Father or mother by minor children who live by their

company

Obligations
Chapter 1. General Provisions

Guardians incapacitated persons under their custody

Definition

Owners and managers employees

Art. 1156. An obligation is a juridical necessity to

give, to do or not to do.

Employers employees and household helpers acting

within the scope of assigned tasks

Elements

State special agent

1.
2.
3.
4.

Teachers or heads of arts and trades pupils students

or apprentice, as long as they remain in their custody

Active subject (obligor)

Passive subject (obligee)
Prestation (to give, to do, not to do)
Vinculum juris

*Only defense for non-liability is Diligence of a good

father of a family

Sources of Obligations (Art. 1157):

A. Law
B. Contracts
C. Quasi-contracts
1. Negotiorum gestio
2. Solutio indebiti
3. Other quasi-contracts
strangers)

Requisites of liability
1
2
3

(support

by

Fault or Negligence
Damage suffered
Direct relation of cause and effect
between the act and the damage

Cases:
Mendoza v. Sps. Gomez

D. Delicts
Cases:

PSBA v. CA

Casupanan v. Laroya

Amadora v. CA

Mendoza v. Arrieta

Chapter 2. Nature and Effect

San Ildefonso Lines, Inc. v. Court of Appeals

Kinds of Prestation

Heirs of Simon v. Chan

A. To give (real)
1. Specific/determinate
a. Obligations of the obligor

Rodriguez v. People
Daluraya v. Oliva

Art. 1244. The debtor of a thing cannot compel the

creditor to receive a different one, although the
latter may be of the same value as, or more
valuable than that which is due.

Lumantas v. Calapiz
Asilo v. Bombasi
People v. Amistoso

E. Quasi-delicts
Vicarious
2180):

liability/imputed

(Parents GOES-TH)

negligence

(Art.

Art. 1163. Every person oblige to give something is

also obliged to take care of it with the proper
diligence of a good father of a family, unless the law
or the stipulation of the parties requires another
standard of care.
Art. 1164. The creditor has a right to the fruits of
the thing from the time the obligation to deliver it
1

arises. However, he shall acquire no real right over

it until the same has been delivered to him.

a. Law
b. When time is a controlling motive
c. When demand would be useless

Art. 1166. The obligation to give a determinate

thing includes that of delivering all its accessions
and accessories, even though they may not have
been mentioned.

B. Mora accipiendi (creditor)

C. Compensatio
morae
obligations)

Art. 1169 (3). In reciprocal obligations,

neither party incurs in delay if the other
does not comply or is not ready to comply in
a proper manner with what is incumbent
upon him. From the moment one of the
parties fulfills his obligation, delay by the
other begins.

b. Rights of the obligee

Art. 1165. When what is to be delivered is a
determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the
right granted him by Art. 1170 (Modes of Breach),
may compel the debtor to make the delivery.
2. Generic/indeterminate
Art. 1246. When the obligation consists in the
delivery of an indeterminate or generic thing, whose
quality and circumstances have not been stated,
the creditor cannot demand a thing of a superior
quality. Neither can the debtor deliver a thing of
inferior quality. The purpose of the obligation shall
be taken into consideration.
B. Obligation to do (personal)
C. Obligations not to do (personal)
Art. 1244 (2). In obligations to do or not to do, an
act or forbearance cannot be substituted by another
act or forbearance against the obligees will.

Breach of Obligation
Breach failure without reason to comply with
terms of contract.

(reciprocal

Cases:
SSS v. Moonwalk
Requisites of default:
1. Obligation be demandable and already
liquidated
2. Debtor delays performance
3. Creditor requires the performance judicially or
extrajudially.
Santos Ventura Hocorma Foundation v. Santos
Compromise agreement as a consensual contract
became binding between the parties upon its execution
and not upon its court approval. From the time a
compromise agreement is validly entered into, it
becomes the source of the rights and obligations of the
parties thereto. The purpose of compromise is precisely
to replace and terminate controverted claims.
Pantaleon v. American Express International, Inc.

