Clarification:

Prescriptive period for filling rescission after specific performance

became impossible- (case of adamos)the reckoning point should
be the finality of the judgement or when such judgement can no
longer be enforced whichever comes latter.
Art. 1193. Obligations for whose fulfillment a day certain
has been fixed, shall be demandable only when that day
comes.
Obligations with a resolutory period take effect at once, but
terminate upon arrival of the day certain.

A day certain is understood to be that which must

necessarily come, although it may not be known when.
If the uncertainty consists in whether the day will come or
not, the obligation is conditional, and it shall be regulated
by the rules of the preceding Section.
-

What is a period: it is the length of time wherein when it

prescribed it will result to the demandability or
extiguishement of an obligation.
What is an obligation with a period- when a certain day has
arrived the obligation become demandable or extinguish.
o In period we a know that it will happen or bound to
happen unlike in condition its happening is still in
question
What are the elements of valid obligation with a period?
o Future
o Certain
o Physically and legally possible
Example of impossible period: when an
obligation is to be demanded on 380 th day of
2013
It is possible to construct a building
however given such period it is
impossible
Difference of condition and period (page 127)
o Past and future event----future event only

Fulfilment is uncertain---- fulfilment is certain

Give
rise
and
extinguish
an
obligation--demandability and extinguishment
o Has retroactivity----- no retroactivity
o (will of the debtor)- Depends exclusively on the will of
the debtor----merely empower the court to fix the
period
Definite period: when the exact date or time is known
Indefinite: time or date time is not known but its sure to
comedeath
Kinds of period regards of effect
o Suspensive period (ex die)- the obligation becomes
effective only on the arrival of a certain period
o Resolutory period (in diem)- the obligation created
will extinguish upon the arrival of the certain period
or time
Kinds of period regards of source
o Legalfrom the law
o Voluntarycontract
o Judicialfrom court
o
o

Art. 1194. In case of loss, deterioration or improvement of

the thing before the arrival of the day certain, the rules in
Article 1189 shall be observed. (n)
-

The law says that pending the happening of the period the
things can be lost, deteriorate or improve, so what are the
rule shall be followed
o Lost without faultthe obligation is extinguish
o Lost with the fault of the debtorask for
indemnification for damages
o Deterioration by without faultborne by the creditor
o Deterioration with faultspecific performance with
damages or rescission with damages
o Improvement- rules of usufruct
o Improvement by timegive to the creditor
It is possible that trough a third person the creditor may be
held liable for lost or deterioration

that the period has been established in favor of one or of

the other. (1127)
Art. 1195. Anything paid or delivered before the arrival of
the period, the obligor being unaware of the period or
believing that the obligation has become due and
demandable, may be recovered, with the fruits and
interests. (1126a)
-

The rule is that when the thing is delivered prematurely

because either the debtor is not aware that period has not
yet arrived or believing that obligation became due, then he
may recover such payment or the principal obligation
What about the fruits and interest? Can it be recovered or
there are limitations? Should it be all fruits and interest?
o Fruits may be recovered only when the debtor is in
good faith for the mistaken payment and fruits.
o If the creditor received the principal due prematurely
from that debtor in good faith then he becomes liable
only of the fruits and interest that benefited him, for
fruits and interest that not benefited him then it is
the loss of the creditor
o But if the creditor received the principal due
prematurely knowing the fact that he will receive in
bad faith in which case he will be obliged to return all
fruits and interest that it earned.
o Note: rule in civil law when both of the parties
acted in good faith the one who cause the lost
shall suffer. So in this case the debtor will
suffer since it is from his mistakes that cause
every problem
o The burden of proof is given to the creditor
that he did not received the thing in bad faith

Art. 1196. Whenever in an obligation a period is

designated, it is presumed to have been established for the
benefit of both the creditor and the debtor, unless from the
tenor of the same or other circumstances it should appear

In general there is a presumption that the benefits of the

contract are made for both parties.- but it is rebuttable
o Exemption
When under the nature or circumstances that
such contract is established for the benefit of
one of the party.
Example: for the debtorif the loan is
gratuitous or without interest to paid in
the reasonable time
On or before the date
phrases that ay indicate
in favour of the debtor
Loan in period without
interestdepends
can
both because
Note: during the
pendency:
the
creditor
cannot
demand or be
compelled
to
receive
any
payment,
the
same with the
debtor.
o For the creditor--- expressly
stipulated that he can demand
anytime but debtor cannot
compel
the
creditorUPON
DEMAND OF THE CREDITOR

Art. 1197. If the obligation does not fix a period, but from
its nature and the circumstances it can be inferred that a
period was intended, the courts may fix the duration
thereof.

The courts shall also fix the duration of the period when it
depends upon the will of the debtor.

