Lesson 8 Joint and Solidary Obligations Student PDF
Lesson 8 Joint and Solidary Obligations Student PDF
Lesson 8
Joint and Solidary Obligations
Art. 1207. The concurrence of two or more creditors or of two or more debtors in one and the
same obligation does not imply that each one of the former has a right to demand, or that each
one of the latter is bound to render, entire compliance with the prestation. There is a solidary
liability only when the obligation expressly so states, or when the law or the nature of the
obligation requires solidarity.
Art. 1208. If from the law, or the nature or the wording of the obligations to which the preceding
article refers the contrary does not appear, the credit or debt shall be presumed to be divided into
as many shares as there are creditors or debtors, the credits or debts being considered distinct
from one another, subject to the Rules of Court governing the multiplicity of suits.
Obligations may be classified according to the number of parties involved, such as:
1. INDIVIDUAL Obligation – where there is one debtor and one creditor
2. COLLECTIVE Obligation – where there are two or more debtors and two or more creditors.
2. SOLIDARY OBLIGATION – each debtor is liable for the whole obligation; each
creditor may enforce the entire obligation to any one of the debtors who may be obliged
to pay it in full. [Simply put – “One for All, All for One”]
If a collective obligation does not provide for the manner of enforceability or liability of the
multiple parties, what is the legal presumption provided by law (Arts. 1207 & 1208)?
Exceptions?
The presumption is that the obligation is JOINT or mancomunada, if multiple persons are liable
under a contract or judgment and there is NO express provision making each one liable for the
entire obligation. Each debtor is liable only for their proportionate part of the obligation.
(1) If A is liable to B for P9,000, the can be no problem regarding the determination of the
following:
(a) The person liable to pay;
(b) The person entitled to demand payment;
(c) The extent of the liability of the debtor; and
(d) The extent of the right of the creditor.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
(2) Where there is a plurality of parties (two [2] or more debtors and/or two [2] or more
creditors) and the share of each in the obligation is specified, the correlative rights and
obligations of the parties are known.
Thus, if A, B and C are liable to D in the amount of P9,000, and it is stated that the
corresponding share of each debtor is P3,000 (it may be in unequal amounts), we know
that A, B, and C are liable only for P3,000 each and that D is not entitled to collect from
each debtor more than his corresponding share in the obligation.
(3) On the other hand, suppose that in the same obligation, the share of each debtor (or share
of each creditor) is not specified. What is the extent of the liability of A, B and C? In
such case, the presumption is that the obligation is joint (Arts. 1207-1208), and as a
consequence:
(a) There are as many debts as there are debtors;
(b) There are as many debts as there are creditors;
(c) The debts and/or credits are considered distinct and separate from one
another;
(d) Each debtor is liable only for a proportionate part of the debt; and
(e) Each creditor is entitled only to a proportionate part of the credit.
What are the exceptions to the legal presumption that the obligation is joint?
EXCEPTIONS: There is solidary liability if required by:
i. the LAW, or;
ii. the Nature of Obligation, or;
iii. Express Stipulation by the Parties to the contract.
It is already a well-settled doctrine in this jurisdiction that, when it is not provided in a judgment
that the defendants are liable to pay jointly and severally a certain sum of money, none of them
may be compelled to satisfy in full said judgment.
• After judgment becomes final, without the court stating in the judgment that liability is
joint and several, the court has no power to amend & convert defendant’s liability to a
solidary obligation.
• It can no longer issue an order of execution for solidary responsibility of defeated parties.
• This is true even if in the written contract originally executed by the parties, and the
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
La Compañía General De Tabacos De Filipinas, Vs. Candida Obed, Viuda De Gallegos, Et Al.
No. 4226. March 31, 1909
“WE promise to pay P2,000 every month from Jan. 30, 2010 to Jan. 30, 2011.”
Since the debt are distinct and separate from each other, the insolvency of one of the debtors
shall not make the others liable.
2.) Each CREDITOR, if there are several, is entitled to only a proportionate part of the credit.
Reason: there are as many separate credits as there are creditors.
3.) Demand by one creditor upon one debtor, produces the effects of default only between them,
but not with respect to others.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
4.) The interruption of prescription by the judicial demand of one creditor upon a debtor, does
not benefit the other creditors, nor interrupt the prescription as to the other debtors.
5.) The insolvency of a debtor does not increase the liability of his co-debtors. Neither does it
allow a creditor to demand anything from his co-creditors.