Case:
Spouses Guanio v. Makati Shangri-la

Modes of Breach
1. Delay (Mora)
A. Mora Solvendi (debtor)

Art. 1169. Those obliged to deliver or to do

somethings incur in delay from the time the obligee
judicially or extrajudicially demands from them the
fulfillment of their obligation.
Exceptions:

Generally, the relationship between a credit card

provider and its card holders is that of creditor-debtor,
with the card company as creditor extending loans and
credit to the card holder, who as debtor is obliged to
repay the creditor, a relationship which takes exception
to the general rule that as between a band and its
depositors, the bank is deemed as the debtor while
depositor is considered as creditor.
Solar Harvest, Inc. v. Davao Corrugated Carton
Corp.
In reciprocal obligations, if the period for the fulfillment of
the obligation is fixed, demand upon the obligee is still
necessary before the obligor can be considered in

default and before a cause of action for rescission will

accrue.

2. Fraud (Dolo)
Art. 1171. Responsibility arising from fraud is
demandable in all obligations. Any waiver of future
fraud is void.
Two Types of Fraud
a. Dolo
Causante

deceptions
or
misrepresentations of a serious character
employed by one party and without which the
other party would not have entered into the
contract.
- Essential cause of the consent
- Enough to render a contract voidable

fraudulent purpose. No such thing has been alleged or

proven in this case.
Arts. 1101-1104 refer to fault and negligence that are
incidental to the fulfillment or nonfulfillment of a
contractual obligations.
Art. 1902 refers to fault and negligence is the culpa
aquilliana, which gives rise to an obligation
independently of any contract.
The fact that the corporation, acting thru the D as its
manager, was guilty of negligence in the fulfillment of the
contract did not make the D principally or even
subsidiarily liable for such negligence. Since it was the
corporations contract, its non-fulfillment, whether due to
negligence or fault or to any other cause, made the
corporation and not its agent liable.
RCPI v. Verchez

b. Dolo Incidente not serious in character and

without which the other party would still have
entered into the contract.
-Refers only to some particular or accident of the
obligation
- Damages

3. Negligence (Culpa)
Art. 1173 (1). The fault or negligence of the obligor
consists in the omission of that diligence which is
required by the nature of the obligation and
corresponds with the circumstances of the persons,
of the time and of the place.
When there is bad faith:
Art. 2201 (2). In case of fraud, bad faith, malice or
wanton attitude, the obligor shall be responsible for
alldamages which may be reasonably attributed to
the non-performance of the obligation.
Cases:
Vasquez v. De Borja
The mere fact that the personality of a corporation is
owing to a legal fiction and that it necessarily has to act
thru its agents, does not make the latter personally liable
on a contract duly entered into, or for an act lawfully
performed, by them for and in its behalf. Such legal
fiction may only be disregarded only when an attempt is
made to use it as a cloak to hide an unlawful or

In culpa contractual, the mere proof of the existence of

the contract and the failure of its compliance justify,
prima facie, a corresponding right of relief.

Art. 1172. Responsibility arising from negligence in

the performance of duty is also demandable, but
such liability may be regulated by courts, according
to the circumstances.

Standard of care required

Art. 1173 (2). If the law or contract does not state
the diligence which is to be observed in the
performance, that which is expected of a good
father of a family shall be required.
Exception:

Law or contract states diligence to be

observed

Cases:
Francisco v. CBCI
One who is physically disabled is required to use the
same degree of care that a reasonable careful person
who has the same physical disability would use.
However, Francisco, despite being blind, had been
managing and operating the Caltex station for 15 years
and this was not hindrance for him to transact business
until his time. The court ruled that Francisco failed to
exercise the standard of conduct expected of a

reasonable person who is blind. First, did not do any

other background check on the identity and authority of
the seller. Second, he already expressed his misgivings
about the diesel fuel, fearing that they might be stolen
property, yet he did not verify. Third, he relied on the
receipts issued by the seller which were only typewritten.
Fourth, the delivery to him does not show that CBCI
authorized Basca to sell the diesel fuel.
Loadmasters v. Glodel
Loadmasters is a common carrier because it is engaged
in the business of transporting goods through its trucking
services. Glodel is also a common carrier. In its
memorandum, it states that it is engaged in the business
of customs brokering. Being both common carriers, they
are mandated to observe extraordinary diligence in the
vigilance over the goods transported by them.
Under art. 2193, the responsibility of two or more
persons who are liable for a quasi-delict is solidary.
The Court clarifies that there exists no principal-agent
relationship between Glodel and Loadmasters. The
elements of a contract of agency are: 1) consent 2)
object 3) agent acts as representative 4) agent acts
within the scope of his authority. There can be no
contract of agency between the parties. It is a settled
rule that the basis for agency is representation.
Loadmasters never represented Glodel. Neither was it
ever authorized to make such representation.
Where there are several causes for the resulting of
damage, a party is not relieved from liability, even
partially. Either of them is liable for the whole injury.
Crisostomo v. CA
R (Travel agency) is not an entity engaged in the
business of transporting passengers or goods and is
therefore, neither, a private nor a common carrier. Its
covenant to its customers is simply to make travel
arrangements in their behalf. Being a travel agency, it is
not bound by the law to observe extraordinary diligence
in the performance of its obligation.
Sarmiento v. Sps. Cabrido
It is beyond doubt that Santos acted negligently in
dismounting the diamond from its original setting. It
appears to be the practice of the trade to use a miniature
wire saw in dismounting precious gems. However,
Santos employed a pair of pliers in clipping the original
setting, resulting in breakage of the diamond. The

jewelry shop failed to perform its obligation with the

ordinary diligence required by the circumstances.
MMTC v. CA
Although, MMTC submitted brochures and programs of
seminars for prospective employees on vehicle
maintenance, traffic regulations, and driving skills and
claimed that applicants are given tests to determine
driving skills, concentration, reflexes, and vision, there is
no record that Musa attended such training programs
and passed the said examinations before he was
employed. No proof was presented that Musa did not
have any record of traffic violations. Nor were records of
daily inspections, allegedly conducted by supervisors,
ever presented.
The failure of the defendant company to produce in court
any record or other documentary proof tending to
establish that it had exercised all the diligence of a good
father of a family in the selection and supervision of its
drivers and buses, notwithstanding the calls therefor by
both the trial court and the opposing counsel, argues
strongly against its pretensions.
Sps. Teodoro v. Perena
Private transports for schools are common carriers. The
Pereas, as the operators of a school bus service were:
(a) engaged in transporting passengers generally as a
business, not just as a casual occupation; (b)
undertaking to carry passengers over established roads
by the method by which the business was conducted;
and (c) transporting students for a fee. Despite catering
to a limited clientle, the Pereas operated as a
common carrier because they held themselves out as a
ready transportation indiscriminately to the students of a
particular school living within or near where they
operated the service and for a fee.
Being a common carrier, what is required of the Pereas
is not mere diligence of a good father. What is
specifically required from them by law is extraordinary
diligence a fact which they failed to prove in court.
Verily, their obligation as common carriers did not cease
upon their exercise of diligently choosing Alfaro as their
employee.
Reyes v. Puyat-Reyes

4. Contravention of Tenor
Case:
4

Chaves v. Gonzales

Breach Due to Fortuitous Event (Art. 1174)

No person shall be responsible for those

events which, could not be foreseen, or
which, though foreseen, were inevitable.