(2) When he does not furnish to the creditor the guaranties

or securities which he has promised;

In every case, the courts shall determine such period as

may under the circumstances have been probably
contemplated by the parties. Once fixed by the courts, the
period cannot be changed by them. (1128a)

(3) When by his own acts he has impaired said guaranties

or securities after their establishment, and when through a
fortuitous event they disappear, unless he immediately
gives new ones equally satisfactory;

Is there a period already contemplated in this article? None,

although no period has been provided in the contract but
from the nature and circumstances in can be inferred that
period was intended then the court may fix the period
o Example: when two parties enter into an
agreement to build a house but period is
stated.
You cannot demand the payment without having the period
fix first, because the period will make it demandable, only
after you fix the period that you can file a petition for
specific performance, it cannot be filed simultaneously.
o Unless the fixing of the date is only for formality or
delaying the case. Then the court may allow the
simultaneous act. The same with 1178 marilao case?
So if the parties obviously intended that a period should be
set in the obligation but they failed to, what is the basis?
The basis is that period which probably contemplated by the
parties, which means that the court cannot simply said that
unilaterally or bilaterally this particular obligation is in five
years or five months, there should be a basis to itcase of
araneta
o Whether the period fixed by the court is justified
o There should be a basis in fixing the date it must be
based on what was intended by both parties

Art. 1198. The debtor shall lose every right to make use of
the period:
(1) When after the obligation has been contracted, he
becomes insolvent, unless he gives a guaranty or security
for the debt;

(4) When the debtor violates any undertaking, in

consideration of which the creditor agreed to the period;
(5) When the debtor attempts to abscond. (1129a)
-

When after the obligation has been contracted, he becomes

insolvent, unless he gives a guaranty or security for the
debt;
o What if the insolvency existed from the time of the
constitution of the contract? 1198 will not be applied,
then the impairment would be borne by the creditor
and the debtor will not lose his right to use the
period
When he does not furnish to the creditor the guaranties or
securities which he has promised
o Is refusal necessary or relevant in this case? No,
because there could be an instance where in the
debtor failed to make guarantee for the reason of
fortuitous event so failure does always connote
refusal. As long as he cannot furnish such guarantee
then he is liable
When by his own acts he has impaired said guaranties or
securities after their establishment, and when through a
fortuitous event they disappear, unless he immediately
gives new ones equally satisfactory;
o Is there a distinction between the act of debtor and
fortuitous event in this case? If the cause of lost is
through fortuitous event it should be a total lost, but
if the cause is through the act of the debtor it does
not necessary follows that it must be a total lost, so
even without total lost he still liable

When the debtor violates any undertaking, in

consideration of which the creditor agreed to the
period;
o It refers to the condition imposed on the fixing of the
period
When the debtor attempts to abscond
o When the debtor attempts to hide from the creditor
in order to evade his obligation

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. (1131)
-

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. (1132)

o
o

The general rule it is always the debtor who has the right to
choose
o When the contract expressly stated that it is given to
the creditor
What are the limitations on the part of the debtor
o He must not choose something that is impossible
o unlawful

or which could not have been the object of the

obligation
subsequent to the constitution of the contract
it become impossible or illegal
when only one prestation becomes practicable.
They could not choose to fulfil part of one and part of
another, it must be a complete fulfilment of only one
prestation

Art. 1201. The choice shall produce no effect except from

the time it has been communicated. (1133)
-

What are the obligation according to obligation

o Simple only one prestation
o Compound- two or more prestation
Conjunctiveseveral prestation all of them
are demadable
Alternativeseveral
prestation
but
performance of one obligation will suffice to
extinguish the obligation
Falcultative- have one principal prestation but
allowed to substitute it with another

Art. 1200. The right of choice belongs to the debtor, unless

it has been expressly granted to the creditor.

The debtor should make a choice at the time the obligation

is to be effected. When the obligation that is due and
demandable. He can also make a choice before it becomes
due; the problem is what if the debtor does not make a
choice, what will be happen? it delays the performance of
the obligation
o The right of choice will not immediately given to the
creditor, first the creditor must first go the court and
file a petition for specific performance in alternative
upon the debtors choice, if he still refuse, then
creditor must execute the judgement at this time the
creditor can make a choice, because it means that
the debtor waived his right to use the benefit of a
period
When will the choice of the debtor take effect? From the
time the choice of the debtor has been communicated
There is no required form of communication either
expresses or impliedimplied once the creditor accepted
the choice without first being notified about the choice. Or
immediate performance of the obligation
without
communication (on the part of the debtor)
What is the effect of communication of the debtor with the
creditor? Then the alternative obligation shall be converted
into a simple obligation that is irrevocable, unless there is a
consent between the two parties

If one make a choice is the consent of the other party is

required? No, because if such thing happen it will negate the
intention of the law to give the debtor a right of choice
o Can the creditor refused the choice of the debtor?
Yes, only when it is unlawful impossible or which
could not have been a subject of prestation
How about there are several debtors how will the choice
become effective? Or if they could not make choice because
they want differet things?
o It will depends on the kind of the obligation whether
it is solidary or joint obligation (relationship)
o when it is joint the consent of all members is
necessary to make a choice, however in the solidary
then the debtor is only bound with his choice and the
others are bound with there personal choice
In solidary, when one debtor made a choice,
then he is bound with that choice then he
should comply with the obligation by
preforming the said prestation. But that is
without prejudice with other debtor who has
the right to make a choice. Then if this debtor
who made the initial choice and does not yet
perform the prestation then the other debtor
can still make a choice

In joint the practical way to solve the problem

is to convert the obligation into money.