6.) The vices of each obligation arising from the personal defect of a particular debtor or
creditor will not affect the obligation or rights of the others.
7.) In joint divisible obligation, the defense of res judicata is not extended from one debtor to
another.
I promise to pay P5,000 every month from Jan. 30, 2010 to Jan. 30, 2011.
Signed – Debtor X Signed – Debtor Y
Examples of other words used to indicate solidarity are: jointly and/or severally; solidaria;
together and/or separately; juntos or separadamente; “I promise to pay” signed by two (2) or
mor persons.
b.) When a charge or condition is imposed upon heirs or legatees, and the testament
expressly makes the charge or condition in solidum;
c.) When the law expressly provides for solidarity of the obligation of several obligors, as in
the case of the liability of co-participants in a crime, the liability of the captain and owner
of a vessel engaged of maritime commerce for damages to the goods or cargo on board,
the liability of connecting carriers in commercial overland transportation etc.
Example: Persons acting in violation of Arts. 19, 20, 21, 22 of Civil Code, Chapter on
Human Relations
A moral wrong cannot be divided into parts, hence liability for it must be solidary.
e.) When a solidary responsibility is imposed by final judgment upon several defendants.
Art. 1209. If the division is impossible, the right of the creditors may be prejudiced only
by their collective acts, and the debt can be enforced only by proceeding against all the
debtors. If one of the latter should be insolvent, the others shall not be liable for his share.
• Its fulfillment requires the concurrence of all the debtors, but each for his part. On the
part of the creditors, collective action is expressly required or acts which may be
prejudicial.
What is the meaning of “the right of the creditors may be prejudiced only by their collective
acts”?
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
This means that – as long as the obligation is joint, the act of one creditor cannot have any effect
as to the other creditors because the credit of each is separated from the credits of the others. The
indivisibility requires collective action from the creditors to be effective.
Example: If a written demand is made by one creditor only, the debtor/s cannot pay him alone.
Payment must be made to all creditors. The act of this one creditor is ineffective. All creditors
must demand performance of the indivisible prestation of the obligation.
A can insist that both D and E together accept the car, and if either of them refuses to
join the other, A may legally refuse to deliver the car. He may deposit the car in court by
your consignation.
If A becomes liable to pay for damages for non-performance, D and E can recover only
their respective shares in the indemnity. Neither D nor E may do anything which may be
prejudicial to the other, like renouncing or assigning the entire obligation without the
consent of the other. This is so because the obligation is joint, the credit of D is separate
from that of E; therefore, neither D nor E can act in representation of the other.
If there are several debtors and only one creditor, the obligation is performed when all the
debtors comply or act together.
“A, B and C are jointly liable to give D a car valued at P240,000. On the date of delivery,
A and B are willing to deliver but C is not.”
Here, D has no cause of action against C for the delivery of the car because, as a joint
debtor, C is liable only for a proportionate part of the obligation, which is P80,000.
Since the object is indivisible, the debt can only be enforced by proceeding against all the
debtors for compliance is not possible unless they act together.
Pursuant to Art. 1224, the liability is converted into one for damages. So A, B and C will
be liable for P80,000 each which is the value of the car. C, the unwilling debtor, shall be
liable for damages to D for having violated the obligation.
If A and B suffered damages by reason of the non-fulfillment by C, they may recover them
from C. And if anyone of the debtors are insolvent, the others shall not be liable for his
share. D must wait until the insolvent debtor can pay.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
Can a debtor deliver to one of the creditors only in a joint indivisible obligation?
NO. A debtor who delivers the thing to one creditor only, becomes liable for damages because
of non-performance to the other creditors, unless they have authorized the former to receive
payment for all of them.
If only one or some of the creditors demand the prestation, the debtor can legally refuse to
deliver to them. Debtor can insist that all creditors together receive the thing.
What happens if one of the debtors in a joint indivisible obligation becomes insolvent?
If one of debtors becomes insolvent, his co-debtors shall NOT be liable for his share. This is due
to the joint character of the obligation
What is the remedy of a debtor if one or more creditors refuse to join and accept the thing
delivered?
If any of the creditors refuses to join and accept the thing, the debtor may deposit the thing in
court by way of consignation.
Art. 1210. The indivisibility of an obligation does not necessarily give rise to
solidarity. Nor does solidarity of itself imply indivisibility.
