Jamero vs Melicor Case Digest
GR 140929 ; May 26, 2005
PRINCIPLE/S:
Special Proceedings
a)
Appointment of Special Administrator
Appointment
of a special administrator is interlocutory, discretionary on the part of the
RTC and non-appealable.
b)
Remedy of aggrieved party in the appointment of a Special Administrator
Petition
for certiorari
Ground: Grave abuse of discretion or lack of or in
excess of jurisdiction
FACTS: Petitioner filed a Special Proceedings for the Administration and
Settlement of the Estate of his deceased mother, Consuelo Jamero, with the RTC. Private
respondent Ernesto Jamero,
a brother of petitioner, opposed the latter’s petition for appointment as regular administrator
of the estate. Upon motion of private respondent Ernesto and over the
objections of petitioner, the respondent court, appointed Atty. Bautista as special administrator pending the
appointment of a regular administrator. Petitioner filed a petition for certiorari with
the CA which was denied. Hence, this present petition for review on certiorari.
ISSUE/S:
1) WON the CA erred in dismissing CA-G.R. SP No. 53020 for having been
filed out of time;
2) WON appointment of special administrator is discretionary to the
appointing court and that being an interlocutory order, the same is not
appealable nor subject to certiorari;
3) WON the appointment of a special administrator is in accordance with
law and jurisprudence.
HELD:
1) YES. A.M. Circular No. 00-2-03-SC further amending Section 4, Rule 65 of the Rules
of Court should be given
retroactive effect.
Amendment under A.M. No. 00-2-03-SC is procedural or remedial in character. It does not create new or remove
vested rights but only operates in furtherance of the remedy or confirmation of
rights already existing. . It is settled that procedural laws do not
come within the legal conception of a retroactive law, or the general rule
against retroactive operation of statutes. They may be given retroactive effect to actions pending and
undetermined at the time of their passage and this will not violate any right of a person who
may feel that he is adversely affected, insomuch as there is no vested
rights in rules of procedure. Thus, the petition for certiorari filed by petitioner with the CA
should now be considered as having been filed within the reglementary period
provided under said circular.
2) YES. Appointment of a special administrator is interlocutory,
discretionary on the part of the RTC and non-appealable. However, it may be subject of certiorari if
it can be shown that the RTC
committed grave abuse of discretion or lack of or in excess of jurisdiction.
3) YES. Appointment of a special administrator is interlocutory,
discretionary on the part of the RTC
No comments:
Post a Comment