Requisites:
1) Independent of human will
2) Could not be foreseen, though foreseen,
inevitable
3) Impossible for the debtor to comply with the
obligation
4) Free from participation of the creditor

It extinguishes the obligation

Exceptions:
a. When specified by law
b. Stipulated
c. When the nature of the obligation requires the
assumption of risk

Effect of Concurrent Fault

Cases:
Juan Nakpil & Sons v. CA
The petitioner made substantial deviations from the
plans and specifications and failed to observe requisite
workmanship standards in the construction of the
building while their architect drew plans that contain
defects and other inadequacies. Both the contractor and
the architect cannot escape liability for damages when
the building collapsed due to an earthquake. Other
buildings in the area withstood the tremor. The lower
court also found that the spirals in one of the columns in
the ground floor have been cut. One who creates a
dangerous condition cannot escape liability even if an
act of God may have intervened as in this case. As such,
the liability of the contractor (herein petitioner) and the
architect for the collapse of the building is solidary.

Napocor v. CA
The obligor cannot escape liability, if upon the happening
of a fortuitous event or an act of God, a corresponding

fraud, negligence, delay or violation or contravention in

any manner of the tenor of the obligation as provided in
Article 1170 of the Civil Code which results in loss or
damage. Even if there was no contractual relation
between themselves and private respondents, they are
still liable under the law on quasi-delict. Article 2176 of
the Civil Code explicitly provides "whoever by act or
omission causes damage to another there being fault or
negligence is obliged to pay for the damage done." Act
of God or force majeure, by definition, is extraordinary
events not foreseeable or avoidable, events that could
not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, are
inevitable. It is therefore not enough that the event
should not have been foreseen or anticipated, as is
commonly believed, but it must be one impossible to
foresee or to avoid. The principle embodied in the act of
God doctrine strictly requires that the act must be
occasioned solely by the violence of nature. Human
intervention is to be excluded from creating or entering
into the cause of the mischief. When the effect is found
to be in part the result of the participation of man,
whether due to his active intervention or neglect or
failure to act, the whole occurrence is then humanized
and removed from the rules applicable to the acts of
God. In the case at bar, although the typhoon "Kading"
was an act of God, petitioners cannot escape liability
because their negligence was the proximate cause of
the loss and damage.
Republic v. Luzon Stevedoring Corp.
It is, therefore, not enough that the event should not
have been foreseen or anticipated, as is commonly
believed, but it must be one impossible to foresee or to
avoid. The mere difficulty to foresee the happening is not
impossibility to foresee the same. Luzon Stevedoring
knew the perils posed by the swollen stream and its swift
current, and voluntarily entered into a situation involving
obvious danger; it therefore assured the risk, and cannot
shed responsibility merely because the precautions it
adopted turned out to be insufficient. It is thus liable for
damages.
Philcomsat v. Globe
The non-ratification by the Senate of the Treaty of
Friendship, Cooperation and Security, and its
Supplementary Agreements, and the termination by the
Philippine Government of the RP-US Military Bases
Agreement effective 31 December 1991 as stated in the
Philippine Governments Note Verbale to the US
Government, are acts, directions, or requests of the

Government of the Philippines which constitute force

majeure.
Yobido v. CA
The explosion of the new tire is not a fortuitous event.
There are human factors involved in the situation. The
fact that the tire was new did not imply that it was
entirely free from manufacturing defects or that it was
properly mounted on the vehicle. Neither may the fact
that the tire bought and used is of a brand name noted
for quality, resulting in the conclusion that it could not
explode within five days use. It is settled that an
accident caused either by defects in the automobile or
through the negligence of its driver is not a caso fortuito.
Moreover, a common carrier may not be absolved from
liability in case of force majeure. A common carrier must
still prove that it was not negligent in causing the death
or injury resulting from the accident. Thus, having failed
to overthrow the presumption of negligence with clear
and convincing evidence, petitioners are hereby held
liable for damages.
BMMC v. CA
The closure of the railroad track is not force majeure.
BMMC should have anticipated it and provided for the
eventuality. BMMC took the risk that the Hacienda
Helvetia will not renew their contract.
Austria v. CA
Robbery is fortuitous event. (1961 pa to)

Remedies for Breach

A.
Specific Performance (Determinate) creditor may
compel the debtor to make the delivery
Substitute Performance (Indeterminate and To Do)
creditor may ask that the obligation be complied with at
the expense of the debtor
Undoing (Not To Do) undone at the expense of
debtor

Power to rescind is implied in reciprocal

ones
Injured party may choose between 1)
Fulfillment and 2) Rescission (both with
damages).