• In SOLIDARY OBLIGATIONS, each creditor may demand the full prestation and each
debtor has likewise the duty to comply with the entire prestation.
• In INDIVISIBLE JOINT OBLIGATIONS each creditor cannot demand more than his
share and each debtor is not liable for more than his share.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
INDIVISIBILITY SOLIDARITY
Each creditor cannot demand more than his Each creditor may demand the full prestation
share and each debtor is not liable for more and each debtor has the duty to comply with
than his share. the entire prestation.
Indivisibility refers to the prestation that is not Solidarity refers too the legal tie or vinculum
capable of partial performance. defining the extent or liability
Only the debtor guilty of breach of obligation All of the debtors is liable for the breach of
is liable for damages, thereby terminating the obligation committed by any one of the
agency. debtors.
Can exist even if there is only one debtor or Can only exist when there is at least creditor or
only one creditor. debtors (requires plurality of subjects)
The other debtors are not liable in case of The other debtors are proportionately liable in
insolvency of one debtor. case of insolvency of one debtor.
Art. 1211. Solidarity may exist although the creditors and the debtors may not be bound in
the same manner and by the same periods and conditions.
KINDS OF SOLIDARITY
(1) According to the parties bound:
(c) Mixed solidarity – that on the part of both creditors and debtors
• Enforcement can be made against any one of the solidary debtors, even if a particular
obligation chargeable to a particular debtor is not yet due. A solidary debtor nonetheless is
responsible for all prestations which fall due, although chargeable to the other co-debtor/s.
This is the essence of solidarity.
c. Real solidarity
The law does not expressly indicate the cases where the liability is solidary
because of the nature of the obligation. The opinion offered that the cases
contemplated are those in which the intent or purpose of the law is to have the
obligation satisfied in full but the law itself does not expressly require solidarity.
Example:
(1) The nature of the obligation of the employers under the Workmen’s
Compensation Law, to pay indemnity or compensation for death or injury
caused to their employees while in the performance of their assigned duty;
(2) Where the vehicle which figured in an accident was operated under the “kabit
system”, the award for exemplary damages, among others, payable jointly and
severally by the operator and the grantee of the certificate of public
convenience and necessity because there was a violation of law.
ILLUSTRATE:
A, B, C got a loan of P300,000 from X. They signed a contract, solidarily binding themselves
to pay X under these terms:
o On Jan. 08, 2017, X can collect the P100,000 with 12% from A.
o But if X cannot collect from A, X can collect the same also from either B or C due to the
solidarity of obligation expressed in the contract.
o X cannot collect the entire P300,000 as this whole sum is not yet due on Jan. 8, 2017. X
must wait for the maturity of the other amounts.
o Even granting that A has paid his Jan. 08, 2017 obligation to X, A may still be held liable
by X for the other debts in 2018 & 2019 if B &/or C cannot pay. Why? Due to the
solidary obligation of the loan contract.
Art. 1212. Each one of the solidary creditors may do whatever may be useful to the others,
but not anything which may be prejudicial to the latter.
Example:
a. A solidary creditor may make judicial or extra judicial demands to adverse claimant
to interrupt prescription within which to file action
b. A solidary can constitute debtor in default
c. A solidary creditor can file a complaint so that the obligation may bear legal interest
➢ If a solidary creditor performs an act which is prejudicial to his co-creditors, the act
may have valid effects and may extinguish the claim against the debtors. But the
creditor who did the prejudicial act shall be liable to his co-creditors.
➢ Here, the rights of the other creditors subsist and can be enforced, but this time,
against the creditor who performed the prejudicial act. [Example – remission of
solidary debt by a co-creditor]
Art. 1213. A solidary creditor cannot assign his rights without the consent of the others.
Art. 1213 provides the general rule and exception about assignment of a solidary creditors rights.
REASON FOR ARTICLE – solidary creditor is an agent of the others, arising from the implied
mutual trust and confidence among the solidary creditors. Hence, a solidary creditor cannot
assign that agency to a third person without the consent of the other creditors.
Art. 1214. The debtor may pay any one of the solidary creditors; but if any demand,
judicial or extrajudicial, has been made by one of them, payment should be made to him.
3.) But if the debtor paid to another creditor who did not demand (judicially or extra-
judicially), it is like paying to third parties, in so far as the shares of the other
creditors are concerned.
