Fraud is every kind of deception, whether in the form of insidious machinations,

concealments or misrepresentations, for the purpose of LEADING ANOTHER

A. Manner of Breach: Fraud, Negligence, Delay, Any other Manner of Contravention PARTY into error and thus execute a particular act. Error of one party is produced by
the bad faith of the other contracting party, it presupposes an illicit act.
E. BREACH OF OBLIGATIONS

Art. 1170 Those who in the performance of their obligation s are guilty of fraud, negligence or delay, and
those who in any manner contravene the tenor there of, are liable for damages.

CU: In an obligation, one of the parties OR even a third party may be held
liable for damages if there is F, N or D?
Not necessarily. Because, even if there is no N, F, or D, those who in any
manner contravene the tenor of the obligation shall also be liable for
damages.
GR: non-performance or contravention of the tenor can be the basis of liability.
X: If both parties have faithfully complied with their respective obligations.

CU: A offered a ring to B. Misrepresenting that it is 24k Gold, but really it was just
gold-plated.
Is there fraud? YES.
What kind? Fraud in obtaining consent or dolo causante (1338)

KINDS OF FRAUD
1171

Fraud occurs in connection

CU: Are debtors the only one liable? No, the last says "those who in the
with the fulfillment of the
performance" bcs it is not only the DR who may be held liable for damages. CRs obligation
may also be held liable if they commit fraud or in delay.
BASIS for the liability of
damages? The
1. FRAUD
Art. 1171. Responsibility arising from fraud is demandable in all obligations. Any waiver of an action for future PERFORANCE of an
fraud is void.
obligation.
Art. 1338. There is fraud when, through insidious words or machinations of one of the contracting parties, the
other is induced to enter into a contract which, without them, he would not have agreed to.
Art. 1344. In order that fraud may make a contract voidable, it should be serious and should not have been
employed by both contracting parties.
Incidental fraud only obliges the person employing it to pay damages

1171 PROHIBITED RENUNCIATION: (always determine/ qualify; STATUS WILL

ALWAYS DEPENDS IF THE WAIVER IS EXECUTED BEFORE THE FRAUDULENT
ACT OR AFTER.)
GR: The law does not prohibit the renunciation of the action for damages on the
ground of fraud ALREADY committed.
EXC: Future fraud.
RATIO: To permit such advance renunciation would practically leave the obligation
without effect.
CONCEPT OF FRAUD

1338 and 1344

Fraud is prior or simultaneous to the
consent or the creation of the obligation.
2 classes:
1. Dolo causante/Causal Fraud-- that which
determines or is the essential cause of
the consent. -- gives rise to a ground for
annulment of contract. (Without such
fraud, he would not have entered into
such contract.)

EFFECT: VOIDABLE
CONTRACT
2. Dolo incidente/Incidental Fraud-- that
which does not have such a decisive
influence and by itself cannot cause the
giving of consent, but refers only to some
particular or accident of the obligation -gives rise to an action for damages under
1344.

EFFECT: Will make the person

liable for DAMAGES

It is the MALICE or bad faith

in the performance of an
existing obligation

Fraud (dolo) or DECEIT is used to procure a

contract

CU: In 1171, A, in the performance of prestation, but failed to perform it, am Action
for Specific Performance was filedas there was fraud committed. Defendants
defense is that there was WAIVER (a stipulation that no action shall be filed between
the parties.
Is the stipulation valid? It depends, if the Waiver was executed

BEFORE the fraudulent act: the stipulation VOID; not allowed by law.

AFTER: amounts to CONDONATION

Where a party to a contract is relieved from the effects of his fault or negligence
by third persons. VALID.
Example: Insurance contracts.

3.

Where one party to a contract renounces IN ADVANCE that right to enforce

liability arising from Fault or Negligence. Valid? Depends.
o If stipulations exempting from liability of gross negligence = VOID.
Gross negligence amounts to fraud.
o If simple negligence = VALID, so long as the F or N remains
merely a simple fault or negligence and is not converted into fault.

