Scribd
Upload
82 views2 pages

Gabriel VS Ca

This case involves a dispute over the administration of an estate between the legitimate and illegitimate heirs of the deceased. The Court affirmed the appointment of Roberto, the illegitimate son, as administrator but also appointed Felicitas, the legitimate widow, as co-administratrix. As the widow, Felicitas had preference under the rules to administer the estate. However, the Court found no reason to nullify Roberto's appointment. Having co-administrators from both the legitimate and illegitimate heirs was deemed just and equitable to represent the different interests and have the benefit of both of their judgments in administering the estate, working in harmony under the court's supervision.

Uploaded by

trextan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
82 views2 pages

Gabriel VS Ca

This case involves a dispute over the administration of an estate between the legitimate and illegitimate heirs of the deceased. The Court affirmed the appointment of Roberto, the illegitimate son, as administrator but also appointed Felicitas, the legitimate widow, as co-administratrix. As the widow, Felicitas had preference under the rules to administer the estate. However, the Court found no reason to nullify Roberto's appointment. Having co-administrators from both the legitimate and illegitimate heirs was deemed just and equitable to represent the different interests and have the benefit of both of their judgments in administering the estate, working in harmony under the court's supervision.

Uploaded by

trextan
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

GABRIEL VS CA

FACTS:
Nine months after the death of Domingo Gabriel on Aug. 6, 1987, Roberto Dindo Gabriel,
an illegitimate son, filed with the RTC of Manila a petition for letters of administration
over Domingo’s estate. A hearing has been set for opposition and publication of the
order in a newspaper of general circulation. However, no opposition has been filed.
Thereafter, the probate court issued an order appointing Roberto as administrator of the
intestate estate of Domingo. Subsequently, a notice to creditors for the filing of claims
against the estate of the decedent was published. Aida Valencia, mother of Roberto,
filed a motion to file a claim against Domingo’s estate alleging that the decision in a civil
case between her and the deceased remained unsatisfied and that she thereby had an
interest in said estate. Later, Roberto filed for the approval by the probate court an
inventory and appraisal of the estate. Nilda Gabriel and others, the legitimate children
of the decedent, filed an opposition praying for the recall of the letters of administration
issued to Rodrigo. They alleged that they were not duly informed by personal notice of
the petition, that Felicitas Jose-Gabriel, as the legitimate spouse-widow, should be
preferred over Roberto as administrator, and that Roberto has a conflicting and/or
adverse interest against the estate because he might prefer the claims of his mother. The
probate court denied the opposition on the ground that they had not shown any
circumstances sufficient to overturn the order. On appeal, the CA ruled in favour of
Roberto on the ground that the appointment of an administrator is left entirely to the
sound discretion of the trial court which may not be interfered with unless abused.
Hence, this petition.

ISSUE: W/N the order of preference in the issuance of letters of administration must
be followed; W/N the appointment of Roberto as administrator be nullified.

HELD: CA decision affirmed w/ modification. The appointment of Roberto as


administrator is valid; Felicitas Jose-Gabriel be appointed as co-administratrix.

Under the Sec.6, Rule 78 of the Rules of Court, “the order of preference in the issuance of
letters of administration categorically seeks out the surviving spouse, the next of kin and the
creditors, and requires that the sequence be observed in appointing an administrator. In the
appointment thereof, the principal consideration reckoned with is the interest in said estate of the
one to be appointed as administrator.”

The widow has the preference to administer the estate of her husband upon the latter’s
death, because she is supposed to have an interest therein as a partner in the conjugal
partnership. On this ground alone, Felicitas, the widow of the deceased, has every right
and is very much entitled to the administration of the estate of her husband since one
who has greater interest in the estate is preferred to another who has less.

On the other hand, we feel that we should not nullify the appointment of Roberto as
administrator. The determination of a person’s suitability for the office of judicial
administrator rests, to a great extent, in the sound judgment of the court exercising the
power of appointment and said judgment is not to be interfered with on appeal unless
the said court is clearly in error. In the instant case, a mere importunity by some of the
heirs of the deceased, there being no factual and substantial bases therefor, is not
adequate ratiocination for the removal of Rodrigo.

Under the circumstances obtaining therein, we deem it just, equitable and advisable that
there be a co-administration of the estate of the deceased by Felicitas and Roberto. The
purpose of having co-administrators is to have the benefit of their judgment and perhaps
at all times have different interests represented, especially considering that in this
proceeding they will respectively represent the legitimate and illegitimate groups of
heirs to the estate. Thereby, it may reasonably be expected that all interested persons
will be satisfied, with the representatives working in harmony under the direction and
supervision of the probate court.

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