If the creditor who was paid, did not turn over to the others their shares in the
payment, the debtor in this case can still be required to pay to the demanding creditor
the full amount, less the share of the creditor who did not demand but to whom
payment was made.
4.) If there are two or more demands made by the other solidary creditors, the first
demand is given preference or priority.
Art. 214 is applicable not only in cases of active solidarity but also where the solidarity is
mixed although the singular “debtor” is employed in case of mixed solidarity, the debtor
upon whom no demand has been made, may pay any one of the solidary creditors.
Example:
A is liable to pay B and C, solidary creditors, P10,000. In this case, A may either pay B or C
but if a demand, judicial or extrajudicial, is made by B, payment should be made to B.
If A, nevertheless, paid C P10,000, B is still entitled to his share from A in case C does not
turn over to B the latter’s share. If B and C demanded payment at the same time, A may pay
either of them.
If there are two (2) or more debtors, only the debtor upon whom demand has been made, is
bound to make payment to the creditor who made the demand.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
Art. 1215. Novation, compensation, confusion or remission of the debt, made by any of the
solidary creditors or with any of the solidary debtors, shall extinguish the obligation,
without prejudice to the provisions of Article 1219.
The creditor who may have executed any of these acts, as well as he who collects the debt,
shall be liable to the others for the share in the obligation corresponding to them.
Art. 1219. The remission made by the creditor of the share which affects one of the solidary
debtors does not release the latter from his responsibility towards the co-debtors, in case the
debt had been totally paid by anyone of them before the remission was effected.
STATE AND DEFINE THE FOUR (4) MODES BY WHICH A SOLIDARY CREDITOR
MAY EXTINGUISH AN OBLIGATION:
2) COMPENSATION – takes place when two persons in their own right, become
creditors and debtors of each other. (Art. 1278)
What are the effects of novation, compensation, confusion or remission of debt by one of the
solidary creditors, with any of the solidary debtors?
The effects of novation, compensation, confusion or remission of debt by one of the solidary
creditors, with any of the solidary debtors:
o But in this case, the action is now based on the new obligation but no longer upon
the old obligation.
2.1 If there had been TOTAL COMPENSATION, the debtor who has given his own credit
to extinguish the obligation, can recover from the others their respective shares in the
obligation.
Illustration: A, B are solidary debtors of X for the sum of P8,000, payable on Feb. 14,
2012. (A and B between them, agreed upon a P4,000 share each)
On Feb. 10, 2012 however, X borrowed on emergency from A the sum of P8,000. Here
there is now total compensation between A and X.
However, A can recover from B his share of P4,000.
2.2 In case of MERGER, if one co-debtor acquires the whole credit, then he can still
demand from the other debtors their respective shares therein.
Illustration: A and B are solidary debtors of P8,000 to creditor X. A later paid and
issued to X a check payable to CASH for the sum of P8,000. Instead of encashing the
check, X endorsed this to his creditor Y whom X owed P7,999. Later, Y used this check
to pay A for the goods he bought from him for P8,000.
Here, A the debtor (of X), and issuer of the check received the same check in
payment of his credit as creditor of Y. There is now complete merger in the person of
A as debtor and creditor.
A can still demand from solidary co-debtor B, his share of P4,000.
2.3 In case of REMISSION however, since the co-debtor in whose favour the remission was
made, gives or loses nothing, he cannot recover anything from the other debtors.
What is the remedy of the co-creditors in case one their solidary co-creditors committed any of
the above acts, or collected the debt, which resulted to the extinguishment of the obligation
due to all of them?
The other solidary creditors may collect from the co-creditor who executed any of the acts, or
collected the debt, and the latter shall be liable for the shares corresponding to all his co-
creditors.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
Art. 1216. The creditor may proceed against any one of the solidary debtors or some or all
of them simultaneously. The demand made against one of them shall not be an obstacle to
those which may subsequently be directed against the others, so long as the debt has not
been fully collected.
If the creditor made an extrajudicial demand against one of the solidary debtors, will this be
an obstacle to making subsequent demands directed against the other co-debtors?
No, so long as the debt has not been fully collected.
For example: A and B are solidary debtors of X for the sum of P8,000. X demanded payment
from A who was able to pay only P3,000. X is not barred from subsequently demanding
payment from B for the sum of P5,000.
If the demand is judicial (thru filing of a case), and a judgment was rendered by the court,
what are the Rules with respect to Solidary Creditors and Debtors?