DEGREE OF DILIGENCE REQUIRED IS DETERMINED BY:

1 Law
2. NEGLIGENCE
4. Stipulations of the parties
Art. 1172. Responsibility arising from negligence in the performance of every kind of obligation is 5. In absence of the two, that observed by a good father of a family.
also demandable, but such liability may be regulated by the courts, according to the circumstances.
Good Father of a Family / bonos paterfamilias -- means a person of ordinary
(1103)
diligence.
Art. 1173. 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 CU: Is negligence synonymous to fault?
the time and of the place. When negligence shows bad faith, the provisions of Articles 1171 and No. Negligence is an omission of that due
2201, paragraph 2, shall apply.
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. (1104a)
Negligence is simply the absence of due care required by the obligation. IT is in each case a see
practically a question of fact, whether the property degree of care has been exercised, taking into
consideration what a reasonable and prudent man would have done under the circumstances.

diligence required,
whereas fault may actually be intentional in character.
Also, by the definition of Quasi-delict, it provides that it is fault OR negligence
CU: One word that covers BOTH fault and negligence? CULPA.
CULPA is not synonymous with negligence, as it is more encompassing than that. It
covers both.

Each case must be determined upon its particular facts and circumstances, and the degree of
WHEN WOULD AN ACT BE CONIDERED A NEGLIGENT ACT?
diligence required for the performance of an obligation must depend upon the circumstances of the
Based on Art 1173. Consider the nature of the obligation. After considering
particular obligation.

the
nature, other things which must be considered is the time, place and the person.

STIPULATIONS ON LIABILITY FOR NEGLIGENCE MAY BE TO:

1 Determine the degree of diligence to be required which may be more or less
than the standard fixed by law.
2. Impose a liability for fault or negligence, where the law does not impose it.

CANGCO vs. MRR: the act of alighting from the train was not a negligent act per se
bcs of the circumstances, person, time and place that was surrounding the event.

NATURE OF OBLIGATION: What is expected of common carriers is

UTMOST diligence.

PERSON: As discussed by the SC, he was at his prime, he would ride the
EXEMPTION FROM LIABILITY (always determine/ qualify, STATUS WILL
train everyday, and the train was about to stop when he was about to alight
ALWAYS DEPENDS IF THE WAIVER IS EXECUTED BEFORE THE FRAUDULENT
from the train. It is an important factor in determining negligence, bcs if he is
ACT OR AFTER.)

about to alight when the train was still running at 180 kph, and he alighted
therefrom, that would be considered a negligent act.
PLACE: He works in MRR, and rides the train everyday. He is very familiar
with the place.
TIME: The incident happened at night time, there was negligence on the
part of MRRS EE to put on and provide proper lighting. Clearly, had he
seen the sacks of watermelon, he would not have alighted agad agad.
OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES: There was another person who alighted first
before him, how come there was no injury sustained to that person, while
he, was in fact, injured? Also, this happened during the 1920s. Cangco was
maleconnection of gender? Apparel.

Considering said factors, such act of alighting from the moving train in the case
presented, is not negligence per se that would relieve MRR from liability. Such act
was not contributory negligence.
CU: Is sleeping at work constitute a negligent act? Again, qualify. It depends on the
NATURE of the obligation. Such that,

If the work consist on taking care of 1 month old kids, a bank, or driving. Of
course.

But if she is a secretary, or an attorney. No. Sleeping is not a negligent act.

CU: There are 2 kinds of Negligence:
NEGLIGENCE IN THE
PERFORMANCE
Culpa contractual

2 kinds of Negligence as to EXTENT:

Simple Negligent Act

NEGLIGENCE THAT CONSTITUTES

AN INDEPENDENT SOURCE
Quasi-delict
Culpa Aquilana
Culpa Criminal

Gross Negligent Act

Tantamount to fraud.

TELEFAST vs. CASTRO: Castro asked TELEFAST to send a Fax Message in the
US to tell her relatives that her mother had already died. TELEFAST was not able to
send the message, allegedly bcs of Atmospheric Pressure. At the time the relatives
received the message, the deceased was a already buried.
An action against TELEFAST was filed.

