Co vs Rosario

G.R. No. 160671 | Apr 30, 2008

Topic: Selection or Removal of Special Administrators

Facts: Luis Co (petitioner) and Vicente Yu was appointed as special

administrator by the RTC of Makati City of the estate of the petitioners father, but
the heirs opposed the petitioners appointment as special administrator, the
petitioner nominated son, Alvin for appointment as co-administrator of the estate.
RTC appointed Alvin as special co-administrator. After 4 years, the RTC revoked
and set aside the appointment of Alvin on the basis that that Alvin had become
unsuitable to discharge the trust given to him as special co-administrator
because of the filing of several criminal cases against him, which, even if there
was no conviction yet. Petitioner filed MR but was denied. Petitioner filed a
petition for certiorari to the CA but the CA dismissed the petition.

Issue:

WON the removal by the lower court of Alvin to be a special administrator

proper. YES

Held:

Courts may appoint or remove special administrators based on grounds

other than those enumerated in the Rules, at their discretion. As long as the said
discretion is exercised without grave abuse, higher courts will not interfere with
it. This, however, is no authority for the judge to become partial, or to make his
personal likes and dislikes prevail over, or his passions to rule, his judgment. The
exercise of such discretion must be based on reason, equity, justice and legal
principles.

In this case, we find that the trial courts judgment on the issue of Alvins
removal as special co-administrator is grounded on reason, equity, justice and
legal principle. It is not characterized by patent and gross capriciousness, pure
whim and abuse, arbitrariness or despotism, as to be correctible by the writ
of certiorari.