Art. 1202. The debtor shall lose the right of choice when
among the prestations whereby he is alternatively bound,
only one is practicable. (1134)
-

The right of choice belongs to the debtor

This article refers to a situation where in during the
constitution of te contract several prestation are practicable
however subsequent to that on only remains to be
practicable or at the time of the constitution only one is
practicable
o What is the reason for impracticability
It became unlawful
Fortuitous event

It could be due to the fault of anyone or event

except the creditor, because if such
impracticability is caused by the debtor then
it is not 1202 but 1203 shall apply- if it is the
fault of the creditor the debtor may;
rescind the contract with damages
He may elect to perform one of the
prestations if several prestations
remain
practicable
either
with
damages or not, depends on the
circumstance if through that process
he lost something that is personal to
him.
he may elect perform the only one
remaining prestation
Does it apply when only one prestation
remains valid? No, as long as the
creditor rendered impracticability in at
least one prestation then he is liable
under 1203

Art. 1203. If through the creditor's acts the debtor cannot

make a choice according to the terms of the obligation, the
latter may rescind the contract with damages. (n)
-

Applicable as long as the creditor rendered

impracticability to at least one among the
prestations.
--kahit
isa
lang
ang
naging
impracticable applicable parin to.
if it is the fault of the creditor the debtor may;
rescind the contract with damages
He may elect to perform one of the
prestations if several prestations
remain
practicable
either
with
damages or not, depends on the
circumstance if through that process

he lost something that is personal to

him.
he may elect perform the only one
remaining prestation
the debtor can also ask for other
damages like moral damages or etc.

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. (1135a)
-

if by the fault of the debtor all choices have become

impossible, the creditor shall have the right to indmnify for
damages
the basis is the value of the last thing which disappeared or
the last service which became impossible
there could be other damages (actual damages) like moral
damages etc.
the ruke if al prestation become or rendered impossible to
comply, the first thing to do is to determined the cause of
impossiblity of that last prestation, if the cause of the
impossibility of the last prestation has became impossible is
due to fortuitous event the obligation is extinguish
regardless the cause of impossiblity or the other prestation.
But if the caue of impossiblity of that prestation has became
impossible due to the fault of the debtor then he becomes
liable base on 1204 regardless of the cause of the lost of the
previous prestation

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) If one of the things is lost through a fortuitous event, he
shall perform the obligation by delivering that which the
creditor should choose from among the remainder, or that
which remains if only one subsists;
(2) If the loss of one of the things occurs through the fault
of the debtor, the creditor may claim any of those
subsisting, or the price of that which, through the fault of
the former, has disappeared, with a 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, also with indemnity for damages.
The same rules shall be applied to obligations to do or not
to do in case one, some or all of the prestations should
become impossible. (1136a)
-

applicable when the creditor has the right of choice-o he must make a choice when the obligation became
due and demandable, or before the maturity of the
obligation
what if he did not make a choice, then the
debtor can not incur in delay in the
preformance of the obligation, this time the
debtor is not liable, because it is the fault of
the creditor
o it will become effective upom the choice has been
communicated to the debtor by the creditor
rules
o If one of the things is lost through a fortuitous
event, he shall perform the obligation by
delivering that which the creditor should
choose from among the remainder, or that

which remains if only one subsists--what if only

all presttaion has become impossible or lost? The the
creditor may choose the price of anyone of the
prestation with damages
If the loss of one of the things occurs through
the fault of the debtor, the creditor may claim
any of those subsisting, or the price of that
which, through the fault of the former, has
disappeared, with a right to damages-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, also with
indemnity for damages

Art. 1206. When only one prestation has been agreed upon,
but the obligor may render another in substitution, the
obligation is called facultative.
The loss or deterioration of the thing intended as a
substitute, through the negligence of the obligor, does not
render him liable. But once the substitution has been made,
the obligor is liable for the loss of the substitute on account
of his delay, negligence or fraud.
-