*May seek rescission even after had chosen

fulfillment if the latter becomes impossible
Art. 1192. In case both parties have committed a
breach in the obligation, the liability of the first
infractor shall be equitably tempered by the courts.
If cannot be determined which of the parties first
violated the contract, the same shall be deemed
extinguished, and each shall bear his own
damages.
C. Damages
D. Subsidiary Remedies
1. Accion Subrogatoria

Art. 1177. The creditors, after having pursued the

property in possession of the debtor to satisfy their
claims, may exercise all the rights and bring all the
actions of the latter for the same purpose.
Exceptions:

Rights which are purely personal

Inherent rights

2. Accion Pauliana (contracts entered in fraud of

creditors)
Requisites:
a. Credit prior to the alienation
b. Debtor has made a subsequent contract
conveying a patrimonial benefit to third person
c. Creditor has no other legal remedy to satisfy his
claim
d. Act being impugned is fraudulent
e. Third person who received the property, if by
onerous title, is accomplice in the fraud
3. Accion Directa (Sublessee, vendee)

B. Rescission

Cases:
Khe Hong Cheng v. CA

Siguan v. Lim

Usurious Transactions

Shall be governed by special laws

12% - loan or forbearance of money, final

judgment
6% - non forbearance, damages

6% - July 1, 2013 (BSP Circular No. 799)

Cases:
Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. CA
Nacar Gallery Frames and/or Felipe Bordey, Jr.
Sps. Andal v. PNB
Advocates for Truth in Lending Act, et al. v. BSMB
Secretary v. Sps. Tecson

Presumptions of Payment
Art. 1176. The receipt of the principal by the
creditor, without reservation with respect to the
interest, shall give rise to the presumption that said
interest has been paid.
The receipt of a later installment of a debt without
reservation as to prior installments, shall likewise
raise the presumption that such installment have
been paid.

Transmissibility of Rights
Art. 1178. Subject to the laws, all rights acquired in
virtue of an obligation are transmissible, if there is
has been no stipulation to the contrary.

Chapter 3. Kinds of Obligations

A. Pure Obligations (Art. 1179 [1])
Does not depend upon a future or uncertain
event, or upon a past event unknown to the
parties, is demandable at once.
B. Conditional Obligations (Arts. 1180,
1181)

When the debtor binds himself to pay when

his means permits him to do so. (Subject to
Art. 1197)
Depend upon the happening of the event
which constitutes the condition

Kinds of Conditions
a. Suspensive (Condition precedent) if
does not happen, no obligation will arise
Cases:
Gaite v. Fonacier
Gonzales v. Heirs of Thomas and Paula Cruz
There can be no rescission of an obligation not yet
existent, because suspensive condition had not yet
happened.
Coronel v. CA
CIR v. Petron Corporation

b. Resolutory (Condition Subsequent) if

does not happen, obligation continues
Cases:
Central Philippines University v. CA
Quijada v. CA
When a person donates a land to another on the
condition that the latter would build upon the land a
school, the condition is resolutory.

c. Potestative, Casual, Mixed

i.
Obligation is void if fulfillment of the
condition is dependent on the sole will of
the debtor (Potestative suspensive
condition)
1. Applies only if potestative suspensive
condition is imposed on the birth
(perfection) of the obligation
Exception:

Pre-existing obligation
Potestative resolutory condition

Cases:
7

Lao Lim v. CA
Relied on the stipulation for as long as the debtor needs
and can pay for the premise. (Invalid: Potestative
suspensive condition)

a. If suspensive condition shall retroact to

the day of the constitution of the obligation.

