Continuation - Solidary Obligation...

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)

Q. WHAT IS PAYMENT?

A. It consists in the delivery of the thing or the rendition of the service

which is the object of the obligation. (Art. 1232)

Q. WHAT ARE THE EFFECTS OF FULL PAYMENT BY A SOLIDARY DEBTOR?

1. Extinguishes the obligation (Art. 1217)

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.

1
Q. WHAT IS THE EFFECT OF PARTIAL PAYMENT BY A SOLIDARY DEBTOR?

 Paying solidary debtor can be reimbursed only for such amount of

money which he had paid in excess of his share in the obligation.

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.

Q. 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?

1.) When the obligation has already prescribed;

Example: A and B are solidary debtors of X for P20,000. Ten years have lapsed
from due date, still X did not demand nor collect the debt. But on the 11 th year,
debtor B paid the total sum when creditor X reminded him of the unpaid debt.

Q. Can B legally demand refund from A of his P10,000 share of the debt?
A. No, under Art. 1218.

Q. Can B now recover from X what he paid after prescription?

A. No, for this will be deemed as fulfilment of a natural obligation under Art. 1424 –

“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.

2
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:

 GEN. 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.

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.

Q. 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?

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.

3
Q. 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.

Illustrate: A is the creditor of solidary debtors W, X, Y, and Z for P6,000.

Obligation is solidary.

 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.

 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

4
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.

Q. What are the RULES to be applied in the following cases -

1.) If there is NO fault by solidary debtors – the obligation is

extinguished; no debtor is liable.

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)

ILLUSTRATE: A, B, C, are solidary debtors, obliged to deliver to X, 1000 sacks of

upland organic rice from the A-1 BIO-Farm in Davao Oriental, and stored in the
warehouse of solidary co-debtor C. But C also placed in his warehouse gasoline
and fertilizer supplies for his farm. Due to negligence of C, the entire warehouse
exploded and burned down and debtors failed to deliver on time the rice to X

1. What are the remedies of creditor X in this case?

2. 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?

3. 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?

Answer :
1. The creditor X can demand for payment of the rice lost plus damages from
any of the debtors A, or B, or C.

2. 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.

3. 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

5
 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.

3.) If the loss or impossibility of performance is due to a fortuitous

event, solidary debtors are NOT LIABLE.

Exception: If loss or impossibility of performance is due to a

fortuitous event, BUT AFTER any, or all of them is in delay. In
this case, all will be liable to the creditor.

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.

WHERE THERE IS NO LOSS OR IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE, BUT

THERE IS DELAY, FRAUD, FAULT OF NEGLIGENCE or some OTHER
BREACH OF THE OBLIGATION, WHAT ARE THE RULES?

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.

Illustrate:
A, B, C, are solidary debtors, obliged to deliver 1000 sacks of rice (generic) to
X. Upon arrival of period, X demanded from C delivery but he failed to
perform or deliver. Thus, there is now delay. The creditor X sued A who as
solidary debtor paid the price of the 1000 sacks of rice, plus damages for the
delay incurred.

Q. How should A recover from his solidary co-debtors?

A. Here, A can recover from c0-debtors B and C their respective shares in the
price of rice paid to X. But the full amount that A paid for the Damages can
be collected against C only who caused or incurred in delay.

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

6
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.
 

Q. WHAT ARE THE DEFENSES OF A SOLIDARY DEBTOR SUED BY A

CREDITOR?

A. There may be different kinds of defenses:

1.) REAL DEFENSE or Defenses derived from NATURE OF OBLIGATION –

this is connected with the obligation. It is a total defense and can
benefit all the debtors.

Examples of Defenses derived from nature of obligation (complete defense):

a. Payment,
b. Prescription,
c. Remission,
d. Statute of frauds,
e. Res judicata,
f. Non-existence of obligation due to illegal cause or consideration or object,
g. Absolute Simulation,
h. Presence of Vices of Consent due to minority, insanity, mistake, fraud or violence,
i. Other similar defenses which invalidates the original contract.

2.) Defenses PERSONAL TO DEFENDANT- DEBTOR – may be total or

partial defenses.

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.

3.) Defenses PERSONAL TO THE OTHER SOLIDARY DEBTORS.

o The debtor can avail himself of these defenses only with regard to
the part of the debt which his co-debtors are responsible for.
o These defenses are partial.

7
 o The debtor sued can invoke all three kinds of defenses. The
difference is whether such defense would result in total or partial
exculpation.

NOTE:
a.) Study EXAMPLES in Annotated books of Paras, or Tolentino and Pineda for better
understanding.
b.) Read the cited cases in your Paras, Tolentinto or Pineda books.