Disclaimer: The following discussion is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. For specific questions or concerns about Philippine agrarian law or family law, please consult a qualified attorney.

Overview

In Philippine law, CARP (Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program) retention limits govern how much agricultural land an individual landowner may keep after land redistribution. Meanwhile, questions often arise regarding how these limits and general property rights apply to Filipinos residing or working abroad (Overseas Filipinos), especially if the marriage in question involves issues of abandonment by an overseas spouse. This article provides a broad overview of:

CARP Retention Limits under Republic Act No. 6657 (and related laws).
How these rules interact with the status of Overseas Filipinos.
Key legal considerations when the landowner or spouse is overseas.
The concept of Abandonment by an Overseas Spouse under Philippine family law and how it may (or may not) affect property rights, particularly farmland subject to CARP.

1. CARP Retention Limits in the Philippines

1.1. Legal Basis

Republic Act No. 6657, or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988, established a framework for redistributing agricultural land to tenant farmers and farmworkers.
Subsequent rules and issuances by the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) have fleshed out procedures and clarified the statutory retention rights of landowners.

1.2. The Five-Hectare Retention Rule

Under CARP:

A landowner (regardless of citizenship, so long as they lawfully own agricultural land in the Philippines) is entitled to retain up to five (5) hectares of agricultural land.
If the landowner has legitimate (or legally adopted) children who were at least 15 years old on or before 15 June 1988 and who are actually tilling or directly managing the land, each child may be allocated up to 3 additional hectares, provided certain conditions are met.

1.3. The Concept of Personal Cultivation

A key principle in determining land retention is personal cultivation:

The land retained is generally meant to be personally cultivated or managed by the landowner (or the qualified children).
“Personal cultivation” can be direct (i.e., hands-on farming) or indirect (supervisory management) as interpreted by the DAR and the courts.

1.4. Exemptions and Exclusions

Certain types of land are exempt from CARP coverage or subject to special rules (e.g., livestock and poultry farms, lands retained for seed production under certain DAR guidelines). However, these exemptions or exclusions must be properly applied for and documented with the DAR.

2. CARP Retention Limits for Overseas Filipinos

2.1. Maintaining Filipino Citizenship

Under Philippine law, agricultural land ownership is generally restricted to Filipino citizens or to corporations/associations that are at least 60% Filipino-owned.
Overseas Filipino Workers (OFWs) or Filipinos who are living or working abroad remain Filipino citizens unless they have explicitly renounced or lost their Filipino citizenship (e.g., by naturalization in another country without taking advantage of dual citizenship laws).
Dual citizenship is recognized under Republic Act No. 9225 (Citizenship Retention and Re-Acquisition Act of 2003), meaning a natural-born Filipino who acquires foreign citizenship can still reclaim or retain Filipino citizenship. This confers the right to own agricultural land under the same rules as a regular Filipino citizen, including CARP retention limits.

2.2. Personal Cultivation While Abroad

A common question involves the requirement of personal cultivation while the landowner is overseas. In practice:

The landowner may argue “direct management” by employing local overseers, caretakers, or representatives who carry out day-to-day farm operations in the owner’s stead.
DAR issuances have acknowledged that personal cultivation can, in some cases, be exercised by distance supervision, especially when the landowner is an OFW whose overseas employment is temporary or whose primary purpose is to support the continued agricultural operations at home.
Nonetheless, documentary proof (e.g., detailed management agreements, sworn statements, and compliance with DAR regulations) is typically required to show that the overseas Filipino remains actively involved in decision-making and operational direction.

2.3. Potential Loss of Retention Right

If the DAR determines that a landowner (whether in the Philippines or abroad) is not actually tilling or managing the land, or that the land exceeds the permissible retention size, the DAR can subject the excess area to compulsory acquisition and distribution to qualified beneficiaries.

3. Interaction with Marriage and Property Regimes

3.1. Conjugal vs. Exclusive Property

Under the Family Code of the Philippines, spouses can be under:

Absolute Community of Property (the default regime for marriages entered into from August 3, 1988, absent a prenuptial agreement).
Conjugal Partnership of Gains (the default regime for marriages prior to the effectivity of the Family Code, also used if spouses so agree, or if governed by older laws).
Complete Separation of Property or other regimes as agreed in a valid marriage settlement.

If farmland was acquired during marriage under Absolute Community of Property (and not by inheritance or donation), generally it is considered community property, with both spouses having undivided interests. Under Conjugal Partnership of Gains, farmland acquired during marriage out of the income or fruits of conjugal funds also becomes conjugal property.