The latter was willing to return the money (ACTUAL DAMAGES) that was paid, but
since MORAL DAMAGES was awarded by the court, TELEFAST questioned the
validity of the latter award, alleging that award for moral damages can only be
awarded if there was bad faith or there was wanton disregard of the obligation of a
party in the contract.
SC: When they failed to send the message due to atmospheric pressure, their was
no bad faith. However, for failure to inform Castro the fact that they failed to send the
message, such act was of gross negligence. Gross negligence amounts to bad faith.
Therefore, there is a bad faith that can be the basis of liability for moral damages.
3. DELAY/DEFAULT/MORA
Art. 1169. Those obliged to deliver or to do something incur in delay from the time the obligee judicially or
extrajudicially demands from them the fulfillment of their obligation.
However, the demand by the creditor shall not be necessary in order that delay may exist:
(1) When the obligation or the law expressly so declare; or
(2) When from the nature and the circumstances of the obligation it appears that the designation
of the time when the thing is to be delivered or the service is to be rendered was a controlling
motive for the establishment of the contract; or
(3) When demand would be useless, as when the obligor has rendered it beyond his power to
perform.
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. (1100a)
Art. 1165. When what is to be delivered is a determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the right granted him
by Article 1170, may compel the debtor to make the delivery.
If the thing is indeterminate or generic, he may ask that the obligation be complied with at the expense of the
debtor.
If the obligor delays, or has promised to deliver the same thing to two or more persons who do not have the
same interest, he shall be responsible for any fortuitous event until he has effected the delivery. (1096)
Art. 1786. Every partner is a debtor of the partnership for whatever he may have promised to contribute
thereto.
He shall also be bound for warranty in case of eviction with regard to specific and determinate things which he
may have contributed to the partnership, in the same cases and in the same manner as the vendor is bound
with respect to the vendee. He shall also be liable for the fruits thereof from the time they should have been
delivered, without the need of any demand. (1681a)
Art. 1788. A partner who has undertaken to contribute a sum of money and fails to do so becomes a debtor
for the interest and damages from the time he should have complied with his obligation.

The same rule applies to any amount he may have taken from the partnership coffers, and his liability shall
begin from the time he converted the amount to his own use. (1682)
Art. 1896. The agent owes interest on the sums he has applied to his own use from the day on which he did
so, and on those which he still owes after the extinguishment of the agency. (1724a)
Art. 1942. The bailee is liable for the loss of the thing, even if it should be through a fortuitous event:
(1) If he devotes the thing to any purpose different from that for which it has been loaned;
(2) If he keeps it longer than the period stipulated, or after the accomplishment of the use for
which the commodatum has been constituted;
(3) If the thing loaned has been delivered with appraisal of its value, unless there is a stipulation
exemption the bailee from responsibility in case of a fortuitous event;
(4) If he lends or leases the thing to a third person, who is not a member of his household;
(5) If, being able to save either the thing borrowed or his own thing, he chose to save the latter.

CONCEPT & NATURE OF DELAY

DELAY is synonymous to default or mora, which means delay in the fulfillment of
obligations; it is non-fulfillment with respect to time.
There can be delay only in positive obligations (to do and to give), and none in
negative obligations (Obligations not to do and not to give).
CU: WHY? Bcs as long as one is not doing what he is not supposed to do,
he is actually fulfilling his obligation.
CU: When a person is in delay, does it mean that he did not perform? Not
necessarily. It is merely non-performance with respect to time.
CU: NO demand, NO delay? It is the just the general rule. In order for delay to set
in, the law requires demand.

KINDS OF MORA
Mora Solvendi

Mora Accipiendi

Compensatio Morae

Default on the part of the

DR which may wither be:

Ex Re: referring
to obligations to
give, or

Ex Persona: ref.
To obligations to
do.

Default on the part of the CR

Default of both
parties in reciprocal
obligations.

Effects:
1. When it has for its
object a determinate
thing, the delay places
the risks of the thing
on the DR
2. He becomes liable for
the delay.

Effects: *code does not expressly

regulate, but the provisions on
consignation are applicable
1. the responsibility of the DR is
reduced and limited to Fraud or
Gross Negligence.
2. The DR is exempted from the
risks of loss of the thing, which
automatically pass to the CR.
3. Expenses for the preservation
of the thing incurred by the DR
shall be chargeable to the CR.
4. Dr does not have to pay the
interest from the time of mora.
5. The DR may relieve himself of
the obligation by consignation
of the thing.

EXC: a person may still be held liable even if there is no demand, in the ff. instances:
1. By stipulation (such as in credit card terms and agreements)
2. By law, (such as in the law on agency and partnership; example: 1788--where it
MORA SOLVENDI.
provides that when a partner fails to make his contribution of the date agreed upon, Mora in the part of the DR is the delay, contrary to law, in the fulfillment of the
even without need of demand from the non-defaulting partners, he is by law in delay.) prestation.
3. When the demand would be useless, and was due to the fault of the DR. (such as Effects of mora arise only when the delay is due to causes imputable to the fault of
when the very expensive vase subj of agreement was broken into pieces or was lost
the DR.
before due date.)
Requisites, in order that the DR may be in default:
CU: In reciprocal obligations, 1 party may be in delay, despite no demand. When?
1169 par. 2 provides: if one performed, the other incurs delay.