When is facultative obligation can be applied? When only

one prestation has been agreed upon, but the obligor may
render another in substitution
How it is different from alternative obligation? Page 154
o Alternative there are two or more prestation, in
falcultative there is only obe prestation
o In alternative the nullity of one prestition does not
invalidate the obligation---as long as there is one
pretation thet remains then the obligation is valid,
while in facultative when the principla obligation is
void, the debtor can not be compelled to deliver the
subsitute (before the substition has been made).
o Alternative the various prestation are impossible of
performance except one must be delivered to settle

the obligation. If all the prestation becmae

impossible then the obligation extinguish. Facultative
if there is impossibility to deliver the principal thing
or prestation, the obligation is extiguish
Falcultative The right of choice pertains to the debtor
alone, the creditor is never given this right,
alternative either debtor or creditos, but in case of
the creditor it must be exprexxly given,

o
Lost of the substitute
o The lost of the substitute before the substitution has
been choosen it will not render the debtor liable
If the lost is cause by the debtor or anyone
same rule will apply
o But if the substitute is lost after the substitution was
made and it is due to the fault of the debtor then he
is lible.--even if without fault of the debtor he can still
be held liable (default)---kailangan linawin

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. (1137a)
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. (1138a)
-

what are collective obligation? When two or more creditor or

debtor is in one obligation
o

joint obligation--- the entire obligation is to be paid or

performed proportionately by the debtors

the liability of the

obligors and the right of the oblige is

proportionately.
o solidary obligation--each of the debtors is liable for
the entire obligation and each of the creditors is
entitled to demand the satisfaction of the whole
obligation from any of all the debtors
there could be one debts regardless of the
number of the creditor or number of the
debtors
Plurality of parties in an obligation it should treat as joint
obligation (presumption)
o Except when the law or nature of the obligation or
expressly stated in the contract that it is solidarily
obligation
Express stipulation of the parties
Nasa book 163, ex. I promise to pay,
jointly and collectively, plus yung case,
individually, severally, jointly and
severally ect.

By law
in quasi-delict the liability of two or
more person is solidary
by nature
article 19 20 and 21,22-- those
violation arising from these provision is
by nature solidary
case IMC and NLRC
kinds of solidatity
o passive - which solidarity on the part of the debtor,
may mutual guarantee,
o active--if the solidarity is on the part of the
obligation, may mutual representation,
o mix solidarity- there two debtors and two creditors in
one the same obligation

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. (1139)

joint indivisible obligations is that on the part of the debtor,

its fulfillment requires the concurrence of all debtors,
although, each for his part
o the oject or the prestation is not susceptible of
division and if you try to divide the essense of the
object will be destroyed
o several parties are jointly bound by an object or
prestation which is indivisible.
The rule is:
o On the part of the debtor: it should be a collective
action in performing the obligation
If some of them will not perform then the
obligation could no longer be fulfilled, then
obligation will be converted to monetary
obligation and it will divided a among the
debtors for them to pay the creditor, then the
person who is in fault shall bear all the
damages plus the actual price of the thing
o On the part of the creditor:
There could only be an extinguishment of
obligation if the debtor able to deliver the
thing to the creditor jointly
There must be a collective act on the part of
the creditor in demanding the obligation, the
act of one is not considered as act of all.
The debtor can refuse to deliver the thing if
only one creditor made the demand unless he
is authorize by other creditor
In order to prevent default the debtor may
concert the obligation to monetary obligation
and give to the demanding creditor his
proportionate part in the obligation

Art. 1210. The indivisibility of an obligation does not

necessarily give rise to solidarity. Nor does solidarity of
itself imply indivisibility.
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. (1140)

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. (1141a)
Art. 1213. A solidary creditor cannot assign his rights
without the consent of the others. (n)
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. (1142a)
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. (1143)
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.
(1144a)
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.

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. (n)
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. (1146a)
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. (n)
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. (1147a)
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. (1148a)
SECTION 5. - Divisible and Indivisible Obligations

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)

Art. 1223. The divisibility or indivisibility of the things that

are the object of obligations in which there is only one
debtor and only one creditor does not alter or modify the

provisions of Chapter 2 of this Title. (1149)

Art. 1224. A joint indivisible obligation gives rise to
indemnity for damages from the time anyone of the debtors
does not comply with his undertaking. The debtors who may
have been ready to fulfill their promises shall not
contribute to the indemnity beyond the corresponding
portion of the price of the thing or of the value of the
service in which the obligation consists. (1150)
Art. 1225. For the purposes of the preceding articles,
obligations to give definite things and those which are not
susceptible of partial performance shall be deemed to be
indivisible.

When the obligation has for its object the execution of a

certain number of days of work, the accomplishment of
work by metrical units, or analogous things which by their
nature are susceptible of partial performance, it shall be
divisible.
However, even though the object or service may be
physically divisible, an obligation is indivisible if so
provided by law or intended by the parties.
In obligations not to do, divisibility or indivisibility shall be
determined by the character of the prestation in each
particular case. (1151a)

10