MD Taylor v. Uy Teng Piao

Reciprocal Prestations - the fruits and interests

during the pendency of the condition shall be
deemed to have been mutually compensated.

If the machinery wont be delivered, contract will be

cancelled. (Valid: creditor can validly exercise their
option)

Unilateral debtor shall appropriate the fruits

and interests received, unless otherwise
provided.

Rustan Pulp & Paper Mills, Inc. v. IAC

To do and not to do courts shall determine

Romero v. CA

b. If resolutory condition parties shall

return to each other what they have
received.

d. Impossible and Illegal

Contrary to good customs or public policy
and those prohibited by law
If obligation is divisible, the part which is not
affected by the impossible or unlawful
condition shall be valid.

Remedy of Creditor Before the Fulfillment

of Condition (Art. 1188)

e. Positive and Negative

Art. 1184. The condition that some event happen at
a determinate time shall extinguish the obligation
as soon as the time expires or if it has become
indubitable that the event will not take place.
(Positive)
Art. 1185. The condition that some event will not
happen at a determinate time shall render the
obligation effective from the moment the time
indicated has elapsed, or if it has become evident
that the event cannot occur.
If not time has been fixed, the condition shall be
deemed fulfilled at such time as may have probably
been contemplated, bearing in mind the nature of
the obligation. (Negative)

Case:

action

for

the

Case:
PLDT v. Jeturian

Rules in Case of Loss, Deterioration or

Improvement Pending the Happening of the
Condition (Art. 1189)
Lost perishes, goes out of commerce, disappears

Without fault extinguished

With fault pay damages

Deteriorate

Constructive Fulfillment
Art. 1186. The condition shall be deemed fulfilled
when the obligor voluntarily prevents its fulfillment.

Bring the appropriate

preservation of his right

Without fault impairment is to be borne by the

creditor
With fault creditor may choose between
rescission and its fulfillment (w/ indemnity for
damages in both)

Improvement

By nature, time benefit of the creditor

Expense of the debtor usufructuary

PLDT v. Jeturian

Effect of Fulfillment of Conditions

Rescission
8

Power to rescind is implied in reciprocal

ones
Injured party may choose between 1)
Fulfillment and 2) Rescission (both with
damages). [Alternative remedies]

*May seek rescission even after had chosen

fulfillment if the latter becomes impossible
Art. 1192. In case both parties have committed a
breach in the obligation, the liability of the first
infractor shall be equitably tempered by the courts.
If cannot be determined which of the parties first
violated the contract, the same shall be deemed
extinguished, and each shall bear his own
damages.
Case:
Boysaw v. Interphil Promotions
Where one party did not perform the undertaking which
he was bound by the terms of the agreement to perform,
he is not entitled to insist upon the performance of the
contract by the other party, or recover damages by
reason of his own breach.

The court shall decree the rescission

claimed, unless there be just cause
authorizing the fixing of a period
Without prejudice to the rights of third
persons
Judicial action

Effect of Rescission:
a. Mutual Restitution
b. Termination of Contract
c. Upon third persons
Cases:

Angeles v. Calasanz
Iringan v. CA
Vlarde, et al. v. CA
Maglasang v. Northwestern

Obligation with Period

Kinds of Period/Term
a. Supensive (ex die) demandable only when
that day comes
b. Resolutory (in diem) terminate upon the
arrival of the day certain
c. Express or implied

Rules in case of Loss, Deterioration or

Improvement Before the Arrival of the
Period
Lost perishes, goes out of commerce, disappears

Without fault extinguished

With fault pay damages

Deteriorate

Without fault impairment is to be borne by the

creditor
With fault creditor may choose between
rescission and its fulfillment (w/ indemnity for
damages in both)

Improvement

By nature, time benefit of the creditor

Expense of the debtor usufructuary

Payment in Advance (Art. 1195)

May be recovered, with fruits and interests

Deiparine, Jr. v. CA
Construction is reciprocal obligation.
EDS Manufacturing
Heirs of Sofia Quirong v. DBP
UP v. De Los Angeles
May rescind if stipulated.