1. That the obligation be demandable and already liquidated

1. That the DR delays performance
2. That the CR requires performance judicially or extrajudicially.

 Default generally begins from the moment the CR demands the performance of the The CR incurs in delay when the DR tenders payment or performance, but the CR
obligation, and may be in any form. Without such demand, the effects of default will refuses to accept it without just cause. it is essential however, that the prestation
not arise.
offered be precisely the one that is due as to content, time and place.
Demand is generally necessary, even if a period has been fixed in the obligation. Requisites, in order that the CR may be in default:
1. An offer of performance by the DR who has the required capacity.
There is no delay if the obligation is not yet due.
6. The offer must be to comply with the prestation as it should be performed
7. The CR REFUSES the performance WITHOUT JUST CAUSE.
WHEN DEFAULT BEGINS: where there has been an extra judicial demand before
action for performance was filed, the effects of default arise from the date of such
COMPENSATIO MORAE
extrajudicial demand.
The parties in a bilateral contract can regulate the order in which they shall comply
WHEN DEMAND NOT REQUIRED To constitute the DR in default:
with their reciprocal prestations. If the parties have not determined the order of
1. where there is an express stipulation to that effect
fulfillment of their obligations, this fulfillment must be reciprocal and simultaneous.
3. Where the law so provides
Hence, he party cannot demand performance by the other without offering to
4. When the period is the controlling motive or the principal inducement for the
comply with his own prestation.
creation of the obligation*
GR: fulfillment by the parties should be simultaneous. Where both are in default,
5. Where demand would be useless.**
their respective liability shall offset equitably.
Delinquency commences when one of the contracting parties fu,fills his obligation
*when from the nature and circumstances of the obligation, it appears that the period and becomes invested with power to determine the contract bcs of failure on the
was the determining motive for the creation of the obligation. Example: where goods
part of the other to carry out the agreement
to be delivered on a specified date bcs they were to be loaded on a boat leaving on Benefits arising from default may cease upon: 1. Renunciation by the CR and 2.
such date; or where a bldg was to be competed on certain date bcs it was to be
Prescription.
opened as a school on a fixed date. In such case, the time foxed for payment of the
price was essential in the transaction.
CU: for delay to set in, the law requires demand,and for demand to be a valid one,
the obligation must be due. Demand here is not necessary for the obligation be due,
**Where performance has become impossible,demand will be useless and will not be rather, in order to hold the other party liable bcs he is already in delay.
necessary to constitute in delay. Example: when the impossibility is caused by some Demand here need not be in writing, need not be in any particular form, a private
act or fault of the DR--such as when he is hiding or has already disposed of the thing document will suffice.
to be delivered; and when the impossibility is caused by fortuitous event.
1165 REMEDIES OF CR
***1788--where it provides that when a partner fails to make his contribution of the
When a DR fails to comply with his obligation, the CR may avail himself of the ff
date agreed upon, even without need of demand from the non-defaulting partners, he remedies:
is by law in delay
Action for Specific Performance
Action to Rescind
Action for Damages
To obtain compliance of the
MORA ACCIPIENDI
Mora of the CR is the delay in the performance based on the omission by the CR of prestation
the necessary cooperation, especially acceptance on his part.

to rescind or resolve
the obligation

exclusively, or in addition to
either of the first actions.

Whether the object of the

obligation is determinate or generic
the CR has the right to ask that the
same be performed.

*in answering cases that has given dates, always CHECK the date,
Malay mo action has prescribed already, or Malay mo premature
demand.

A cannot be held liable bcs even if there was a demand made, and the loss
happened after the demand was made, the lessee was NOT YET in delay. At the
time of demand, the obligation was not yet due. Reason: February only has 28
days. From Feb 15 to March 15, that is only 28 days. Based on their agreement,
the deliver must be made "after a month", and a month under the law is 30 days. B
then should have made the demand only on March 17. (Assuming 1985 is not a
AGCAOILI vs. GSIS Subject of the case is the ousing unit applied by Agcaoili with
leap year, otherwise, March 16 should be the correct date for demand, as there are
GSIS. GSIS delivered, however, it was merely a structure, there were even no walls.
29 days in Feb of leap year)
Just roof. The buyer, Agacoili then suspended payments for the monthly amortization. See 1174 (if reason for non-compliance is due to a fortuitous event) and 1165
GSIS then cancelled the agreement, on the ground of default in payment.
(liabilityif there is delay)
In case of GENERIC things:
The delivery of any thing belonging
to the species stipulated will be
sufficient

CU: Was GSIS correct in cancelling the contract? No, bcs in this case, both are in
delay. GSIS was delayed in delivering a habitable house, while Agacoili was delayed
in payments.
What is the effect when both parties are in delay? Under the law, when both
parties one are in delay, no one is considered to be in delay; hence, no one can be
held liable for damages, or no one can have a cause of action by and between the
the parties.

