Short answer. Under Article 1682, a lease of rural land with no fixed duration lasts for all the time needed to gather the fruits the whole estate may yield in one year — or that it may yield once, even if two or more years must pass. The harvest cycle, not a calendar term, sets its length.
What the law says
is understood to have been for all the time necessary for the gathering of the fruits which the whole estate leased may yield in one year, or which it may yield once, although two or more years have to elapse for the purpose
Civil Code, Article 1682 — Term of an Unfixed Rural Lease. Read the full provision →
The harvest, not the calendar, fixes the term
For farm land, the Civil Code ties an unfixed lease to the agricultural cycle rather than to a flat number of months. Article 1682 says the lease of a piece of rural land, when its duration has not been fixed, is understood to have been for all the time necessary for the gathering of the fruits which the whole estate leased may yield in one year, or which it may yield once, although two or more years have to elapse for the purpose. The idea is practical: a tenant who plants should be able to reap. The term lasts long enough for the land to produce and for that produce to be gathered.
One yield, even if it takes more than a year
The article covers two situations. For ordinary land that yields within a year, the lease runs the time needed to gather that year's fruits. But some crops — trees or plants that mature over several seasons — yield only once after a longer wait. For those, the lease is understood to last until that single yield can be gathered, although two or more years have to elapse. So the length flexes to the nature of what the land produces. A tenant is not cut off before the crop he was entitled to raise can be harvested, which would defeat the whole point of leasing farm land.
This applies only when no period was set
The rule is a gap-filler. It operates only where the parties never agreed on a duration. If the lease contract states a term, that term governs and Article 1682 does not apply. The provision also speaks specifically to rural land — agricultural ground — and not to urban lots, which are handled under different rules. So before relying on the harvest-cycle measure, confirm two things: that the land is genuinely rural, and that the agreement is truly silent on how long it should last. Where either is untrue, a different rule or the parties' own stipulation controls the length.
What it does not decide
Article 1682 answers how long the lease is understood to run, but it does not by itself settle related farm questions. It does not fix the rent, allocate the crop between owner and tenant, or govern the special protections that agrarian laws give certain agricultural tenants — those are separate matters, and share-tenancy in particular is governed by special legislation. Its function is narrow: to supply a sensible duration when the parties forgot to. Reading it together with the actual crops the land bears, and with any applicable agrarian rules, gives the full picture of how long a periodless farm lease is meant to endure.
Cases citing this provision
These Supreme Court decisions cite the provision above. We list them so you can read them yourself; the summaries of what each decided are not ours to give.
- Allan Mañas, joined by wife Lena Isabelle Y. Mañas vs. Rosalina Roca Nicolasora, et, G.R. No. 208845, February 3, 2020 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Oscar L. Rivera vs. Serafin O. Roman, G.R. No. 142402, September 20, 2005 — read the decision on LawPhil →
- Felix L. Gonzales vs. Heirs of Thomas and Paula Cruz, etc. et al, G.R. No. 131784, September 16, 1999 — read the decision on LawPhil →