Benefit of a Period

Presumed to have been established for the

benefit of both parties, unless from the tenor
of the same or other circumstances it should
appear that the period has been established
in the favor of one or of the other
9

Loss of benefit of period by debtor:

(IGIVA)

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Insolvency
Guaranty
Impairment
Violation of any undertaking
Abscond

When Court May Fix a Period

1. No fix period + period was intended
2. Dependent on the sole will of the debtor
Cases:
Maria Lachica,etc v. Gregorio Araneta, Inc.
Central Philippines University v. CA

Alternative Obligations
Art. 1199. A person alternatively bound by different
prestations shall completely perform one of them.
The creditor cannot be compelled to receive part of
one and part of the other undertaking.
When Debtor has the Right of Choice
Art. 1200. The right of choice belongs to the debtor,
unless it has been expressly granted to the creditor.
The debtor shall have no right to choose those
prestations which are impossible, unlawful, or
which could not have been the object of the
obligation.
Art. 1201. The choice shall produce no effect
except from the time it has been communicated.
Art. 1202. The debtor shall lose the right of choice
when among the prestations whereby he is
alternatively bound, only one is practicable.
Art. 1203. If through the creditors acts the debtor
cannot make a choice according to the terms of the
obligation, the latter may rescind the contract with
damages.
Art. 1204. The creditor shall have a right to
indemnity for damages when, through the fault of
the debtor, all the things which are alternatively the

object of the obligation have been lost, or the

compliance of the obligation has become
impossible.
The indemnity shall be fixed taking as a basis the
value of the last thing which disappeared, or that of
the service which last became impossible.
Damages other than the value of the last thing or
service may also be awarded.
When the Creditor has the Right of Choice
Art. 1205. When the choice has been expressly
given to the creditor, the obligation shall cease to
be alternative from the day when the selection has
been communicated to the debtor.
Until then the responsibility of the debtor shall be
governed by the following rules:
(1) Lost through fortuitous events, he shall
perform the obligation by delivering that
which the creditor should choose, or that
which remains.
(2) Lost through the fault ot the debtor, creditor
may claim any of those subsisting, with right
to damages.
(3) If all the things are lost through the fault of
the debtor, the choice by the creditor shall
fall upon the price of any one of them, with
indemnity for damages.
Same rules shall be applied to obligations to do or
not to do.

Facultative Obligations (Art. 1206)

One prestation agreed upon, but the debtor

may render another in substitution.
Loss or deterioration of the thing intended
shall not render him liable

Exception:
Once the substitution has been made.

Joint and Solidary

10

Joint Obligations there is concurrence of

several creditors, or of several debtors, or of
several creditors and debtors, by virtue of which
each creditors has a right to demand, and each
debtors is bound to render, compliance with his
proportionate part of the prestation.
Presumption of joint liability

Presumed to be divided into as many equal

shares as there are creditors and debtors

Exceptions:
1. When the obligation expressly states
2. When the law requires
3. Nature of the obligation

Extent of liability of the debtor

Does not imply that each one of the debtor

is bound to render entire compliance

Extent of right of creditor

Does not imply that each creditor has a right

to demand

Art. 1277. Confusion does not extinguish a joint

obligation except as regards the share
corresponding to the creditor or debtor in whom the
two characters concur.

Joint Indivisible Obligations

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.
Art. 1210. The indivisibility of an obligation does
not necessarily give rise to solidarity. Nor does
solidarity of itself imply indivisibility.

11

12