GR 157438; (October, 2004) (Digest)
G.R. No. 157438; October 18, 2004
HEIRS OF GREGORIO LICAROS, namely, CONCEPCION B. LICAROS and ABELARDO B. LICAROS, petitioners, vs. SANDIGANBAYAN and REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondents.
FACTS
The Republic of the Philippines, through the PCGG, filed a complaint to recover alleged ill-gotten wealth accumulated during the Marcos regime. The original 1987 complaint implicated, among others, former Central Bank Governor Gregorio S. Licaros, alleging he conspired with Lucio Tan and the Marcoses to fraudulently acquire the assets of General Bank and Trust Company (GBTC) for a nominal sum. Despite these allegations, Licaros was not initially named as a defendant. Licaros died in 1983. In 1991, four years after the original filing, the Republic filed a Second Amended Complaint which, for the first time, impleaded the Estate/Heirs of Gregorio Licaros as party defendants, reiterating and detailing his alleged active collaboration in the scheme.
The Heirs of Licaros filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing the complaint stated no cause of action against them. They contended that the acts attributed to Gregorio Licaros were performed in his official capacity as Central Bank Governor and were acts of the Monetary Board, not his personal acts. They further argued that the allegations constituted mere conclusions of law. The Sandiganbayan denied the motion to dismiss and the subsequent motion for reconsideration, prompting the heirs to file the present Petition for Certiorari.
ISSUE
Whether the Sandiganbayan committed grave abuse of discretion in denying the motion to dismiss, holding that the Second Amended Complaint sufficiently states a cause of action against the Estate/Heirs of Gregorio Licaros.
RULING
The Supreme Court DISMISSED the petition and AFFIRMED the Sandiganbayan Resolutions. The Court held that the Sandiganbayan did not commit grave abuse of discretion. The test for sufficiency of a cause of action is whether, assuming the allegations in the complaint to be true, the court can render a valid judgment in accordance with the prayer. At this stage, the truth or falsity of the allegations is not in issue.
The Second Amended Complaint contains sufficient factual allegations to implicate Gregorio Licaros in an alleged conspiracy to accumulate ill-gotten wealth. It specifically avers that he “facilitated” and actively collaborated in the fraudulent acquisition of GBTC assets, taking undue advantage of his official position. These are allegations of ultimate facts, not mere conclusions of law. The contentions that his acts were done in good faith, in the regular performance of official duty, or were acts of the Monetary Board, are matters of defense that require presentation of evidence. Such defenses cannot be invoked to abate the complaint at the motion to dismiss stage. The cause of action, as pleaded, is for the recovery of unlawfully acquired property, which survives the death of the alleged wrongdoer and can be pursued against his estate. Therefore, the complaint states a valid cause of action.