LIMJOCO v. INESTATE OF FRAGANTE G.R. No. L-770, April 27, 1948 Petitioner: ANGEL T.

LIMJOCO Respondent: INTESTATE ESTATE OF PEDRO O. FRAGRANTE, deceased *Angel Limjoco, Jr. and Delfin L. Gonzales for petitioner. Bienvenido A. Tan for respondent Ponente: J. Hilado
FACTS: The Public Service Commission rendered its decision to the applicant for certificate of public convenience to Pedro O. Fragante for the installation, maintenance and operation of an ice plant in San Juan Rizal(the public interest and convenience will be promoted in a proper and suitable manner "by authorizing the operation and maintenance of another ice plant of two and one-half (2-) tons in the municipality of San Juan). The respondent died and and the petitioner alleged that it was against the law to grant the certificate to the deceased (Pedro O. Fragante). ISSUE: Whether or not it is against the law to give the respondent the certificate of public convenience. HELD: No. It is not against the law to give the respondent the certificate of public convenience because the deceased is considered as a person and his properties are considered as artificial person. Because of this, even though he is deceased his intestate estate, still capable of running the iceplant could claim the certificate.

In doubt, read this: http://www.scribd.com/doc/43415222/Limjoco-v-Intestate-Estate-ofFragante-Rule-111