GR: 1174 No person shall be responsible for those events, which could not be
foreseen or which, though foreseen, were inevitable.
X: 1. By express provision of law: (One of which is article 1165, If the obligor DELAYS
or has PROMISED to deliver the same thing to two or more persons who do not have
the same interest, he shall be responsible for fortuitous event until it has effected
the delivery.)
2. When it is otherwise stipulated by law
3. When by the nature of the obligation, requires the assumption of risk.

In relation to DEMAND: Is follow-up a demand, or sufficient to constitute demand?

No. Mere reminder is not a demand. Also, in order to constitute delay, there must be
CU: In 1189, there are 6 incidents wherein..
a due and demandable right to demand. Thus, there is no demand if the obligation is
not yet due and demandable.
CU: Always check if it is a VALID DEMAND.
CU: similar to SICAM vs. JORGE (where owners sued the pawnshop naman):
Example:
A leased a machine of B, bcs he opened his own repair shop. They agreed that the
lease would be only for 1 month. The lease was entered into in Feb 15 of 1985. In
March 15, the lessor demanded for the return of the machine. The lessee however,
was not able to return the machine bcs A's truck had a mechanical problem. On
March 16, the machine was still with lessee A, and was destroyed in a fire that
started in a neighboring house. Can the lessee be held liable for the lost of the
machine?

Kristine went to a jewelry shop to have her jewelry cleaned and it should be returned
to her after a week. When she returned after a week, the jeweller told her that the
jewelry had not yet been cleaned, so she has to return again another week. When
she returned back another week, she was informed that her ring was lost bcs of an
alleged robbery that took place. Claiming that robbery is fortuitous event, the jewelry
shop cannot be held liable, and that 1174 GR should apply.
Is the contention tenable? (first, determine what kind of thing is involved, and if
there was valid demand)

B. EXCUSE FOR NON-PERFORMANCE

No, based on the facts, Art.1165 would apply: exception that is provided by law:
Art. 1174. Except in cases expressly specified by the law, or when it is otherwise declared by stipulation, or
When what is to be delivered is a determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the
when the nature of the obligation requires the assumption of risk, no person shall be responsible for those
right granted him by Article 1170, may compel the debtor to make the delivery. If the
events which could not be foreseen, or which, though foreseen, were inevitable.
obligor delays, he shall be responsible for any fortuitous event UNTIL he has effected
Art. 1165. When what is to be delivered is a determinate thing, the creditor, in addition to the right granted him
the delivery.
Clearly, the jewelry shop was already in delay. ALSO, even for the fact, that the
jewelry was lost due to a FE, the shop shall still be held liable bcs there was already
a delay when the CR failed to deliver the same after a week time as promised.
CU: In NPC vs. CA, was held liable bcs it released the water when the dam was full. It should
have released the water when the dam was not yet full so that the pressure would not be as
much as the result of the damage. Hence, to invoke fortuitous event which transpired in the
case due to heavy rainfall, there should be no concurring negligence on the part of the
defendant NAPOCOR.

by Article 1170, may compel the debtor to make the delivery.

If the thing is indeterminate or generic, he may ask that the obligation be complied with at the expense of the
debtor.
If the obligor delays, or has promised to deliver the same thing to two or more persons who do not have the
same interest, he shall be responsible for any fortuitous event until he has effected the delivery.
Art. 2147. The officious manager shall be liable for any fortuitous event:
(1) If he undertakes risky operations which the owner was not accustomed to embark upon;
(2) If he has preferred his own interest to that of the owner;
(3) If he fails to return the property or business after demand by the owner;
(4) If he assumed the management in bad faith.

Whoever in bad faith accepts an undue payment, shall pay legal interest if a sum of money is involved, or
shall be liable for fruits received or which should have been received if the thing produces fruits.
He shall furthermore be answerable for any loss or impairment of the thing from any cause, and for damages
to the person who delivered the thing, until it is recovered.