Relevance to CARP:

Even if farmland is conjugal or community property, only Filipino citizens can retain title to agricultural land. If one spouse has renounced Filipino citizenship (and is not a dual citizen), problems may arise regarding compliance with constitutional limitations on land ownership.
If the farmland is covered by CARP and subject to compulsory acquisition, it is still the landowner’s (or conjugal partnership’s) right to keep the maximum allowable retention area, provided the required qualifications are met.

4. Abandonment by an Overseas Spouse: Family Law Perspective

4.1. Defining Abandonment

Under Article 101 of the Family Code for property relations and under provisions dealing with Legal Separation (Articles 55 and 56), “abandonment” typically means:

The spouse has forsaken or deserted the family;
The spouse refuses to return to the family dwelling without just cause, and
The abandoning spouse fails to provide financial support for the family.

In many instances, an Overseas Filipino spouse may be physically absent due to employment abroad. Physical absence alone does not necessarily constitute abandonment in a legal sense if the spouse still communicates, sends support, or intends to reunite with the family.

4.2. Grounds for Legal Separation vs. Annulment/Nullity

Abandonment for more than one year is a ground for Legal Separation under Article 55(10) of the Family Code.
However, abandonment by itself is not a ground for Annulment or Declaration of Nullity of a marriage. Grounds for annulment include lack of parental consent, insanity, fraud, force/intimidation, impotence, or sexually transmissible disease existing at marriage. A marriage can be declared void ab initio for reasons such as psychological incapacity (Art. 36), bigamous or incestuous unions, or if contracted by minors below 18.

Hence, if a spouse has left for overseas and genuinely cut off support and communication, the aggrieved spouse might seek Legal Separation on the ground of abandonment. In very particular scenarios—such as a pattern of extreme desertion or neglect that may demonstrate psychological incapacity—the aggrieved spouse may test whether it qualifies as grounds under Article 36, though this is a much higher bar and dependent on court interpretation.

4.3. Effect on Property

When a spouse abandons the family, the Family Code allows the innocent spouse to petition the court for receivership or administration of the common or conjugal properties. This ensures the property is protected and its fruits are used to support the family.
For farmland subject to CARP, if it is conjugal/community property, the spouse who remains (and who presumably continues management or cultivation) could maintain the farmland’s operations, possibly reinforcing that they meet the “personal cultivation” requirement.
However, if the farmland is effectively left unmanaged (no caretaker, no proven direct management) because the owner is absent, the DAR may later question compliance with retention requirements.

5. Practical Concerns and Tips

Document Management and Cultivation
- For Overseas Filipinos retaining farmland, keep detailed records showing how the farm is being supervised and managed. This can include written agreements with on-site caretakers, receipts, management logs, etc.
Check Citizenship and Land Ownership Status
- If you have acquired foreign citizenship, see if you are eligible for dual citizenship under RA 9225. Once recognized or reacquired, your right to own or retain land (subject to CARP rules) remains.
Coordinate with DAR
- If you believe your land or a portion of your land is exempt, excluded, or subject to a valid retention, promptly file the necessary petitions, declarations, or retention applications with the Department of Agrarian Reform.
Family Law Remedies
- If you are dealing with abandonment by a spouse, assess whether to file for Legal Separation, petition for judicial separation of property, or explore other protective mechanisms.
- Consult a family law attorney regarding whether the spouse’s behavior might meet the stricter threshold for psychological incapacity (void marriage under Article 36), though this is less common.
Community/Conjugal Property Protection
- If farmland is conjugal property and one spouse is absent, the remaining spouse can seek judicial authority to manage or even to mortgage or dispose of certain property when necessary for the family’s sustenance, subject to legal restrictions.

6. Conclusion

CARP Retention Limits for Overseas Filipinos hinge on the landowner’s ability to prove lawful ownership, continued Filipino citizenship (or dual citizenship), and personal cultivation or direct management even while abroad.
Abandonment by an Overseas Spouse can impact the family’s property rights and management but does not automatically dissolve the marriage. It can, however, constitute a ground for Legal Separation, and it may allow the non-abandoning spouse to administer conjugal or community property for the sake of the family’s welfare.
Because agrarian, civil, and family laws intertwine in these circumstances, consultation with both an agrarian lawyer (for DAR and CARP concerns) and a family law attorney (for abandonment-related proceedings) is highly recommended.

In all such cases, timely action and proper documentation are key. By staying informed of both the agrarian reform and family law aspects, Overseas Filipino landowners (and their families) can safeguard their rights to land and preserve family interests—even in challenging circumstances where a spouse has gone abroad and potentially abandoned the marital home.