1.2 If judgment is against the plaintiff solidary creditor, the judgment will be res judicata
between the co-creditors and co-debtors.
The solidary creditor who filed the case is an agent and representative of his solidary co-creditors
and judgment against him will constitute as bar to filing the same case by any or all of the
solidary creditors. “It is anomalous to hold that the plaintiff would have the representation of his
co-creditors if the action prospers, but does not have it if the action fails.” (p. 242, Tolentino,
Obligations and Contracts, 2000 ed.) This is also to prevent multiplicity of suits.
1.3 The solidary creditors can however go after the co-creditor who filed the case without their
knowledge or consent.
2.1 If the judgment is favourable, this can also benefit and be invoked by the solidary debtors in
their favour, provided that it is not based on a defense or cause personal to the debtor. (id)
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
2.2 If the solidary co-debtor happens to be insolvent, and the case was filed only against him,
the judgment cannot be executed against the other co-debtors who were not made parties in the
complaint. A new action is necessary to make them liable and this new action is not barred by
the first action; there is no waiver against those not sued.
o After 5 years, (before lapse of the 10-yr. period), the winning party must file a case for
Revival to Enforce the Judgment.
Art. 1217. Payment made by one of the solidary debtors extinguishes the obligation. If two
or more solidary debtors offer to pay, the creditor may choose which offer to accept.
He who made the payment may claim from his co-debtors only the share which
corresponds to each, with the interest for the payment already made. If the payment is
made before the debt is due, no interest for the intervening period may be demanded.
When one of the solidary debtors cannot, because of his insolvency, reimburse his share to
the debtor paying the obligation, such share shall be borne by all his co-debtors, in
proportion to the debt of each. (1145a)
WHAT IS PAYMENT?
It consists in the delivery of the thing or the rendition of the service which is the object of the
obligation. (Art. 1232)
2. Releases the paying solidary debtor and his co-debtors from the same liability. (Joseph v.
Bautista, 170 SCRA 540)
3. Paying co-debtor is entitled to reimbursement from the other co-debtors the share
pertaining to each with interest on the amount advanced from the time the debt has
become due, and not from the date of payment by the co-debtor.
4. If one of the solidary debtors is insolvent and cannot pay his share, all solidary debtors
and the paying co-debtor shall share proportionately in the settlement of the share of the
insolvent debtor.
Example:
1.) A & B are solidary debtors for the sum of P2,000 to X. If A pays P1,500 to X. A
can ask for reimbursement from B for only P500 and not the entire P1,000.
2.) If A pays only P1,000 to X, he cannot recover any reimbursement from B.
Art. 1218. Payment by a solidary debtor shall not entitle him to reimbursement from his
co-debtors if such payment is made after the obligation has prescribed or become illegal.
Under Art. 1218, Payment by a solidary debtor shall not entitle him to reimbursement from his
co-debtors if such payment is made under certain situations. What are these?
Can B legally demand refund from A of his P10,000 share of the debt?
No, under Art. 1218.
“Art. 1424. When a right to sue upon a civil obligation has lapsed by
extinctive prescription, the obligor who voluntarily performs the
contract cannot recover what he has delivered or the value of the
service he has rendered.”
2.) When the obligation or prestation has become illegal before it could be performed.
Art. 1219. The remission made by the creditor of the share which affects one of the solidary
debtors does not release the latter from his responsibility towards the co-debtors, in case
the debt had been totally paid by anyone of them before the remission was effected.
Article 1219 applies to a case where one of the solidary debtors fully paid the obligation
BEFORE the remission was made by the creditor. Thus:
General Rule: The debtor whose share is remitted by the creditor will not be exempt from
his obligation to reimburse his share paid by the co-debtor.
Reasons:
(1) This is to prevent fraud;
(2) After the obligation is fully paid, it is extinguished, so the creditor has nothing more to
remit, even partially.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
Example: A & B are solidary debtors for the sum of P8,000 to X. A paid X in full the
P8,000. Two days after, creditor-X remitted debtor-B’s share of P4,000 out of the P8,000
debt.
With X’s remission of B’s P4,000 debt, is B still required to refund his P4,000 share of
the debt earlier paid by his solidary co-debtor A?
YES. X’s late remission of B’s debt has NO effect as to B’s obligation to reimburse A for
his P4,000 share of the solidary debt of P8,000. There is nothing more to remit, for the
obligation had already been extinguished with A’s full payment 2 days before the
remission of B’s share of the debt.
