A, B, and C borrowed money from X and failed to repay the debt on time. X sued A for the full amount. A argued two defenses: 1) B was a minor when the contract was signed, which was known to X, and 2) X granted a two-year extension to C to repay. A can use these defenses because they are personal to the other debtors. If successful, A would only owe his individual share plus B's share, but X must wait two years to collect C's share due to the extension.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0 ratings0% found this document useful (0 votes)
30 views
Joint and Solidary 2
A, B, and C borrowed money from X and failed to repay the debt on time. X sued A for the full amount. A argued two defenses: 1) B was a minor when the contract was signed, which was known to X, and 2) X granted a two-year extension to C to repay. A can use these defenses because they are personal to the other debtors. If successful, A would only owe his individual share plus B's share, but X must wait two years to collect C's share due to the extension.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1
Problem — A, B and C borrowed P12,000 from X on June 1, 1966.
They executed a promissory note
binding themselves jointly and severally to pay the obligation on June 1, 1968. For failure to pay, X brought an action against A for payment of the entire obligation plus interests. A interposed the following defenses: (1) that B was only a minor at the time of the celebration of the contract and that such fact was known to X; and (2) that X had granted an extension of two years to C within which to pay. (1) Can A avail himself of these defenses? (2) Granting that A can avail himself of these defenses, what would be the effect upon his liability, assuming that he can establish both defenses by competent evidence? Reasons. Answer — (a) A can avail himself of these defenses. Under Art. 1222 of the Civil Code, there are three kinds of defenses which are available to a solidary debtor if the creditor proceeds against him alone for payment of the entire obligation. They are: fi rst, defenses derived from the nature of the obligation; second, defenses personal to him or pertaining to his share; and third, defenses personal to the others, but only as regards that part of the debt for which the latter are responsible. It is evident that both defenses interposed by A fall within the purview of the third. (b) Since A can avail himself of both defenses, and since such defenses are not absolute but merely partial in character, undoubtedly, X can collect from A the following: (a) P4,000 corresponding to the share of A in the obligation; and (b) an amount equivalent to the extent that B had been benefitted by his share in the obligation, applying the rule enunciated in Art. 1399 regarding the effect if the defect of a contract consists in the incapacity of one of the contracting parties. As far as the share corresponding to C is concerned, X must wait for the expiration of the two years extension which he had given to C before he can collect such share from A. These are: first, when the obligation expressly stipulates the contrary, second, when the different prestations constituting the objects of the obligation are subject to different terms and conditions; and third, when the obligation is in part liquidated and in part unliquidated.
Law School Survival Guide: Outlines and Case Summaries for Torts, Civil Procedure, Property, Contracts & Sales, Evidence, Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Constitutional Criminal Procedure: Law School Survival Guides
Law School Survival Guide (Volume I of II) - Outlines and Case Summaries for Torts, Civil Procedure, Property, Contracts & Sales: Law School Survival Guides