CU: If a party to an obligation was not able to comply or it was not completely
fulfilled, or irregularly complied, does it mean that he will be liable for damages? Not
necessarily. Why? There are excuses to non-performance. Incomplete performance
or Irregular performance.
Excuse for Non-Performance:
1. Fortuitous Event
2. Acts of Creditor
FORTUITOUS EVENT or CASO FORTUITO
Fortuitous Events may be produced by 2 General Causes:
1. By Nature-- such as earthquakes, storms, floods, epidemics, fires, etc.
8. By Act of Man-- such as armed invasion, attack of bandits, governmental
prohibitions, robbery, unavoidable accidents.*
*in order that the acts of man may constitute fortuitous event, it is necessary that they
have the force of an imposition which the DR could not have resisted.
*even if their has been an intervention of human element, provided fault or
negligence cannot be imputed to the DR. Ex: The act of a train guard of Manila
Railroad, in shooting a passenger bcs of an old personal grudge. Reason: The MRR
had no means to ascertain that the 2 would meet, nor foresee every personal
troubles btwn each one of the passengers and its employees.

2. STIPULATION: when the parties expressly stipulate in their contract that the DR
CHARACTERISTICS OF FORTUITOUS EVENTS:
shall be held liable to the CR, even if the performance is rendered impossible by
1. The cause of the unforeseen and unexpected occurrence, or the failure of the DRfortuitous event of force majeure.
to comply with his obligations, must be independent of the human will.

the provision in a contract imposing liability even in case of

9. It must be impossible to foresee the event whc constitute the case fortuito, or if it
fortuitous event should be clearly expressed.
can be foreseen, must be inevitable to avoid.
Ex: REPUBLIC vs. LITTON & CO: contract was entered btwn the two, wherein
10. The occurrence must be such as to render it impossible for the DR to fulfill his
LITTON
would
supply 96,000 padlocks at Php1.87. They delivered on April 8 34, 200 padlocks
obligation in a normal manner.
and
failed
to
deliver
61, 800 which were to be used during the elections on April 23. HELD:
11. The obligor must be free from any participation in the aggravation of the injury
defendant's contract with plaintiff was unconditional. the clause provided in their contract makes
resulting to the CR.
LITTON liable in all eventualities and is authorized by Art 1174. Ther esu is that defendant
cannot invoke the delay in the issuance of the export license by the prep or authorities, even to
AS A DEFENSE: in order to prosper, the accident must be due to natural causes and an act of the Govt.

absolutely without human intervention. One who creates a dangerous condition

cannot escape liability although an act of God may have intervened. Examples that
are not fortuitous:
1. Mishap caused by faulty brakes of a car
12. Tire blow-out

CASE: NPC vs. CA: NAPOCOR was liable bcs it released the water when the dam
was full. It should have released the water when the dam was not yet full so that the pressure
would not be as much as the result of the damage. Hence, to invoke fortuitous event which
transpired in the case due to heavy rainfall, there should be no concurring negligence on the
part of the defendant NAPOCOR.
In another case, in the event that NAPOCOR would release the water of a dam, in
EFFECT OF FORTUITOUS EVENT:
order not to be held liable, a proper notification to the proper authorities is required. Notice to
GR: the debtor or obligor cannot be held liable for damages for non-performance due persons not authorized, such as PO1 Officer, is not a proper authority that would relieve
to a fortuitous event.
NAPOCOR from liability.
Example:
1. Where under a bond conditioned upon the delivery to the sheriff of certain carabaos, 3. NATURE OF THE OBLIG REQUIRES ASSUMPTION OF RISK: Principle of
and the said carabaos could not have been delivered bcs they dies of natural causes.
Assumed Risks
13. Where funds in the hands of the defendant were lost through confiscation by the army

BASIS: Social justice. If he benefits from the means that have

14. Where non-compliance w/ the terms of a lease contract is due to enemy occupation
produced the loss, it is only equitable that he should bear the
during war.

consequences of such loss.

The principle of assumed risk or created risks has an exception:
(EXC to the EXC) unless the injury is cause by the inexcusable
fault or neglect of the victim. (See art 2179)

EXC:
1. LAW SO PROVIDES
2. NEGLIGENCE: when the negligence of a person concurs with an act of God in
producing a loss, such person is not exempt from liability by showing that the
EX: Derailment of a train; it is only just that those who are injured thereby be indemnified by the
immediate cause of the loss was an act of God.
transportation company.

to be exempt from liability, he must be free from any previous

negligence or misconduct by whc that gloss or damage may have
ACTS OF CREDITOR
been occasioned
The DR is released from liability not only when the non-performance of the obligation
is due to fortuitous event of force majeure, but ask when it is due to the act of the CR
himself.