Art. 1220. The remission of the whole obligation, obtained by one of the solidary debtors,
does not entitle him to reimbursement from his co-debtors.
Article 1220 applies – (a.) When remission covers the ENTIRE obligation; (b.) When remission
is obtained by one of the solidary debtors without spending anything for it; (c.) When remission
is timely made by creditor before any solidary debtor has properly paid the solidary obligation.
Result: The whole obligation is extinguished. But solidary debtor who obtained the remission
from creditor is not entitled to refund from co-debtors.
Reason: The remission or condonation by the creditor is gratuitous. In this case, the solidary
Debtor did not incur any expense or consideration.
What about if the remission is partial in favour of one of the solidary debtors only? What
are the legal effects?
o PARTIAL REMISSION:
(a) If remission is only partial, the solidary debtor who paid the unremitted debt is
entitled to refund from his co-debtors only with respect to the sum he actually paid.
(b) The solidary debtor whose share is remitted by creditor may still held liable for the
remaining debt by the creditor.
➢ A remits Y‘s share – P1,500. A can go after X for only P4,500. The remission
benefits X initially since X only has to pay P4,500 instead of 6,000. However, X can
only recover P3,000 (P1,500 each) from W and Z.
➢ A remits Y‘s share – P1,500. A can go after Y for the P4,500 balance since Y is still a
solidary debtor for the remaining debt. Otherwise, the effect of remission would be
extended. But Y can recover the sum P4,500 (or P1,500 each) from W, X, and Z.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
➢ A remits Y‘s share – P1,500. Debtor Z becomes insolvent. A sues W for the balance
of P4,500. Art. 1217 must be applied. Now, the insolvency of Z is shouldered by W,
X, and Y. So, W can recover P2,000 (P1500 + P500 share of Z) from X, and P500
from Y (-P1500 is remitted + P500 share of Z). W has to shoulder P500 as a loss due
to Z‘s insolvency plus his P1,500 share in the debt, or P2,000 total.
Art. 1221. If the thing has been lost or if the prestation has become impossible without the
fault of the solidary debtors, the obligation shall be extinguished.
If there was fault on the part of any one of them, all shall be responsible to the creditor, for
the price and the payment of damages and interest, without prejudice to their action
against the guilty or negligent debtor.
If through a fortuitous event, the thing is lost or the performance has become impossible
after one of the solidary debtors has incurred in delay through the judicial or extrajudicial
demand upon him by the creditor, the provisions of the preceding paragraph shall apply.
• The effects provided in this Article apply only to non-performance of an obligation due to the
LOSS OF THE THING, or IMPOSSIBILITY OF THE PRESTATION THAT IS DUE.
2.) If there is fault by any of the solidary debtors, ALL will be liable due to their mutual
agency.
But the co-debtors without fault, can file an action against the guilty or negligent solidary
debtor to recover the full amount of the indemnity paid to the creditor.
(INDEMNITY – consists in the price of the thing or prestation, damages and interests)
If A paid the full price of the rice plus damages to creditor X, can A recover from C the
full sum of the price plus damages, or only the 1/3 share of C in the solidary
obligation?
If A paid the full price of the 1000 sacks of rice plus damages to creditor-X, A can
recover from C the full amount of the price plus damages paid to X.
What about if X first demanded payment of the price and damages from C who paid
the full indemnities, can C thereafter collect each of the 1/3 shares of A and B in the
obligation?
But if X first demanded payment of the rice lost plus damages from C who paid, C,
cannot recover from A and B for their respective shares in the price of rice and damages
paid to X. In this case, under Art. 1221, C bears the entire burden of the indemnity of
paying for the price of the 1000 sacks of rice and damages as he caused the loss or
impossibility of performance by his own negligence.
This is without prejudice to the co-debtor/s right to go after the guilty or negligent
solidary debtor/s up to the full amount of the indemnity.
1.) As to Creditors: ANY or ALL solidary debtors will be liable to the creditor due to
their mutual agency.
2.) Among Debtors: Every or all solidary debtors shall pay his share of the obligation.
However, the debtor who is guilty or at fault shall be LIABLE ALONE for paying the
damages claimed by the creditor.
NOTE: SEE also similar provisions or rules in Articles 1174, 1262, 1266.
