LAW ON SUCCESSION | BUAN VS. ALCANTARA, G.R. NO. L-59592, FEBRUARY 29, 1984

BUAN VS. ALCANTARA,

G.R. NO. L-59592, FEBRUARY 29, 1984

 

TOPIC/DOCTRINE

Pendency of damage suits filed against administrators in connection with decedents’ transportation business, not a valid reason to defer settlement of estate

 

FACTS

The glaring problem in this case is that the intestate case below, which was instituted in 1953, is still pending despite the lapse of 30 years, mainly on the proposition that damage suits filed against the administrators in connection with the land transportation business of the decedents have prevented the settlement of the estate. 

 

ISSUE

The Probate Court erred in denying closure of administration already twenty eight years long just for a few remaining pending separate damage suits against the estate arising from vehicular accidents.

 

RULING

Yes.

The court ruled that the case of Dinglasan v. Ang Chia, 88 Phil, 476 (1951), upon which respondent Court relied in denying closure, will not apply, first, because the litigation involved therein was for the recovery of real property and, second, it was the only property of the estate left subject of administration such that whatever was determined in the civil case would have had far-reaching effects in the determination and distribution of the estate. In this case, however, the damage suits bear no intimate connection or close interrelation with the estate per se, specially after incorporation. It should also be borne in mind that vehicular accidents are a risk inherent in transportation business, and as long as this business continues in operation, accidents are bound to occur from time to time with the consequent filing of suits by persons who may be injured. To await the termination or settlement of all these suits before closing the intestate proceedings will virtually place the estate under perpetual administration contrary to the intendment of the law.







Popular posts from this blog

CRIMINAL LAW II CASE DIGEST/ BACLAYON V. MUTIA, 129 SCRA 148

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW I CASE DIGEST | THE DIOCESE OF BACOLOD V. COMELEC G.R. No. 205728, January 21, 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTIONS CASE DIGEST/ BPI FAMILY BANK VS. FRANCO/ G. R. NO. 123498/ 23 NOVEMBER 2007

REMEDIAL LAW | Riviera Golf Club v. CCA G.R. No. 173783, June 17 2015

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ MINA VS. PASCUAL/ 25 PHIL. 540 (1923)

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ QUINTOS VS. BECK/ 69 PHIL. 108 (1939)

LAW ON PROPERTY | ACOSTA V. OCHOA, ET AL., G.R. NO. 211559; G.R. NO. 215634, OCTOBER 15, 2019

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION | HYGIENIC PACKAGING CORPORATION VS. NUTRI-ASIA, INC ., G.R. NO. 201302, JANUARY 23, 2019

LEGAL ETHICS | MAURICIO C. ULEP VS. THE LEGAL CLINIC, INC Bar Matter No. 553. June 17, 1993

CREDIT TRANSACTION CASE DIGEST/ DELOS SANTOS VS. JARRA/ G. R. NO. L-4150/ 10 FEBRUARY 1910/ 15 PHIL. 147