates that the division of the sugar between
HELD: CA before rendering judgement traced the history:
the millers and the planters in accordance with the schedule of
Act. No. 567 took effect. Noting the great disparity in the proportion of participations mentioned, has to be complied with only during periods when
benefits being received from the industry by each of its component millers and planters are bound by no written milling agreements, and need
elements, it declared it to be a ‘national policy to obtain a readjustment of not govern the sharing system of the contracting parties who have entered
the benefits derived from the sugar industry by the component elements into such agreements.
thereof – the mill, the landowner, the planters of the sugarcane, and the
That this is the real intendment of the law can hardly be shrouded in doubt.
laborers in the factory and the field.
For the law is not merely social in that it means to uplift the wretched
Justice Moran tasked by Pres. Quezon, filed a report recommending the condition of the labourers in the country’s sugarcane plantations; it is also
increase in the participation of sugar planters, even in violation of existing economic in that the law is calculated to safeguard, preserve, and maintain
milling contracts, contending that such a law is constitutional as a valid the integrity, viability, and health of an industry so vital to the entire
exercise of the police power of the State. economy of the country.
The expiration of long-term contracts between the millers and sugar plant RA 809 is a social legislation granting the planters’ participation for the
had expired and negotiations for another contracts are in progress, the primary purposes of enabling the planters to improve the lot of their
planters staged strikes and threatened not to plant cane unless they were plantation laborers.
given bigger share in the sugar industry as a whole.
Citing the case of Talsiay-Silay, the Supreme Court held that the Sugar Act
Following such finding, it is therefore believed that nation interest requires 809 was not intended to deprive the mills and the planters of the right to
that congress should take immediate steps to save or promote an industry, divide the proceeds of the milled sugarcane in each district in the proportion
they might agree on, without regard to the ratios specified in section 1 of
the Act, provided that any increase that the planters might be given, as
expected in consequence of the implicit compulsion of the law, has to be
shared by them, in the proportion of 60% for said labourers and 40% only
for them.
There is nothing in the said law that excludes the right of the parties to enter
into new contracts, and in said new contracts, they could provide for a ration
of sharing different from that stipulated in Sec 1 of the Act, provided that
any increase in their share in the proceeds of milling that the PLANTERS
would get, 60% thereof must be paid by them to their respective plantation
laborers
*if the statute used ambiguous words, the court may look beyond the statue
such as legislative history, what evil or mischief was meant to be redressed,
reason or cause which induced the enactment if the law.