Art. 1222. A solidary debtor may, in actions filed by the creditor, avail himself of all
defenses which are derived from the nature of the obligation and of those which are
personal to him, or pertain to his own share. With respect to those which personally belong
to the others, he may avail himself thereof only as regards that part of the debt for which
the latter are responsible.
o Vices of consent due to minority, insanity, mistake, fraud or violence may be total to the
debtor himself
o Partial remission of solidary debt in his favour may be a defense, but he can still be liable
for the other shares as solidary co-debtor.
Name: Score:
Block: Date:
Exercise 1. Multiple Choice. Read and analyze each items carefully. Write the letter of your
which corresponds to your choice on the space before the number.
a. One in which the debtor is liable for the entire obligation, and each creditor is
entitled to demand the whole obligation.
b. One in which either one of the parties is indispensable and the other is not
necessary.
c. One in which the obligation of one is a resolutory condition of the obligation of
the other, the non-fulfillment of which entitles the other party to rescind the
contract.
d. One in which each of the debtors is liable only for a proportionate part of the debt
and each creditor is entitled only for a proportionate part of the credit.
2. X, Y and Z joint debtors owe P18,000 to A, B and C, solidary creditors. How much can B
collect from X?
a. P3,000 c. P9,000
b. P18,000 d. P6,000
4. A, B, and C secured a loan from D. The promissory note which evidence the obligation
states, “I promise to pay D or order P10,000 payable on demand”(Sgd.) ABC The
obligation is:
a. Solidary c. Indivisible
b. Divisible d. Joint
5. Althea and Benedict are joint debtors of joint creditors Carlos, Dencio, Eduardo and
Franco in the amount of P200,000. How much can Dencio and Eduardo collect from
Althea?
a. P200,000 c. P100,000
b. P25,000 d. P50,000
6. A, B, and C solidarily owe X and Y P30,000. X remitted the entire obligation in favor of
A. The effect is –
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
7. Atienza and Bandana are jointly and severally liable to Cantada for P50,000. Atienza is a
minor.
a. Cantada can collect P25,000 from Bandana.
b. Cantada can collect P25,000 from Atienza, that is the share of Bandana.
c. Cantada can collect P50,000 from Bandana.
d. Cantada can collect P50,000 because minority is not a defense.
8. X and Y are solidary debtors of A, B and C, joint creditors of the amount of P30,000.
How much can B collect from X?
a. B can collect P30,000 from X. B in turn has to give A and C, P10,000 each.
b. B can collect P10,000 from X.
c. B can collect P15,000 from X.
d. B can collect P30,000 from X. X in turn can recover from Y the amount of
P15,000.
9. X, Y and Z solidarily owe A, B, C and D, joint creditors P30,000. How much can A
collect from X?
a. P7,500 only
b. P20,000, A in turn has to give P5,000 each to B, C and D.
c. P10,000, A in turn has to give P20,000 each to B, C and D.
d. P5,000 only.
10. Carlo and Cleo are solidary debtors of Corrina, Luis, Edward and Abel, joint creditors in
the amount of P20,000. How much can Corrina collect from Carlo?
a. Corrina could collect P2,500 from Carlo.
b. Corrina could collect P10,000 from Carlo. Corrina is then obliged to give P2,500
each to Luis, Edward and Abel.
c. Corinna could collect P5,000 from Carlo.
d. Corinna could collect the whole P20,000 from Carlo but will in turn give P5,000
each to Luis, Edward and Abel.
JOSE MARIA COLLEGE
OBLIGATIONS AND CONTRACTS NOTES
Name: Score:
Block: Date:
Exercise 2. Problems. Explain or state briefly the rule or reason for your answer.
1. X, Y and Z bind themselves to pay W P30,000. Only X received the money as per
agreement between X, Y and Z. On the due date of the obligation, has W the right to
demand the full payment of P30,000 from Z alone?
4. A, B, and C are solidarily liable to D. For their failure to pay, D filed a complaint in court
but only against C. Has C the right to demand that A and B be also included as party
defendants?
References:
De Leon, H. S. (2014). The Law on Obligations and Contracts. Manila: REX Book Store.
Suarez, C. B and Suarez, A. Q. (2006). The Law on Obligations and Contracts. Davao City:
GIC Enterprises & Co., Inc.
Sta. Maria Jr., M. S(2003). Obligations and Contracts, Text and Cases. Manila: REX Book
Store.